Rittenhouse trial goes to opening statements after jury set

Just as I predicted, the judge has dismissed the weapons charge.

 

No man. Word is Kyle was actually a Russian spy and Grosskreutz was only trying to get the microchip and forgot the secret code word.

 

Yeah the curfew charge has already been dropped so the weapons charge was the prosecution's next best hope. I don't believe any clear-minded person could surmise that Kyle did not have a reasonable fear of serious bodily injury or death when he pulled the trigger and he was attempting to escape his attackers.

 

That law suit would be a loser.

 

Closing arguments are the best. Most fun to watch.

 

That doesn’t seem to be the case. In the last few minutes it’s been reported that the judge is sticking with that particular decision.

 

I'm listening right now. He did not give an instruction that the defendant pointed the gun at the zeminskis.
He's still leaving it for the jury to decide, he's just not doing the extra instruction on pointing the gun the prosecutor asked for.

 

I never said anything about “pointing a gun” at anyone. You just inserted a straw man.

 

No, I did not.

The pointing the gun is what the judge and lawyers are talking about back and forth. Its the instruction you're referencing ffs.

I'm having a busy day today (filling in for my partner who is on vacation) so if you want me to paintstakingly prove this up I will but I'm going to be rude about it and you're going to need to wait until close of business.

 

You misunderstand the issue at hand. That’s fine. You’re not a juror so it doesn’t matter.

 

Why would you be intentionally rude. That seems kind of senseless.

 

Looking at the video provided by the prosecution it looks like Rosenbaum is putting his arms out to the side and not up as if to say I dare you to shoot. Rittenhouse should have shot Rosenbaum while he was being chased and this BS assumption by the prosecutor would not be an issue.

 

He's not unknown. He's a convict named Joshua Ziminski. Kudos to the awesome researchers at 4chan who identified him and notified the police.

Ziminski and his wife are two of the criminals Kyle witnessed with Rosenbaum when they pulled a stolen flatbed heavy equipment trailer into Sheridan road, turn it on it's side and set it on fire. Rosenbaum had stolen the chain he was carrying from that trailer.

Later Kyle suddenly found himself surrounded by those three criminals as he was on his way to Carsource 3 to put out another fire and Kiminski was armed with a handgun yelling "get him! Kill Him" to Rosenbaum. That must have been an "Oh ****!" moment. So Kyle dropped the fire extinguisher and ran for his life. That's when Rosenbaum chased him down and tried to steal his gun thus earning his Darwin award.

Kyle witnessed those criminals committing arson, which is likely one of the reasons they wanted to kill him. Criminals often try to kill witnesses. Wisconsin is a three strike state, and Rosenbaum could have served life without parole if he got convicted of arson.

 

As stated because I'm a busy man and now I'm going to need to come here and demonstrate why you're incorrect. Think of it as payment in kind.

 

Rittenhouse did shoot Rosenbaum as he was being chased.

 

That's what every left-winger was saying when Nick Sandmann sued the fake news media. They were wrong.

 

That are no similarities to the two situations.

 

So, being busy justifies rudeness. That's a new one.

 

He could have legally shot him a lot earlier because he has no obligation to retreat. Instead he decided to run because he obviously didn't want to hurt Rosenbaum and only shot when Rosenbaum chased him down, had him cornered and dove for his gun.

 

That's funny.

 

There are plenty of similarities, specifically around the fake news and downright propaganda pushed by "news" organizations to at the very least, borderline slander.

 

Being pulled off important things to point out something you would've understood had you watched the footage yourself: Definitely justifies rudeness because it is rudeness.

I'll see you later, do'nt worry.

 

1) it's not according to experts and you're just being petty.
2) It's true, and the same thing applies Grosskreutz, while that the right to self defense goes to Grosskreutz since Rittenhouse pulled his weapon on him while Grosskreutz had his hands up.

 

1) Not its not those charges were LITERALLY dismissed this morning on the exact theory I described. WATCH THE TRIAL YOURSELF ffs.
2) No, Grosskreuz put his hands up and Rittenhouse moved the weapon off him. Grosskreuz admits that after that he didn't get shot until he pointed his gun "in the direction of " Rittenhouse's "head".
Please watch the ****ing trial.

 

Grosskreutz didn't chase anybody. He even asked Rittenhouse some questions and he replied. That's recorded.
And it's obvious you are exceptionally eager to dismiss / disregard that Rittenhouse pulled a gun to somebody who got his hands up, and he did not lower his gun at all. There is no such thing as doing that out of self defense. The person at the other side of the barrel has that right, and Rittenhouse stopped him trying from self defending his life.

He swung his gun around to the wrong person because of that, and that person tried to defend his life.