Rittenhouse Trial: Calling Res Ipsa

[Binger]

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

You caught my mistake before I changed it. I think Richie and Richards did a number on my brain.

Also, this is what happens when you get clocked with a skateboard:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... board.html

There are plenty of videos anyone can pull up of people using their skateboards to hit people, and they can in fact cause serious bodily harm and death depending on any number of factors.

- Doc

[Gadianton]

So that begs the question: What exactly is the aim of the argument you believe is valid?

The aim is to highlight the fact that K walked a razor's edge and "lucked out" every step of the way. Things could have gone just a little different and they most likely will during the next round with a vigilante. K could have become confused and shot a person not making an advance. One of those attempting to stop him could actually have tried to kill him, not just meet the bare minimum bar of "attack" that allowed K to make the argument that he thought his life was in danger. A better prosecutor or a less empathetic judge could also easily have made the difference. (maybe not for the first degree charge, which seems pretty bogus). It's also possible to at least consider possibilities where you didn't extend your use of force rights and de-escalate.

With so many possible things that can go wrong in this scenario, considering options aside from deadly force as Canpakes has suggested is quite a good idea. For instance, had K accidently shot a bystander instead of somebody provoking him in the secondary altercation, prison time would be far more difficult to avoid. Had that happened, or had a bystander shot him in the spine, he might have looked back and wished he'd taken his chances and surrendered to Ro.

Consider one of your D&D games. You choose a road less travelled and arrive at a situation where a horrible outcome is nearly assured, but you skate by if you roll your 20, 50, and 100 sided dice and get three 1s. You roll, and you get three ones. Those on your side cheer you on and say basically anybody who can roll three ones in that situation should do the same thing.

[Binger]

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[doubtingthomas]

How the F would you know that?

Well, apparently nothing happened to Rittenhouse when he was allegedly attacked with the skateboard. And it is disputable that Huber did hit him with the skateboard. Here is a better explanation

According to court records, Huber had a skateboard in his right hand and used it to "make contact" with Rittenhouse's left shoulder as they struggled for control of the gun.

because a 17 year old isn't allow to carry a gun in Winsconsin.
-_-

"Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statut ... tes/948/55

Huber had the right to disarm Rittenhouse.

[canpakes]

Can you clearly state what you think Rosenbaum would have done if he had managed to reach Kyle before being shot?

Nope. Nobody can, now. That’s the beauty of the situation. And if I kill someone on the claim that I feel threatened, then the person that I fired on can’t say anything at all about their mindset. Reckless open carry can proceed without consequence, for shooting deaths after the slightest interpretation of provocation.

Jump-kick man doesn't need to accost him at all before jumpkick man attempts to kick him in the head. That is the whole point of self defense. You don't wait till the actual act of great bodily harm or death has occurred, rather, you take action to prevent it.

Again, though, I’m not convinced that this gives license without consequence for anyone to attempt to shoot to kill someone for merely running at them.

But, maybe this is part of the defense being used in the Ahmaud Arbery trial, too.

[doubtingthomas]

you can still manage to conclude that your feelings confirm that the courts and judge got it wrong and you are right).

Not at all. Did you forget what I said earlier? I am not saying Rittenhouse is guilty, I am just saying there is no evidence Huber tried to kill or seriously hurt Rittenhouse. If I am wrong let me know.

[doubtingthomas]

There are plenty of videos anyone can pull up of people using their skateboards to hit people, and they can in fact cause serious bodily harm and death depending on any number of factors.

- Doc

Can you share one. If you closely watch the Rittenhouse video it is clear Huber did not hit him very hard with the skateboard, just look at the position of Huber's arm before touching Rittenhouse with the skateboard.

[Tinfoilhat]

There are plenty of videos anyone can pull up of people using their skateboards to hit people, and they can in fact cause serious bodily harm and death depending on any number of factors.

- Doc

Can you share one.

https://youtu.be/GJTir4skm68
Skateboard as weapon

https://youtu.be/ok9_EqP7DPg

[Jersey Girl]

I'm two clicks away from going off on you. I'll return in a bit. Or never speak to you ever again.

I am your friend Jersey Girl. Let see if these guys can convince me that Huber was trying to kill or seriously hurt Rittenhouse.

I believe that in spite of differences (sometimes very strong differences) of opinions and especially when I criticize you heavily, we are friends to each other. I know when to back off to maintain a spirit of good will and I do it all the time here, not just with you.

That said, there isn't one person on this board whom you can rightly task with convincing you that Huber was trying to kill or seriously hurt Rittenhouse. Likewise, no one here should allow themselves to be tasked with convincing you of anything regarding the interaction in Kenosha or any part of the trial when...

every bit of it is available to you online to examine for yourself. The members of the jury themselves, took days to scrutinize the evidence before them and they were present throughout the trial.

Regardless of how some of the posters here are using this case to spew hatred for the other (while criticizing Rittenhouse for the same mindset) when it's crystal clear that they don't know jack crap about the events OR the trial, and are too lazy to damned look it up for themselves, the jury did their job.

Try not to be one of those people. Because everyone here who watched the trial (I admitted I didn't watch until the last 3 days or so myself) knows when people are ill informed and using their comments for purposes beyond trying to understand what took place in Kenosha and search for TRUTH.

The truth is that Rittenhouse was found not guilty on all counts by a jury of his peers because he was not guilty (according to the law) on all counts. What we wish could have happened has nothing to do with the law. What we think should have happened has nothing to do with the law.

Anyone who flips out over the verdict, in my view, is a hypocrite who has no respect for the law nor the truth.

So...people are free to BS away on this matter but let's not pretend that it's not BS coming out of their devices.