N583JB wrote:casinterest wrote:N583JB wrote:
Defending his rights to shoot those people? I've stated that the shootings to me looked like they were in self-defense. I've also stated that it may not matter since Rittenhouse may have been committing a crime before the shootings. In fact, I believe I was the first person in this thread to bring up the felony murder rule and apply it to Rittenhouse. There is a huge legal gray area, which is why this case is so interesting to me. Indeed, if he is charged with a crime, the only reason he would likely be charged at all would be because of his age. It is crazy to me to think that if Rittenhouse were a few months older he'd either be a free kid right now or he'd have a much easier trial, but the law is the law. Should be interesting to follow.
Either way, his self defense is going to be mired by the fact that he himself fell to the ground. He put himself into a defenseless position, and those coming after him were trying to disarm him after he shot another person. He made himself judge,jury and executioner, after flouting the law to bring the gun across state lines under age.
He fell to the ground as he was fleeing. Not sure how that can be held against him. Also not sure how much the other protesters who were shot can be faulted if they reasonably believed that Rittenhouse was a threat. It is very possible that this could be a case where no one ends up going to jail. Rittenhouse thought he was defending himself, protesters thought they were defending themselves, and each side was reasonable to believe as such.
And the parents get sued to bankruptcy.