I agree the first 1 was self defense but really what you have done if you heard a bunch of people saying get him, get him, he just shot someone. would you allow that person to flee or least try to detain. Really that all they were trying to do, go after someone who shot someone.
So the one with the gun to his head was trying to detain him? Nah. I would have thought he was going to kill me too. This case isn’t about hindsight what they may have been trying to do. This kid thought his life was in danger after being chased, hit over the head with a rock, a skate board and then had a gun pointed at his head AFTER he said he was heading to the police to turn himself in from killing the first one. It comes down to he felt his life was in danger, and he was.
@@williamcrook4943 If he was running to the cops with his hands up I would let the cops deal with it. He wasn't pointing it at anyone that didn't attack him. Even the prosecution said we should let the police handle situations like that. We all take a beating after all.
It's hilarious that the prosecution is suggesting that ordinary citizens are gonna understand, through common sense, what it's like to be in a gun fight or being attacked by a mob. They don't know what it's like and that's why having an expert to tell them what it's like is important and why there should be one.
So now experts serve for a kid who shouldn't of even been there, especially with a gun. Would be nice to get some expert advice for the pandemic we're in.
Also, the brought a friend of Kyle Rittenhouse, Lewinoski or something who was a veteran who said he didn't feel threatened by Rosenbaum. Seems like he could be considered an expert.
@@HiddenRealm I'm saying that in hyperbole, when I say he shouldn't of been there. Essentially all I mean was his deception and lying put him in a situation that otherwise could of prevented this from happening. There is legal precedent which states that you can't claim self defense if you put yourself in a situation which could potentially lead to violence. How is it truly self defense, if your aggressively looking for ways to defend yourself?
If the prosecution thinks that this case is an open and shut non self defense case then why are they contending the use of the defenses expert? Seems shady
@@saelerie did you not see the same videos the world has? He was in an open carry state. He shot as he was being attacked. We can't continue to allow lawlessness continue.
A Poe lease Self-defence expert? Day are tri N two use his title two persuade de jury. Lawyers and judges no a bot Self-defence laws Moore than Poe lease Self-defence experts,So why bring him inn?
@@iwkaoy8758 Ask the prosecution that. The defense team’s expert is for civilian self defense. Who is much better versed in self defense laws and practices than a judge.
Miners are not excluded from possessing firearms in Wisconsin. You cannot find, nor can anyone else find, a law in Wisconsin that he broke by being in possession of that gun. If he had been 15 then the BS charge that they put on him would have applied
@@Bike_Lion Actually no they haven't. They tried to get a couple charges dismissed and a judge flat out refused. There's only one reason he did that he's going to bury this kid. Either way he's not going to leave this unscathed especially not for that many felonys.
@@patman0250 I do think he’s going to get some legal trouble for possession of a firearm I think the only real debate here is if it was self defense or not. He won’t get out unscathed but he could get off with not much time.
The state doesn't believe Kyle acted in self defense. So yes they would like to not use a self defense expert, not because it is some kind of logical trap but they want common knowledge to be the deciding factor. The way the prosecutor made his statement was logical to me--even though I personally believe Kyle acted in self defense. The average citizen is likely never going to be in this situation so using experts to explain the law and events from an expert analysis to the common citizen seems to suggest the law is not clear or understood by the common citizen. As a prosecutor I'd like to avoid that line of thought as well. However, the law is obviously not well understood, as can be seen by the argument over the gun charge for a 17 year old, and most people will never be in this type of situation so it does make sense to bring expert testimony in to describe the situation to common citizens so they can make educated determinations.
@@williamcrook4943 I don’t know how someone having seen the videos of the second shooting could reasonably assume those three people assaulting Kyle were trying to detain him. Do you detain people by kicking them in the head, using a skateboard like a bat, or pointing a loaded gun at them? Even the prosecutor is saying that pointing a weapon at someone is provocation so Kyle was provoked by the guy with a gun pointed at his head he would be justified in shooting him. Did you watch the videos? No one testified that He was a mass shooter so they had nothing to stop. It was just a wild mob trying to either seriously injure Kyle or kill him. Where are he Ziminsky people. That ziminsky guy fired a rogue shot that likely caused Kyle to shoot the first guy because of the proximity he was to Kyle while pursuing him and a random gun shot goes off. In my mind ziminsky likely caused Kyle to think rosenbaum was shooting at him and he returned fire. Ziminsky likely caused rosenbaums death and should be charged
@@jasonsachinger3276 I thought from what i heard from the videos they said get hm get him he just shot someone. Since I dont own a firearm, yes i would have had to use what ever i had if it was a skateboard then that what it would have been. What would you have used. That wht it said on the videos GET HIM GET HIM HE JUST SHOT SOMEONE. What would you do if you heard people saying that. Try stopping that person or just allow that person to flee. Every video i heard I heard them say GET HIM GET HIM HE JUST SHOT SOMEONE. So yes I would have done what I could to have stopped a person. You cant tell me you wouldn't have done the same
The defense should definitely use that to their advantage. As much as the prosecutor is trying to get a conviction based on convincing a jury to dislike Rittenhouse as a person the defense should try to get the jury to see the prosecutor as a terrible human being which shouldn't be hard because that's what he is.
That's crazy, the people were just trying to detain a fleeing suspect. It just like any other person who shot someone. would you go after a person who people say hey get him, get him. that person just shot someone or would you just allow that person to flee.
@@williamcrook4943 should I go attack someone based on a 2nd hand allegation that he did something bad? No. That's what the Arbery trial is about as well. Just because you want to detain people doesn't give you the right to use force on them. You have to actually witness an ongoing threat. From what I saw Kyle was attacked once, then an uninformed mob tried to "burn the witch" so to speak. That wasn't justice or an attempt at it. It's literal vigilantism.
@@pierredelecto7069 Who said they wanted to harm him. if it had been me, yes i would have tried to stop him. maybe trying to trip him or hitting him with a skate board them least trying to hold him down till other people came saying to get the police. Not once did I hear anyone say they wanted to kill him except rosebum which yes he had a right to defend himself
@@williamcrook4943 it can be assumed they wanted to harm him. Why else would people chase you, reach for your weapon, hit you with blunt objects and point handguns at you? Those are all aggressive actions. Huber and Grosskreutz might have thought they were going after an active shooter. This is possible. It doesn't mean that Kyle WAS an active shooter. From what I've seen Rosenbluam attacked Kyle. Guy was literally crazy, just relaxed from a mental hospital. Kyle defended himself. Lawfully. Against Rosenbluam. Following this the crowd attacked Kyle. It's kind of like Emmit Till honestly. Mob justice is hardly ever justice for this reason. You can't just hear something then go get a guy.
@@HiddenRealm so because idiots exist, one should not be fair and honest? Basically you are saying you rather back down because you are afraid to tell the truth? Explain please?
The dangerous weapons statue does not apply to rifles and shotguns. The dangerous weapons are because the state doesnt want certain ages running around with handguns. It says this if you know the law. A supplemental briefs on this and clarify that dangerous weapons statue doesnt apply to Rifles and shotguns.
@Gordon Kahl Kyle will face justice and we will all see the outcome. Some will always disagree no matter what happens. I believe in justice and the rule of law.
@Gordon Kahl - You were indeed wrong. The jury ruled correctly - despite all the corruption and misconduct on the part of the prosecution and the media.
Prosecutor's argument is flawed. The Kenosha police department has set a standard as to when a police officer's life is in danger to where he can use deadly force. If it was a matter of only whether the policeman followed procedure or not then they would not have an expert in procedure and the jury would "make up their own mind" as to whether the officer followed procedure. Case closed. However the prosecution had use of force experts testify on the correctness of the police procedure and why it is used to lay the foundation for the "use of deadly force". In the same way Kyle Rittenhouse should be allowed the same use of force expert to lay the same foundation for why a use of force was used.
@@harlee2191 Rittenhouse doesn't have to be a cop to use self defense. I'm not saying what Rittenhouse did was correct either. Police use the use of force experts to defend their procedures so Rittenhouse has the same right to use experts to justify defense.
The general public has no idea what "reasonable" means, especially in the context of a life or death self defense situation. The expert should be allowed to testify.
Errr, erm ah,, judge... its erm...ahhh going to ahhh, erm, be a loooooooooong erm trial ah if ah you erm put er er er so er many erm erm er ahhhs in every sentence...
To say he was a right winger is totally irrelevant and typical of the medias left wing bias like this channel. He was protecting property and peoples livelihoods first. Do you think he was doing it for right wing reasons? Get a grip of yourselves.
If the cops were/are doing their jobs, why would Rittenhouse need to "protect"?? The whole point of those protests were b/c cops weren't doing their job in the first place.. now u conviently want to claim Rittenhouse needed to protect property b/c cops didn't/couldn't. .. u can't have it both ways , sunshine.
@Musical Artist So then Rittenhouse is a murderer and took his gun to a street & murdered 2 ppl.. U can't have it both ways like u are attempting. It is not logical which means your stance is ILLOGICAL. U can't claim police are doing their job when a 17 yr old has to protect the streets. But nice try.
@Musical Artist Furthermore, Ritenhouse inserted himself into the situation by TRAVELLING ACROSS STATE LINES. He was a willing participant that was armed. Not some little boy that was attacked for no reason. So cut the crap & sob story.
This case will be the model for others who defend themselves against rioters in the future. Lesson here ?? Keep your hands to yourself..cause you may get clapped. End lesson.
The description is nevertheless correct. That is what makes a good judge: calling oneself to order again and again. Schroeder is that kind of good old oldschool no-BS- judge. His many aaaahs and hmmmms indicate that he sorts his thoughts well and weighs his words carefully before he utters them.
Dont know the truth on all facts just yet. I need to research more. That said, if he wasn't legally able to have that weapon he should get whatever punishment the law requires. As for the shooting, if he didn't initially hurt someone (important) and was running in fear for his life from the people chasing him he should have the right to defend himself.
Illegal possession and use of firearm to begin with. He chose to be out in those streets acting like a big boy, now unfortunately he needs to be held accountable and face the consequences. No one wins. This should have never happened to begin with. Period.
👨⚖️🧠🤔 *~ I’m always worried how judges often have HUGE DISCRETION in their court but the discretion is UNCHECKED, meaning the appeals court cannot overturn a ridiculous ruling by the judge.* These discretionary ruling can have a very wide area they can cover. Even one example is if a judge departs from the federal sentencing guidelines - (those guidelines tell the judge what does sentence a convicted criminal to based on the severity of the crime, the defendants criminal history, and other mitigating/aggravating circumstances) - and appeals court cannot reverse that. Let’s say the trial judge had five cases over several years where he followed the guidelines exactly but then decided to completely disregard the guidelines for One of the five defendants. And that say that all five defendants committed the same crimes, the same way, had the same history, and all other situations were the same. So four of those defendants the judge sentenced to two years in prison but one of the defendants he sentenced to 20 years in prison. As long as the law allowed him to go up to 20 years, the appeals court can do nothing. The reasoning for this I believe is to say that the judge that handled the case set through the trial and all the hearings and was able to also to judge the criminal and the witnesses better, so that judge is the one that we should trust the most. And I’m fine with that in general, but if there is something a judge does that is extraordinarily dumb, then judges should be able to correct it. But judges at the appeals court level cannot do that. The appeals court judges I just there to correct any legal errors that a trial judge made. But if the trial judge can make Legal errors what makes us think that they cannot make errors even if it falls within their discretion? (I’m mainly talking about federal court because I don’t know about all the state courts. But many state courts are just like the federal courts.)
@@JohnnieWalkerDread B/c "uh.. uh... uh.. uh" is not professional? If a judge expects respect, as a baseline he should be conducting himself with professionalism. Not as an opinionated old man talking to his wife.
@@Bonzi_Buddy WHAT A DOPE. VIDEO OF AK-47 GUNMEN KAYLEE CHASING ROSENBAUM MOMENTS EARLIER. HAVING WORDS. PON WHICH ROSENBAUM TURNED AROUND AND CHSED KAYLEE TO TAKE HIS GUN AWAY.... CASE CLOSED! HE SHOT 3 PEOPLE, HE WAS THE AGGRESSOR AS THE WITNESSES SAID HE WAS ALL NIGHT LONG.
@@jjboyd01 They leak stuff to the press but don't leak a video that shows him to be the aggressor. lol. Get outta here. You're fixing to be disappointed.
After hearing this expert I think it still comes down to the fact that Rittenhouse should not have been there in the first place with that weapon if he didn’t have the experience to handle the stimuli that was there. That is why these situations shouldn’t be handled by hot headed teenagers.
He wasn't hot headed. Seriously, how can you be this ignorant? And whether or not he "should" have been there is subjective, and irrelevant to his SDclaim.
He handled himself quite well actually. Better than most cops would have. Hot-headed? If he was truly hot-headed, there would have been a lot more dead people that night, including Gaige Grosskreuitz.
Penny - you can't really make the excuse that "he should not have been there", because that undermines EVERYONE's right to self defense, if the assailant can argue "well, if you didn't want to get illegally assaulted you should have stayed home". The problem with your argument is that it implies that getting illegally assaulted by people trying to murder you is a normal situation, and everyone should expect it to happen, and not complain about it. Kinda like "if you walk into the tiger enclosure in the Zoo, expect to get attacked" - that is understandable, and for that very reason, the tiger enclosure is off limits. Or "if you try to break into a military base, you may get shot" - hence it is illegal to break into military bases, and they have fences with barbed wire, and armed guards. However - "if you leave your house, you will have people trying to kill you" is not a normal situation - that is why there are laws against assaulting people, and Kyle was assaulted. You can't argue that he should have stayed home. Likewise - you can't make the argument that he should have left the gun - you have no right to tell somebody to refrain from doing something, if it is lawful for them to do it. And the whole idea of carrying a firearm for self defense is to have one if/when you need it. I carry. And as long as it is lawful for me to do so, you have no right to tell me not to carry. True - in the event that I am attacked, the presence of a firearm (even if the assailant originally had none) elevates the potential threat, but in such a situation, my safety trumps any possible injury to the attacker.
@@user-tf5lg7fc9s if you want a chuckle, check out a guy that goes by Jason Unruhe doing a video on this - you'll get a laugh out of it. Also Liberal Dan - dude is so intentionally obtuse it's hillarious.
Event two and three could be also be self defense. Rittenhouse already shot someone. So if you say Rittenhouse used self defense you can’t then say that the others who are trying to protect themselves weren’t also using self defense.
False. This is a misconception that a lot of people have about self-defense. They assume that if Person A has a self-defense claim against Person B, that Person B cannot have a self-defense claim against Person A. FALSE! There are plenty of scenarios where two people can have legitimate self-defense claims against each other. If you're not convinced, let me know and I'll post one for you.
@Don't Wake your confusing Defending him self width de Lee goal term ( Self-defence) If some one is punching Mii indie face,So eye killl dim width a gun, that's technically Defending my self, but it's knott de Lee goal term (Self-defence)
Are you deaf? The expert says ke acted in self defense and at this point anyone who says Kyle is guilty is basing everything off of feelings and not facts
@@Skarletjonancy 😆😆 De Poe lease Self-defence expert de prosecution brought inn said, it's self-defense, Hoo wood have guest? Binder has a civilian Self-defence expert two and I'm a Hong dread purr cent sure heal say de shootings was ant justified. De Prosecutions expert did ant say inn knee thing that de defense has Isle red de said. He's tri N two use his tidal two persuade de jury. Same own you four fall lean four it. He did ant bring inn knee thing knew two Kyle's defense,but a tidal.
@@jacobhenry8546 hahaha good one 👍🏻👍🏻 they dont like the judge bc he isn’t buying the prosecutors bs nonexistent arguments.. how can you look at this case in full and charge this kid? thank god this judge seems like he wants a fair trial and he may stutter but is thinking about what he’s about to say. he is not stupid at all but very wise.
I can’t wait for the trial!! Hopefully he gets more than 5 years!! Felony never gets to own a gun again or VOTE!! Seems like troubles like this follow a person for life!! 👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼🙏🏼
Praying you are never chases by a mob of ppl intent on harming you and you only have a knife or gun! I'd be waiting for your actions then!! Watching the video not the cherry picked one the state and CNN gave will show the true terror of that moment. Good luck
you should do your research and actually watch the hearings and read court papers instead of just commenting on things you know NOTHING about. you probably believe whatever the mainstream media/ news tells you to believe.
@@RebeccaGallin exactly! i don’t know how a functional thinking person can actually look into this case IN FULL and think anything else but kyle was completely defending themselves.. same people wanted to defund police but cry and scream when they are in trouble no one is coming to help.
Kyle is innocent.
We will decide.
@@TheVTrider we will? Unless you’re on the jury you have no say.
@@alittlewheiser521 Lmao. dude says we like hes apart of some sort of massive organization
@@xxtripleokgaming maybe he thinks he is royalty and is using the royal we.
If Kyle loses this case, it will earmark the date our ability to defend ourselves in this country has died.
I agree the first 1 was self defense but really what you have done if you heard a bunch of people saying get him, get him, he just shot someone. would you allow that person to flee or least try to detain. Really that all they were trying to do, go after someone who shot someone.
So the one with the gun to his head was trying to detain him? Nah. I would have thought he was going to kill me too. This case isn’t about hindsight what they may have been trying to do. This kid thought his life was in danger after being chased, hit over the head with a rock, a skate board and then had a gun pointed at his head AFTER he said he was heading to the police to turn himself in from killing the first one. It comes down to he felt his life was in danger, and he was.
@@williamcrook4943 If he was running to the cops with his hands up I would let the cops deal with it. He wasn't pointing it at anyone that didn't attack him. Even the prosecution said we should let the police handle situations like that. We all take a beating after all.
It's hilarious that the prosecution is suggesting that ordinary citizens are gonna understand, through common sense, what it's like to be in a gun fight or being attacked by a mob. They don't know what it's like and that's why having an expert to tell them what it's like is important and why there should be one.
So now experts serve for a kid who shouldn't of even been there, especially with a gun. Would be nice to get some expert advice for the pandemic we're in.
Also, the brought a friend of Kyle Rittenhouse, Lewinoski or something who was a veteran who said he didn't feel threatened by Rosenbaum. Seems like he could be considered an expert.
@@joeyblowguns4070 whether you or I think he should have been there has no relevance for self-defense
@@joeyblowguns4070 every thing you said has 0 relevance to self defense.
@@HiddenRealm I'm saying that in hyperbole, when I say he shouldn't of been there. Essentially all I mean was his deception and lying put him in a situation that otherwise could of prevented this from happening. There is legal precedent which states that you can't claim self defense if you put yourself in a situation which could potentially lead to violence. How is it truly self defense, if your aggressively looking for ways to defend yourself?
So weird that a witnesses civil attorney for a 10 million lawsuit is at these hearings :/
If the prosecution thinks that this case is an open and shut non self defense case then why are they contending the use of the defenses expert? Seems shady
Even calls out the firm for using two use of force experts in prior cases. What snakes
This is not a self defense case. A reasonable person can see that.
@@saelerie did you not see the same videos the world has? He was in an open carry state. He shot as he was being attacked.
We can't continue to allow lawlessness continue.
A Poe lease Self-defence expert? Day are tri N two use his title two persuade de jury. Lawyers and judges no a bot Self-defence laws Moore than Poe lease Self-defence experts,So why bring him inn?
@@iwkaoy8758 Ask the prosecution that.
The defense team’s expert is for civilian self defense. Who is much better versed in self defense laws and practices than a judge.
Miners are not excluded from possessing firearms in Wisconsin. You cannot find, nor can anyone else find, a law in Wisconsin that he broke by being in possession of that gun. If he had been 15 then the BS charge that they put on him would have applied
This judge is awesome
And he's going to send this kid to prison forever he sure is awesome.
@@patman0250 - We'll see what happens, but thus far a large majority of his pretrial rulings have favored the defense.
@@Bike_Lion Actually no they haven't. They tried to get a couple charges dismissed and a judge flat out refused. There's only one reason he did that he's going to bury this kid. Either way he's not going to leave this unscathed especially not for that many felonys.
@@patman0250 I do think he’s going to get some legal trouble for possession of a firearm I think the only real debate here is if it was self defense or not. He won’t get out unscathed but he could get off with not much time.
He dose seem pretty reasonable and I don’t get the feeling he taking any bias for either side.
state: " There is no need for a self defense expert"
also the state: "we brought our own self defense expert"
Prosecutor figured their motion was going to be denied. Just pre-trial strategy.
The state doesn't believe Kyle acted in self defense. So yes they would like to not use a self defense expert, not because it is some kind of logical trap but they want common knowledge to be the deciding factor. The way the prosecutor made his statement was logical to me--even though I personally believe Kyle acted in self defense. The average citizen is likely never going to be in this situation so using experts to explain the law and events from an expert analysis to the common citizen seems to suggest the law is not clear or understood by the common citizen. As a prosecutor I'd like to avoid that line of thought as well. However, the law is obviously not well understood, as can be seen by the argument over the gun charge for a 17 year old, and most people will never be in this type of situation so it does make sense to bring expert testimony in to describe the situation to common citizens so they can make educated determinations.
@@jasonsachinger3276 In a way he didnt, least not in the second shootings. All they were trying to do was detain the suspect
@@williamcrook4943 I don’t know how someone having seen the videos of the second shooting could reasonably assume those three people assaulting Kyle were trying to detain him. Do you detain people by kicking them in the head, using a skateboard like a bat, or pointing a loaded gun at them? Even the prosecutor is saying that pointing a weapon at someone is provocation so Kyle was provoked by the guy with a gun pointed at his head he would be justified in shooting him. Did you watch the videos? No one testified that He was a mass shooter so they had nothing to stop. It was just a wild mob trying to either seriously injure Kyle or kill him. Where are he Ziminsky people. That ziminsky guy fired a rogue shot that likely caused Kyle to shoot the first guy because of the proximity he was to Kyle while pursuing him and a random gun shot goes off. In my mind ziminsky likely caused Kyle to think rosenbaum was shooting at him and he returned fire. Ziminsky likely caused rosenbaums death and should be charged
@@jasonsachinger3276 I thought from what i heard from the videos they said get hm get him he just shot someone. Since I dont own a firearm, yes i would have had to use what ever i had if it was a skateboard then that what it would have been. What would you have used. That wht it said on the videos GET HIM GET HIM HE JUST SHOT SOMEONE. What would you do if you heard people saying that. Try stopping that person or just allow that person to flee. Every video i heard I heard them say GET HIM GET HIM HE JUST SHOT SOMEONE. So yes I would have done what I could to have stopped a person. You cant tell me you wouldn't have done the same
Prosecutor keeps going on and on and on. Judge needs to give him a 60 second timer.
The defense should definitely use that to their advantage. As much as the prosecutor is trying to get a conviction based on convincing a jury to dislike Rittenhouse as a person the defense should try to get the jury to see the prosecutor as a terrible human being which shouldn't be hard because that's what he is.
Kyle should sue the surviving guy he shot for the cost of this trial and emotional distress.
He attacked Kyle. Forced Kyle to defend himself.
That's crazy, the people were just trying to detain a fleeing suspect. It just like any other person who shot someone. would you go after a person who people say hey get him, get him. that person just shot someone or would you just allow that person to flee.
@@williamcrook4943 should I go attack someone based on a 2nd hand allegation that he did something bad?
No. That's what the Arbery trial is about as well. Just because you want to detain people doesn't give you the right to use force on them. You have to actually witness an ongoing threat.
From what I saw Kyle was attacked once, then an uninformed mob tried to "burn the witch" so to speak. That wasn't justice or an attempt at it. It's literal vigilantism.
@@pierredelecto7069 Who said they wanted to harm him. if it had been me, yes i would have tried to stop him. maybe trying to trip him or hitting him with a skate board them least trying to hold him down till other people came saying to get the police. Not once did I hear anyone say they wanted to kill him except rosebum which yes he had a right to defend himself
@@williamcrook4943 it can be assumed they wanted to harm him. Why else would people chase you, reach for your weapon, hit you with blunt objects and point handguns at you? Those are all aggressive actions.
Huber and Grosskreutz might have thought they were going after an active shooter. This is possible. It doesn't mean that Kyle WAS an active shooter.
From what I've seen Rosenbluam attacked Kyle. Guy was literally crazy, just relaxed from a mental hospital.
Kyle defended himself. Lawfully. Against Rosenbluam.
Following this the crowd attacked Kyle.
It's kind of like Emmit Till honestly. Mob justice is hardly ever justice for this reason. You can't just hear something then go get a guy.
@@pierredelecto7069 That is a brilliant argument. Too bad their answer to your question is YES. Mob rule.
Thank God the jury found him NOT guilty. What a nightmare sham this was, beginning to end.
A perfect example of why you don’t swing skateboards at folks on the ground with rifles.
Charles Bronson would be proud……
Somebody died from it recently.
If the witnesses that testify do it fair and honest, they shouldn't fear anything.
Meaning if day don't dew ore say what eye want,some thing bad wheel happen
@@HiddenRealm so because idiots exist, one should not be fair and honest? Basically you are saying you rather back down because you are afraid to tell the truth? Explain please?
The dangerous weapons statue does not apply to rifles and shotguns. The dangerous weapons are because the state doesnt want certain ages running around with handguns. It says this if you know the law. A supplemental briefs on this and clarify that dangerous weapons statue doesnt apply to Rifles and shotguns.
Good call!
Lets just be honest here. Binger didn't want to use a use of force expert because he knew that this is a slam dunk self defense case.
State is already missing this case up. 😒
It was never a winnable case to begin with. The prosecutor was hoping that they could railroad this kid despite the evidence or the law.
@Gordon Kahl Kyle will face justice and we will all see the outcome. Some will always disagree no matter what happens. I believe in justice and the rule of law.
@@TheVTrider Pedos, wife beaters, and antifa are less than human. True justice was putting that scum into the ground in the first place.
Good thing Kyle was within the gun laws of Wisconsin and those charges were dismissed. Let’s just hope the jury rules unbiasedly.
@Gordon Kahl - You were indeed wrong. The jury ruled correctly - despite all the corruption and misconduct on the part of the prosecution and the media.
I like Corey
came here after the Court Room Trial just to see the "extras"
FREE KYLE
He's free at last
Oh bad time management mr prosecutor.
Prosecutor's argument is flawed. The Kenosha police department has set a standard as to when a police officer's life is in danger to where he can use deadly force. If it was a matter of only whether the policeman followed procedure or not then they would not have an expert in procedure and the jury would "make up their own mind" as to whether the officer followed procedure. Case closed. However the prosecution had use of force experts testify on the correctness of the police procedure and why it is used to lay the foundation for the "use of deadly force".
In the same way Kyle Rittenhouse should be allowed the same use of force expert to lay the same foundation for why a use of force was used.
Wait rittenhouse is a cop? Nope. Therefore those rules don't apply.
@@harlee2191 Rittenhouse doesn't have to be a cop to use self defense. I'm not saying what Rittenhouse did was correct either. Police use the use of force experts to defend their procedures so Rittenhouse has the same right to use experts to justify defense.
That's like saying a purr sun shot four tackling de president is proof Yuken shoot some one four tackling some one.
The general public has no idea what "reasonable" means, especially in the context of a life or death self defense situation. The expert should be allowed to testify.
@@SurlyEngineer agree
Let him go
Who is Bob? Is he father of skate board boy?
Good question no idea
Errr, erm ah,, judge... its erm...ahhh going to ahhh, erm, be a loooooooooong erm trial ah if ah you erm put er er er so er many erm erm er ahhhs in every sentence...
Seriously though! It is driving me insane listening to him! 😳
He does seem to enjoy the babble
Huge waste of tax paying dollars…..Free Kyle! Self Defense Easily! This is all political!
To say he was a right winger is totally irrelevant and typical of the medias left wing bias like this channel. He was protecting property and peoples livelihoods first. Do you think he was doing it for right wing reasons? Get a grip of yourselves.
If the cops were/are doing their jobs, why would Rittenhouse need to "protect"??
The whole point of those protests were b/c cops weren't doing their job in the first place.. now u conviently want to claim Rittenhouse needed to protect property b/c cops didn't/couldn't. .. u can't have it both ways , sunshine.
@Musical Artist So the cops weren't doing their jobs when Rittenhouse "had" to protect property. Good to know.
@Musical Artist So then Rittenhouse is a murderer and took his gun to a street & murdered 2 ppl.. U can't have it both ways like u are attempting. It is not logical which means your stance is ILLOGICAL. U can't claim police are doing their job when a 17 yr old has to protect the streets.
But nice try.
@Musical Artist Furthermore, Ritenhouse inserted himself into the situation by TRAVELLING ACROSS STATE LINES. He was a willing participant that was armed. Not some little boy that was attacked for no reason. So cut the crap & sob story.
@Musical Artist Why was he at the protest?
This case will be the model for others who defend themselves against rioters in the future. Lesson here ?? Keep your hands to yourself..cause you may get clapped.
End lesson.
Kyle the Great protector and holy Chad is going to get off and deserves a statue
Schroeder seems to think that he is running this trial. I hope the judge puts him in his place.
Schroeder is the Judge.
@@ccserfas4629 Sorry, I thought he was the prosecutor.
The description is nevertheless correct. That is what makes a good judge: calling oneself to order again and again. Schroeder is that kind of good old oldschool no-BS- judge. His many aaaahs and hmmmms indicate that he sorts his thoughts well and weighs his words carefully before he utters them.
@@aletheaglenn6656 Binger is the prosecutor, schroeder is the judge
@@rob-6177 Thank you. I got it wrong.
Dont know the truth on all facts just yet. I need to research more. That said, if he wasn't legally able to have that weapon he should get whatever punishment the law requires. As for the shooting, if he didn't initially hurt someone (important) and was running in fear for his life from the people chasing him he should have the right to defend himself.
This didn’t age well
I think it aged well!
lol @ the bad blurry green screen
Kyle is a hero, if this wasnt self defense nothing is.
Free Kyle
His first night in jail is going to be hilarious 😂
@@AnnaZombi This aged well...
Kyle is the true hero.
A true zero.
@@saelerie Did a pretty good job of removing two degenerates from society.
Lets see how you would feel how he would have shot three of your children.
@@ErikS- If I raised a pedophile, a domestic abuser and a communist I would be extremely disappointed in myself.
@@ErikS- Yes because Rausembaum - the one who tackled Kyle to the ground first and was shot first, was an expert in 'loving' children.
Illegal possession and use of firearm to begin with. He chose to be out in those streets acting like a big boy, now unfortunately he needs to be held accountable and face the consequences. No one wins. This should have never happened to begin with. Period.
This didn't age well either
@@varunhebli sucks :/
He was defending himself.
👨⚖️🧠🤔 *~ I’m always worried how judges often have HUGE DISCRETION in their court but the discretion is UNCHECKED, meaning the appeals court cannot overturn a ridiculous ruling by the judge.*
These discretionary ruling can have a very wide area they can cover. Even one example is if a judge departs from the federal sentencing guidelines - (those guidelines tell the judge what does sentence a convicted criminal to based on the severity of the crime, the defendants criminal history, and other mitigating/aggravating circumstances) - and appeals court cannot reverse that. Let’s say the trial judge had five cases over several years where he followed the guidelines exactly but then decided to completely disregard the guidelines for One of the five defendants. And that say that all five defendants committed the same crimes, the same way, had the same history, and all other situations were the same. So four of those defendants the judge sentenced to two years in prison but one of the defendants he sentenced to 20 years in prison. As long as the law allowed him to go up to 20 years, the appeals court can do nothing. The reasoning for this I believe is to say that the judge that handled the case set through the trial and all the hearings and was able to also to judge the criminal and the witnesses better, so that judge is the one that we should trust the most. And I’m fine with that in general, but if there is something a judge does that is extraordinarily dumb, then judges should be able to correct it. But judges at the appeals court level cannot do that. The appeals court judges I just there to correct any legal errors that a trial judge made. But if the trial judge can make Legal errors what makes us think that they cannot make errors even if it falls within their discretion?
(I’m mainly talking about federal court because I don’t know about all the state courts. But many state courts are just like the federal courts.)
Free him
The Judge is a typical old dinosaur that rambles & is painful to listen to.
Then don't listen to him.
@@JohnnieWalkerDread A judge should be well spoken and articulate. Not a bumbling fool that has a hard time recalling words.
@@jonathanse8977 I think a trial lawyer needs good speaking skills, but not a judge. What is the relevance to his job description?
@@JohnnieWalkerDread B/c "uh.. uh... uh.. uh" is not professional? If a judge expects respect, as a baseline he should be conducting himself with professionalism. Not as an opinionated old man talking to his wife.
@@jonathanse8977 I think you simply don't like the judge because he's been hammering the prosecution.
Why can't Rosenbloom take the illegal weapon away from the teenager whose in illegal possession of it?
Cuz Rosenbloom is a convicted felon & is not legally permitted to have possession of a firearm…
I bet you call KYLE the vigilante too. What a dope!
@@Bonzi_Buddy its exactly what the prosecutor SAID THE FBI VIDEO WILL SHOW. LOLOLOLOLOLOL. YEAH THE FBI VIDEO.
@@Bonzi_Buddy WHAT A DOPE. VIDEO OF AK-47 GUNMEN KAYLEE CHASING ROSENBAUM MOMENTS EARLIER. HAVING WORDS. PON WHICH ROSENBAUM TURNED AROUND AND CHSED KAYLEE TO TAKE HIS GUN AWAY....
CASE CLOSED! HE SHOT 3 PEOPLE, HE WAS THE AGGRESSOR AS THE WITNESSES SAID HE WAS ALL NIGHT LONG.
@@jjboyd01 They leak stuff to the press but don't leak a video that shows him to be the aggressor. lol. Get outta here. You're fixing to be disappointed.
go to prison rottenhouse
this didn't age well
Um… NOPE.
@@blacknoir2404 it didn't
After hearing this expert I think it still comes down to the fact that Rittenhouse should not have been there in the first place with that weapon if he didn’t have the experience to handle the stimuli that was there. That is why these situations shouldn’t be handled by hot headed teenagers.
He wasn't hot headed. Seriously, how can you be this ignorant? And whether or not he "should" have been there is subjective, and irrelevant to his SDclaim.
He handled himself quite well actually. Better than most cops would have. Hot-headed? If he was truly hot-headed, there would have been a lot more dead people that night, including Gaige Grosskreuitz.
Penny - you can't really make the excuse that "he should not have been there", because that undermines EVERYONE's right to self defense, if the assailant can argue "well, if you didn't want to get illegally assaulted you should have stayed home".
The problem with your argument is that it implies that getting illegally assaulted by people trying to murder you is a normal situation, and everyone should expect it to happen, and not complain about it.
Kinda like "if you walk into the tiger enclosure in the Zoo, expect to get attacked" - that is understandable, and for that very reason, the tiger enclosure is off limits. Or "if you try to break into a military base, you may get shot" - hence it is illegal to break into military bases, and they have fences with barbed wire, and armed guards. However - "if you leave your house, you will have people trying to kill you" is not a normal situation - that is why there are laws against assaulting people, and Kyle was assaulted. You can't argue that he should have stayed home.
Likewise - you can't make the argument that he should have left the gun - you have no right to tell somebody to refrain from doing something, if it is lawful for them to do it. And the whole idea of carrying a firearm for self defense is to have one if/when you need it. I carry. And as long as it is lawful for me to do so, you have no right to tell me not to carry. True - in the event that I am attacked, the presence of a firearm (even if the assailant originally had none) elevates the potential threat, but in such a situation, my safety trumps any possible injury to the attacker.
@@jakubfabisiak9810 This comment brought a tear to my eye.
@@user-tf5lg7fc9s if you want a chuckle, check out a guy that goes by Jason Unruhe doing a video on this - you'll get a laugh out of it.
Also Liberal Dan - dude is so intentionally obtuse it's hillarious.
Event two and three could be also be self defense. Rittenhouse already shot someone. So if you say Rittenhouse used self defense you can’t then say that the others who are trying to protect themselves weren’t also using self defense.
False. This is a misconception that a lot of people have about self-defense. They assume that if Person A has a self-defense claim against Person B, that Person B cannot have a self-defense claim against Person A. FALSE! There are plenty of scenarios where two people can have legitimate self-defense claims against each other. If you're not convinced, let me know and I'll post one for you.
@@user-tf5lg7fc9s when you are pursuing someone it negates self defense claims most of the time. Kyle was fleeing each of these attackers.
It was not self defense. He deserves to go straight to prison.
@Don't Wake your confusing Defending him self width de Lee goal term ( Self-defence)
If some one is punching Mii indie face,So eye killl dim width a gun, that's technically Defending my self, but it's knott de Lee goal term (Self-defence)
@@iwkaoy8758 Yes it is legal self defense. Getting punched in the head can and often does cause great bodily harm and even death.
Are you deaf? The expert says ke acted in self defense and at this point anyone who says Kyle is guilty is basing everything off of feelings and not facts
Ha ha ha you are such a jokester!
@@Skarletjonancy 😆😆 De Poe lease Self-defence expert de prosecution brought inn said, it's self-defense, Hoo wood have guest? Binder has a civilian Self-defence expert two and I'm a Hong dread purr cent sure heal say de shootings was ant justified. De Prosecutions expert did ant say inn knee thing that de defense has Isle red de said. He's tri N two use his tidal two persuade de jury.
Same own you four fall lean four it. He did ant bring inn knee thing knew two Kyle's defense,but a tidal.
This judge has a babble problem that raises questions regarding his qualifications.
Your comment raises questions regarding your intelligence.
@@jacobhenry8546 hahaha good one 👍🏻👍🏻 they dont like the judge bc he isn’t buying the prosecutors bs nonexistent arguments.. how can you look at this case in full and charge this kid? thank god this judge seems like he wants a fair trial and he may stutter but is thinking about what he’s about to say. he is not stupid at all but very wise.
This judge does not seem competent.
How so?
Why?
You seem to be so incompetent you don’t even know what competent means.
😳
I can’t wait for the trial!! Hopefully he gets more than 5 years!! Felony never gets to own a gun again or VOTE!!
Seems like troubles like this follow a person for life!! 👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼🙏🏼
Praying you are never chases by a mob of ppl intent on harming you and you only have a knife or gun! I'd be waiting for your actions then!! Watching the video not the cherry picked one the state and CNN gave will show the true terror of that moment. Good luck
@@KaktusLady oh me too! Poor guy.
you should do your research and actually watch the hearings and read court papers instead of just commenting on things you know NOTHING about. you probably believe whatever the mainstream media/ news tells you to believe.
@@RebeccaGallin exactly! i don’t know how a functional thinking person can actually look into this case IN FULL and think anything else but kyle was completely defending themselves.. same people wanted to defund police but cry and scream when they are in trouble no one is coming to help.
This didn't age well