• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

17-year-old arrested in killing of 2 people in Kenosha

Boghog1 said:
yeah, thousand of BLM protest that were like the ones in my small town, bunch of virtue signaling soccer moms hold signs, not one POC at the event, how do you think they can say that 95% of the protest were peaceful. Oops my bad you said major, nope not a one of those were peaceful
Click to expand...

Pick up those soccer moms, aging hippies and teens from the local high school and let them ‘March’ with BLM in Boston, NYC or LA - that would be gold. Do you know why? Because those folks aren’t BLM, have no clue other than what is force fed via MSM and would be in for a rude awakening.
 
Soundwave said:
I know he was unarmed but that seems like the easiest one for me. He was a proven psycho and instigator. Yes he didn't have a weapon but he was pretty relentless. The other people could have reasonably thought they were trying to stop an active shooter etc. If it wasn't for Rosenbaum setting it all off none of the rest would have happened most likely.
Click to expand...
While true, the prosecution had a provocation argument, that while weak to most unbiased watchers of the trial, was most applicable to JoJo the Pedo based on blurry video.
 
TLB said:
While true, the prosecution had a provocation argument, that while weak to most unbiased watchers of the trial, was most applicable to JoJo the Pedo based on blurry video.
Click to expand...
The provocation argument, though, was irrelevant from the moment it was introduced. Attempting to flee/retreat after the supposed provocation would have fully restored his right to act in self defense, anyway.
 
meh said:
The provocation argument, though, was irrelevant from the moment it was introduced. Attempting to flee/retreat after the supposed provocation would have fully restored his right to act in self defense, anyway.
Click to expand...
I agree. My point was the jury listened to the lying prosecution and confusing jury instructions and left that for last. They claimed the provocation caused the pedo to grab the rifle.
 
TLB said:
I agree. My point was the jury listened to the lying prosecution and confusing jury instructions and left that for last. They claimed the provocation caused the pedo to grab the rifle.
Click to expand...

Well, you can't quite draw that conclusion yet, until the jurors start coming out with interviews or statements... have they?

All we know is that they saved Rosenbaum for last. We don't know why.
 
Last edited:
AHM said:
Yeah, no.

Rittenhouse Analysis: State’s Weak Provocation Argument is the Major Threat to Acquittal
See the section "Provocation: Does It Tip Over the Whole Trial Chessboard"
Click to expand...
Yeah, yeah.

WI WJIC 815 Privilege: Self-Defense: Not Available to One Who Provokes an Attack: Regaining the Privilege – Law of Self Defense

lawofselfdefense.com lawofselfdefense.com
"[A person who provokes an attack may regain the right to use or threaten force if the person in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice of the withdrawal to his assailant.]"
Click to expand...

Running away so that he has to chase you down certainly qualifies as "adequate notice", does it not?

Actual statute can be read here:

law.justia.com

2019 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations :: Chapter 939. Crimes — general provisions. :: 939.48 Self-defense and defense of others.

Justia Free Databases of US Laws, Codes & Statutes
law.justia.com law.justia.com
 
AHM said:
Actually, I suspect you'll find that
the jury didn't suck for the false proposition that
Kyle did any initial provocation at all.
Click to expand...
Reading between the lines, it seems like they (the jury) got jumping kick man who attacked him by kicking him, bicep boy (had a gun pointed at him), and Skateboard Suicide man (hit him with skateboard), but they weren't sure about Pedo Scum who was just trying to take his gun away.
 
I’m betting that whatever Kyle is saying now during these interviews is being scripted by his attorneys. We may not like what he’s saying but I’m thinking it a big picture thing. With everything that’s happened his counsel isn’t going to let him just shoot off his mouth and let him talk himself into trouble.
 
Rockrivr1 said:
I’m betting that whatever Kyle is saying now during these interviews is being scripted by his attorneys. We may not like what he’s saying but I’m thinking it a big picture thing. With everything that’s happened his counsel isn’t going to let him just shoot off his mouth and let him talk himself into trouble.
Click to expand...

Some are making a big stink about his BLM comment. With what you said in mind it's a smart move for him to keep his words wise. The backing behind Kyle is about his RIGHT to self defense. Let the kid be himself. His win is a win for all of us.
 
AHM said:
Actually, I suspect you'll find that
the jury didn't suck for the false proposition that
Kyle did any initial provocation at all.
Click to expand...
I agree. There was no valid evidence of it, and none of him provoking Rosenbaum (via unlawful act--no doubt Rosenbaum thought putting out his fire was provocative, but that doesn't matter). The point I was trying to make was that even hypothetically provocation was still a weak case due to Kyle's obvious and earnest retreat, Andrew's comments notwithstanding. You can see what the prosecution might have been trying to do if you read the entire subsection of the statute:

(2) Provocation affects the privilege of self-defense as follows:

(a) A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.

(b) The privilege lost by provocation may be regained if the actor in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his or her assailant.

(c) A person who provokes an attack, whether by lawful or unlawful conduct, with intent to use such an attack as an excuse to cause death or great bodily harm to his or her assailant is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense.
Click to expand...

The prosecution may have been trying to argue that (c) applied based on their premise that Kyle's intent from start to finish was to engineer an opportunity for him to shoot people. But if the provocation alone is to be considered sufficient evidence of intent, then (a) and (b) become meaningless, so this interpretation cannot be right.
 
Rockrivr1 said:
I’m betting that whatever Kyle is saying now during these interviews is being scripted by his attorneys. We may not like what he’s saying but I’m thinking it a big picture thing. With everything that’s happened his counsel isn’t going to let him just shoot off his mouth and let him talk himself into trouble.
Click to expand...
If he's lucky, he's had his options laid out by some lawyers.
(The criminal lawyers we've seen, or civil lawyers we don't know (yet)).

However, I don't put a lot of faith in Kyle following a script.

In at least one of the clips of him being cross-examined,
it seemed to me that he said too much - volunteered information
unnecessary to answer the question he was asked.
And I don't mean volunteered information helpful to his case.

(If it was helpful, the prosecution would have objected to him
"answering questions that weren't asked").

The example that happens to come to mind this evening is a long one:
Kyle engaging in a dialog with the prosecutor
about this-or-that aspect of AR-15's and ammo. The prosecutor
was clueless, Kyle wasn't 100% better, and helpfully offering false
info about the platform could have screwed him hard if the case
revolved primarily around super-killy bullets as opposed to
some other narrative thread.

And I do credit the prosecutor with the sense to capitalize
upon an unexpected "admission" - even if it's not an actual admission.


If Kyle didn't manage to internalize "don't run your mouth
when the prosecutor asks you a question",
then some double-reverse psychology ragtime
about BLM support is above his pay grade.


meh said:
The prosecution may have been trying to argue that (c) applied based on their premise that Kyle's intent from start to finish was to engineer an opportunity for him to shoot people. But if the provocation alone is to be considered sufficient evidence of intent, then (a) and (b) become meaningless, so this interpretation cannot be right.
Click to expand...
Using Andrew's framing of the five elements of self-defense,
IIRC the purpose of a provocation narrative is to destroy the element of Innocence.

Normally Innocence is disproved by evidence that someone started a fight.
In many (all?) jurisdictions, if you start an argument or even a fistfight,
and then realize your mouth has written a check that your ass can't cash,
and you nope away consistently and earnestly then you regain innocence.
If you're noping away as hard as possible, but the person you fought
catches up to you, you're theoretically permitted to defend yourself.

Wisconsin has this One Weird Angle where if you troll someone into attacking you,
so that you can get all killy on them in response,
you lose Innocence and can't get it back by retreating.


Note also the uncommon nature of a self-defense argument.

Normally in an assault or murder trial,
the prosecution is trying to claim you did it,
and the defense is trying to inject reasonable doubt about the claim.
(Usually, make jurors consider that maybe you didn't really do it).

In a self-defense case, you admit you did it,
but your lawyer claims you check off all the items
which allow you to be entitled to do it.
And the prosecution is striving to give the jury
reasonable doubt that at least one of the 4-5 elements wasn't fully checked-off.
If the prosecution makes the jury doubt your entitlement then you're screwed,
because you'd implicitly conceded that you did the actual act.

So a danger in Kyle's trial in Wisconsin was that the prosecutor
might sow enough doubt in the jury that they considered
flouncing around open carrying a scary black rifle (and putting out fires)
to be a troll of the rioters.


Not sure if this addressed your point or argued straight past it.
If the latter, I'm too distracted tonight to do a good job...
 
his interview on tucker Carlson tonight was pretty good, he’s definitely more mature than 98% of the 18 year olds you’ll meet. Anyone interested should dvr the replay at 1am.

It definitely sounds like civil actions against those who defamed him are in the works. A lot of people at CNN and MSNBC should seek lawyers now, and biden, ayanna pressley and other dems should too.
 
Hoover said:
his interview on tucker Carlson tonight was pretty good, he’s definitely more mature than 98% of the 18 year olds you’ll meet. Anyone interested should dvr the replay at 1am.

It definitely sounds like civil actions against those who defamed him are in the works. A lot of people at CNN and MSNBC should seek lawyers now, and biden, ayanna pressley and other dems should too.
Click to expand...
I thought that the interview was great. I highly recommend recording the replay as well.
 

Similar threads

85-year-old Idaho woman hailed as 'hero' in fatal shooting of home invasion suspect
Replies
7
Views
131
Tartakovsky
Tartakovsky
2 men found guilty of murder in Jam Master Jay killing
Replies
9
Views
256
inerlogic
inerlogic
Pennsylvania Court Upholds Right of Young People to Carry Guns in Public
Replies
6
Views
204
Coyote33
Coyote33
16-Year-Old Shot Dead While Allegedly Trying to Steal Car in Texas
2
Replies
30
Views
668
rewster
rewster
Framingham Man Sentenced to Seven Years in Prison for Illegally Possessing Firearm in Furtherance of Drug Trafficking
Replies
2
Views
145
Beretta92FS
Beretta92FS
Back
Top Bottom