Posted on 11/07/2021 12:11:25 PM PST by rktman
A witness in the murder trial of Kyle Rittenhouse told the court that Gaige Grosskreutz, one of the men who Rittenhouse shot, had a round chambered in a handgun at the time of the shooting.
The Daily Wire reports that Jason Lackowski is the seventh witness called in the Rittenhouse trial. Lackowski came to the aid of Grosskreutz, the third individual whom Rittenhouse allegedly shot in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on August 25, 2020.
Rittenhouse allegedly shot and killed Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber, then shot Grosskreutz while allegedly being chased by protesters.
Lackowski also testified that he heard the crowd yelling “Get him!” as they pursued Rittenhouse.
Rittenhouse allegedly shot Grosskreutz in the arm and Lackowski “helped apply a tourniquet” to slow the bleeding. Lackowski also emptied rounds from a handgun Grosskreutz had in his possession and indicated there was a bullet in the gun’s chamber.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
good question. Not sure if the defense will pose that question or if that will not be allowed to be brought up.
“well you were just assuming that he was a threat, but you didn’t really know.”
Only in this example if you guess wrong you’re dead. So that argument is fallacious.
L
In your mind it is fallacious. As a juror I don’t have to figure it out or argue it. The chamber was loaded. End of story.
It’s the opposite of don’t point at anything unless you want to shoot it; if the gun is pointed at you, then you are going to get shot. Act accordingly.
That is one way to look at it. Just assume all the jurors are idiots.
Which is probably the smart way to play it.
L
“… 3rd guy took out his gun but Kyle shot him before he could…”
****************************************************
And, in true cowboy movie fashion, Kyle shot the assailant in his gun bearing arm. That wound rendered the assailant unable to even release the handgun from his grip.
Much less question about whether it was really self-defense.
The kid was lucky there.
His biggest threat is not the criminals but the legal system.
Half of them are and 2/3 are scared. So you are relying on one or two jurors to have the guts to hang the jury, figuratively, when there is a crowd outside itching to hang the jury literally.
“the problem with your view is that you think being a legal literalist will win the day.”
Yea, well that’s because I’m a rational human being.
But the Defense was smart to point this up. Now they need to introduce this creep stating publicly that he wanted to kill Kyle.
That’ll nail the door shut on this charge.
L
He was amazing. Kept his composure the entire time, and fired his weapon accurately and only when absolutely necessary. IMHO, kid has the makings of a natural war fighter.
“when there is a crowd outside itching to hang the jury literally.”
The Judge needs to hammer that garbage down and hammer it down hard. Anyone even approaching a jury member needs to be arrested, charged, convicted, and then put away for the maximum.
I’m betting on a directed verdict of not guilty on most if not all of the charges. That will take the heat off the jury and be legally correct.
L
Kyle’s attackers were no match for someone who could handle a firearm with such finesse.
You must remember chances are the jury voted for the prosecutor in this case. They share something in common. KR is an outsider.
Kyle took two out and disarmed the third.
Indeed.
I hope he beats this.
Wow,
Kinda shows it all,,,
Would the judge allow his testimony to be stricken from the record? Is that what "withdraws" means?
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.