Posted on 11/15/2021 7:20:11 PM PST by Faith Presses On
For most of the crowd that went after Kyle Rittenouse, it was just word of mouth that he'd shot someone. Even the man he told that he had (which was picked up clearly on the videotape he would only have played back later) might have misheard him with all that was going on. Only later could he be sure, with the tape, of what was said.
And since Rittenhouse left the area rather than shooting other people, and wasn't acting like an active shooter, they had no way of truly thinking that he was. The crowd went after him anyway, although they might have easily been acting on mistaken identity, just as Jacob Rosenbaum is alleged to have mistaken Rittenhouse for the similarly dressed man who angered him by putting out the dumpster fire at the gas station.
Good point,
The entire crowd should be prosecuted for Lynching.
FALSE FLAG and Rittenhouse was set-up. Made for TV gun rights abolishing op in progress.
The Rose-EMBALM was an FBI asset, released from a mental hospital only MOMENTS before the riot.. WHAT A COINCIDENCE!
Wake up, FReepers. I would say MOST of the street RATS around Rittenhouse were FBI assets. MOTHER DRONE UP ABOVE.
Oh, and WHO assaults a kid with his finger on the trigger of a loaded AR-15? IN A REAL WORLD, NOBODY DOES.
What were all of those attackers doing in Kenosha that night?
How far away do they live from Kenosha?
Had they ever been to Kenosha before?
Were they planning to go there and make trouble?
Well Listed, Sir!
Exactly.
And considering how Jacob Rosenbaum was acting, there seems to have been a very good chance that he either would have killed someone that night, or else been killed by someone else. Anything that didn’t go his way seemed to enrage him.
No matter how righteous they thought they were, it does not matter what anyone in the crowd thought. It has zero bearing on Kyle’s guilt or innocence.
It could possibly have relevance if Grosskreutz were tried for attempted murder.
Yes, it doesn’t have bearing on it, despite what the prosecutors said. I wonder how they are able to even make that argument. It seems to cross a line. Is there no limit to what they can say in their closing arguments?
It’s lawlessness arguing for the idea that Rittenhouse was somehow responsible for the attacks on him, when the law says otherwise. Rosenbaum attacked him by chasing him as he did. And until there was no other choice, Kyle didn’t shot him. And then he was merely getting away from a hostile mob, some of whom were tending to Rosenbaum. It’s not like it happened away from people and he merely left him. I think he probably would have called 911 himself in that case given that he was not quick to shoot him.
The crowd that decided to go after Rittenhouse could simply have called the police. They would have been there quickly, as they ended up showing up shortly afterward.
That would make Huber and Grosskruetz the vigilante's would it not?
Good thing Kyle missed the unidentified black guy seen trying to jump stomp him....
Yup, saw Unidentified Black Guy. He failed to do his job.
True. Or just continued to follow him in the direction he was running. That is, towards the flashing lights of the police line where he tried to surrender. I don't know or care what the mob in general thought, but the three people who attacked Kyle were not trying to make a citizens arrest.
Exactly, they were. And they were vigilantes as protesters, too, punishing people not directly related to the incident they were out protesting about, the Jacob Blake shooting by police.
Yes, they should have just followed him. Even if they thought he had been an “active shooter,” he wasn’t threatening them in any way. Apparently that’s why they felt they could run up to him, although he was armed as he was.
A citizen other than an authorized officer of the law who attempts to arrest another person could be committing a crime by doing so. It could result in charges of kidnapping or false imprisonment.
This is determined by state law but generally a citizen’s arrest is only lawful when the person doing so was an eyewitness to the person having just committed a felony. Also, not all felonies apply. In Texas I believe the felony witnessed must carry a minimum penalty of 1 year incarceration upon conviction.
I also believe that you must maintain continuous contact or line of sight with the alleged perp in order to avoid mistaken identity.
The irony here is that the ones Rittenhouse shot were clearly acting like vigilantes, yet this is what the prosecution is accusing him of.
Thank you for explaining that. Yes, they were acting like vigilantes. Different ones had made threats earlier, too, including against Rittenhouse, and he probably heard many, too. The reason why he ran to leave the area was just that reason.
So Kyle didn’t put out that dumpster fire?
I don’t believe so. It was a similarly dressed man. It’s in this video made last year by the defense:
https://nypost.com/2020/09/23/kyle-rittenhouse-attorney-releases-video-in-self-defense-claim/
I do believe that after the events at the gas station, however, he moved down the street along with the crowd to the car lot, and there at least attempted to put out the fire in a truck. And that’s when it seems Rosenbaum went after him. That’s in the video as well, IIRC.
If it’s not in that video, then another one. But I’m pretty sure he tried using a fire extinguisher on a truck that was on fire at the car lot. There is video of him with the extinguisher, and also different videos of Rosenbaum starting to chase him at that point.
Vigilantesand roters were burning down the city, including black owned business’s
A different much smaller group cries out “hey, stop doing that”
The Vigilantes and rioters looked at the smaller group, picked out one of the runts, isolated the runt, and tried to kill that human being with their hands/skateboard/hand gun
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.