https://twitter.com/thevivafrei/status/1457774701673996298?t=oPH9QjWrujDBIcyNLtcEyA&s=19

  • JackalopeEnthusiast [she/her]
    ·
    3 years ago

    They didn't really have much to work with.

    Rittenhouse went to a protest with a gun, which undoubtedly provoked people, but that's legal in America.

    He didn't shoot anyone who wasn't on video attempting to use lethal force against him, wasn't caught on camera brandishing his gun at anyone, and thanks to Wisconsin's lack of laws regarding underaged firearm possession, I'm starting to worry they might not even get him on the straw purchase.

    Legally, the wannabe cop bootlicker fascist is likely in the clear here. What else should the prosecutors have done? Their star witness admitted he was pointing his gun at Rittenhouse when he was shot. That's self defense.

    • newmou [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      So convicted on murdering two people and self-defense on one? Could they have gone with that narrative

      • Huldra [they/them, it/its]
        ·
        3 years ago

        At most manslaughter, since bringing a gun to a protest would probably not be considered enough to support premeditation, but I wouldnt be sure of that even being a strong case.

        Maybe 1 count of manslaughter, by the second shooting any competent defense would most likely successfully argue that Rittenhouse was in sufficient fear of his life that self defense would apply.