Kyle Rittenhouse Trial (Jacob Blake Protest Shooting)

Bow to Royalty said:
@The Lonious Monk here it is for you too. You telling me her only saying he shot this guy in the back wasn't intentional.

Click to expand...


Based on this video I can't say what he did in shooting any of those people is self-defense. We don't know what started the confrontation in the first place. Cause if the 1st shooting wasn't in self defense the other folks had every right to make a citizens arrests which means the other 2 people he shot were not in self defense.
 
Bow to Royalty said:
@DMorgan You're a really good person to ask too since you hadn't seen it. REGARDLESS OF WHOSE SIDE YOU'RE ON...do you think that tweet was accurately describing things, or meant to mislead people that haven't seen the video?
Click to expand...

In a way can see how it can be taken as trying to be misleading. Also she can also be telling the truth as in now knowing that he has taken police training and factoring in "he was trying to get away" how can he shoot someone in the back and be trying to get away at the same time.

That doesn't really add up trying to get away by shooting someone in the back.
 
Bow to Royalty said:
@The Lonious Monk here it is for you too. You telling me her only saying he shot this guy in the back wasn't intentional.

Click to expand...


Again, I don't know what her intentions were. Like I said before, I believe that she believes that Rittenhouse was in the wrong and the report of the victim being shot in the back goes along with that, so she reported that. For better or worse, that's how shit goes with Twitter reporting. It's not a platform meant for nuance. People purposely make statements as short and sweet as possible. She probably legitimately things that all the other shots are irrelevant. If one of those shots was in the back then that shot was unjustified and draws the whole self defense argument into question.

Now, after looking at the video, I'm not sure how you watch that and think that it supports your cause or the cause of the self defense argument. After the initial couple shots I might agree. However, even when his pursuer was down and everyone else had cleared out, he kept shooting. That's not self defense. He then went and stood over the victim while someone else was trying to help the victim. That's not what someone does when they are scare for their life. If he was really shooting to try and give himself the opportunity to escape, he would have actually used that opportunity to escape.
 
StringerBell said:
www.mediaite.com

Attorneys Pounce on Kyle Rittenhouse’s Reported ‘Well Regulated Militia’ Legal Defense

Kyle Rittenhouse, a 17-year-old supporter of President Donald Trump and police who is accused of fatally shooting two men in Wisconsin last week, is expected to unveil a rather extraordinary legal argument as part of his defense.
www.mediaite.com www.mediaite.com
Click to expand...

That's an interesting legal strategy. Man, Lawyers are something else.


DMorgan said:
In a way can see how it can be taken as trying to be misleading. Also she can also be telling the truth as in now knowing that he has taken police training and factoring in "he was trying to get away" how can he shoot someone in the back and be trying to get away at the same time.

That doesn't really add up trying to get away by shooting someone in the back.
Click to expand...

The tweet came across as misleading to me because she quoted Trump saying he was trying to get away, and replied simply he shot them in the back (intentionally not mentioning the other shots) like he wasn't trying to get away. So only seeing that tweet and not the video, I think most people wouldn't imagine that's how it looked.

At 17, I'm honestly not sure what level of police training he's had, since he's not in the actual academy. Like I'd be surprised if they had proper training simulating armed confrontations. I dunno the program though.

And a shot in the back can come from someone turning sideways (trying to make himself small) when engaging you. So every shot in the back doesn't necessarily mean the person wasn't engaging. You saw the video though...it looked like constant engagement up until death to me.
 
DMorgan said:
Based on this video I can't say what he did in shooting any of those people is self-defense. We don't know what started the confrontation in the first place. Cause if the 1st shooting wasn't in self defense the other folks had every right to make a citizens arrests which means the other 2 people he shot were not in self defense.
Click to expand...

I agree with you 100%. I've said multiple times in here, it depends on if that first guy had a valid reason to attack him. I haven't seen a single witness say he did. One witness said the guy he shot walked up on him and Kyle ran away.
 
Bow to Royalty said:
That's an interesting legal strategy. Man, Lawyers are something else.




The tweet came across as misleading to me because she quoted Trump saying he was trying to get away, and replied simply he shot them in the back (intentionally not mentioning the other shots) like he wasn't trying to get away. So only seeing that tweet and not the video, I think most people wouldn't imagine that's how it looked.

At 17, I'm honestly not sure what level of police training he's had, since he's not in the actual academy. Like I'd be surprised if they had proper training simulating armed confrontations. I dunno the program though.

And a shot in the back can come from someone turning sideways (trying to make himself small) when engaging you. So every shot in the back doesn't necessarily mean the person wasn't engaging. You saw the video though...it looked like constant engagement up until death to me.
Click to expand...

We still don't know what caused the engagement to say if it was self defense or not. That's the only stance I'm taking.

I really don't see how a person can be engaging someone making themselves small and get shot in the back.
 
DOS_patos said:
I don't like dudes time or message.


Sounding like he would be cool with black people dying.
Click to expand...

He's basically saying that if BLM keeps calling white people out on their bullshit, white people will start killing them, and the way he's saying it makes it sound like the white people would be justified to do that. lol This is why I think it's stupid when people on this site find random people of other races saying some shit against black interests and try to act like those people represent the whole race. There are plenty of people like this black dude, so either you think its fair to use one person to represent a whole race or you don't, but you gotta choose.
 
The Lonious Monk said:
He's basically saying that if BLM keeps calling white people out on their bullshit, white people will start killing them, and the way he's saying it makes it sound like the white people would be justified to do that. lol This is why I think it's stupid when people on this site find random people of other races saying some shit against black interests and try to act like those people represent the whole race. There are plenty of people like this black dude, so either you think its fair to use one person to represent a whole race or you don't, but you gotta choose.
Click to expand...
I think black are more than justified in laying a few thousand cacs down. I dont see how the f cacs think they are justified.

But what do I know
 
DMorgan said:
We still don't know what caused the engagement to say if it was self defense or not. That's the only stance I'm taking.

I really don't see how a person can be engaging someone making themselves small and get shot in the back.
Click to expand...

I agree with your first point. I've said it a bunch of times in here. But nobody has come out saying dude had a reason. A witness has said Rosenbaum just pushed up on him, and the kid ran away. So I'm going off that for now. But if he didn't have a valid reason to be chasing/attacking him...self defense?

Your back is more than your spine. You can be engaged with someone and turn to get shot somewhere besides the front of you. Could also have just hit him as he was dropping and caught him in the back. I dunno.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top