Kyle Rittenhouse Book Sparks Uproar

But it had nothing to do with the shooting, did it? Was he stopping the riot in front of the used car lot? No. The first shooting was more than a block away, at a gas station, not the used car lot where the riot was happening. And that shooting led the second sequence of events.

 

Yes it did.

He put out the fire that the first rioter had set.

That is how it started.

The riot was following him as he attempted to flee to the police

 

He never put out the fire. He was on his way TO the FIRE.

Look dude, the used car lot was at a different address. In the first confrontation, even KR admitted on the stand he was "on patrol" and was located at 63rd and Sheridan when the first confrontation happened. The Car Lot, Car Source, is located at 60th and Sheridan. Thus, he was not at the used car where the riots happened. That happened a couple blocks away at another location that was owned by Car Source. He also noticed a fire on a car, but never put out the fire. This is where he encountered Zelinsky, who had a pistol and he had a rifle. He walked away, towards the gas station. Zelinsky shot in the air, he turned around. Rosenbaum yelled at him, called in him a curse word, allegedly "lunged at him," and he shot him. So in this sequence of events, where was the riot happen AT THE TIME he was shot?

Look, I understand what the defense did. Standard tactic to try the victims in court, not the defendant. This time, the strategy worked, but it still does not make it right legally.

 

he did in fact which is why Rosenbaum attacked him.

Rosenbaum was in fact rioting as were the other two pigs.

These are established facts

It was right legally and proved that it was all on the men he shot.

 

Next time you should send a 17 yr old family member. Seriously, how naive can people be thinking a 17 yr old with a rifle is going to stop that.

 

Rosenbaum alleged "lunged" at him. Lunging is not an attack. The problem, the judge disallowed any and all testimony by Ziminisky, which would have offered a different version of events, at least the lunging part, that night. Ziminisky is the one who had the pistol and shot up in the air. He was later arrested and charged with disorderly conduct with a dangerous weapon. So, the jury only had to go with KR testimony.

Rosembaum was not rioting at the time of the shooting. Past events prior to the shooting should have nothing to do with the shooting. It would be like you, as a witness, are challenged on everry little wrong thing in your past in order to disqualify you from your testimony. Do you understand now?

 

WRONG

It is not alleged it si PROVEN by factual evidence that Rosenbaum attacked him and attempted to take the rifle away.

THAT is an attack

Rosenbaum was absolutely rioting.

Setting a fire and then chasing cornering and attacking someone who put out the fire or even just attempting to ut it out IS rioting

You are positng falsehoods

UNDERSTAND NOW?

 

I was speaking about Rittenhouse.

 

There is no factual evidence that he attacked him. KR specific word was "lunged." That was his testimony, under penalties of perjury. Lunge does not mean attack, PERIOD. Again, the site that happened where Rosenbaum was shot had two people: Rosenbaum and Ziminsky, near the gas station. The rioters were a block away. Ziminisky is the one who had the pistol and fired a shot into the air. Rosembaum called him a name, "FU" and "lunged" at him. If you look up the word lunge, it does not mean attack, it means to lean forward. Apparently, English is not your forte, is it?

He saw a fire. Even KR, under testimony, could not identify who set the fire. He was called by Black to put out the fire. He was on his way over there, ran into police who said you can't go this way, and went the long way around towards the gas station that was two blocks away. From the gas station and the car lot, he encountered Rosenbaum and Ziminisky. Second. being confronted by someone does not mean the person is a rioter. You are obviously confronting me, but that does not make you a rioter, does it? yes, he was confronted. But the fact of the matter is that the judge ruled that the victims could be described as "rioters" per the defense's motion. The judge should not have done that because it prejudiced the jury into their deliberations. And that does not make the trial fair or equitable. It may not have changed the outcome, but it did put the prosecution behind the eight ball legally.

You obviously not read the entire transcript nor the testimony of KR on the stand. But you are making assumptions here. And assumptions are the mother of all **** ups.

 

Rittenhouse was stalked by those you defend after he helped extinguish a fire. You know better than the jury of his peers?

 

Rittenhouse's blithering idiot publisher.



Michael Quinn Sullivan

@MQSullivan
Follow

Tell me more about how public school teachers in Texas need an across the board payraise... And, specifically, this guy in the
@mesquiteisdtx
. Until classroom teachers are willing to speak out publicly against those in their profession who do abhorrent things with children, it is correct to assume those teachers don't care about the sexual abuse of children. https://texasscorecard.com/local/mesquite-elementary-teacher-charged-with-indecency-with-a-minor/…




6:00 PM · Nov 21, 2023
·

 

He damn sure put a stop to three people's rioting that night.

Two of whom are currently dirt napping because they were retarded enough to chase a man with a rifle and try to beat him and point a gun to him

 

One can easily make the argument that trying to beat someone to death with a skateboard and chasing him down the street with a gun is indeed participating in a riot

 

WRONG.

there is factual evidence showing he physically attacked rittenhouse. Ther eis drone footage from the FBI which shows exactly that,.

ther eis also forensic evideence to ocnlude muzzle burns on his hand which supports Rittenhouse's claim

Rosenbaum started the fire which is confirmed by many witnesses.

I am stating gfacts you are making **** up

 

Seriously. You can see the pedophile literally chasing Kyle across a parking lot.

He's 20. There's not going to be a lot to talk about. So the shooting and its fallout will be the bulk of the book. I hope he embellishes the **** out of the part where he spends a significant portion of his book telling the world what terrible humans being Rosenbaum and Huber were, and what a useless human being Grosskreutz is.

 

If he had shot them for rioting, then he'd be in prison for the rest of his life, because it would deprive him of the self defense claim. Lucky for him, his lawyers didn't push the narrative you are pushing, that the three were rioting when he shot them.

 

I have no interest in reading/buying his book---not even if I see it at the Dollar Tree store. If Kyle Rittenhouse had been a Black guy walking around with a gun like that, he would have been shot by police before he even had a chance to kill those other men.

 

As I said, I don't see how it could be that interesting. I wonder if writing the book will be cathartic for Kyle. He was put through a lot, and unnecessarily so.

 

But you won't admit yours.

 

No it's in a conversation somewhere else that gun control is a function of authoritarian government.

100% of every dictator took away guns so that's a good reason not to do it

 

Well, if you showed where I misread something. I'll take a look and evaluate.

 

You misrepresented.

 

What if it ends up being a romance novel?

 

Ummmm it is already published

 

He was not stalked. not even KR's testimony makes that claim. It was after he shot Rosenbaum that people reacted. That is natural. If you see a person go down by gunfire, or see a person holding a firearm, you will put two and two together and try to apprehend the person. Some were vengeful, but that is adrenaline talking. It was not they were being told to do this, but it does happen.

The key to this trial was Rosenbaum and how the jury perceived the person. The rest follows.