Rittenhouse was (and is) the designated prey of psychopathic wolves
I was in transit yesterday out west, so I’m still catching up with yesterday’s news in the Rittenhouse case. Fortunately, others have done excellent work summing things up.
If you haven’t seen these yet, I highly recommend them: Andrew Branca at Legal Insurrection discusses the legal wrangling over the different video versions submitted by the prosecution as well as other legal issues, anti-Rittenhouse demonstrators are arrested for attacking pro-Rittenhouse demonstrators outside the courtroom (a courtroom which should have been cordoned off but was not) as the jury deliberates inside; MSNBC has been barred from the courtroom for having a producer follow the jury bus (see also this), and we learn more about the previously elusive “jump kick man.”
But if you read or watch only one thing about the trial, it should be this from Frei and especially Barnes. I haven’t watched the whole thing yet (it’s long) but it’s well worth your time. You can change the setting to 125% speed if you want to make it quicker.
Please watch for however long you care to. Barnes comes on around 7:27, so I suggest you begin there if you’ve got the time. Barnes describes quite well, I think, how the initial mindset of the judge and the defense played into what we’re seeing now and how out of control this trial has become.
But in particular, and especially if you’re pressed for time, I recomment this part that I’ve cued up. In it, Barnes lays out the events of the evening the shooting occurred, giving us the big picture of the way in which a pack of criminal psychopaths selected the naive Rittenhouse to set him up and if possible kill him, and how the prosecution (and the MSM) is putting forward the version of reality the violent psychopaths created (and if you’re in a very very special hurry, just watch from about 45:30 to 51:49):
What Barnes is saying there is something I’ve thought about in recent days, although he says it with a great deal more knowledge of the facts and details of the killings and especially the prelude to the killings.
The point is that violent psychopaths are very savvy about choosing their prey, and if society winks at their violence they will escalate and escalate until they are stopped.
Politics sets the stage, pscyhopaths take advantage of the situation, and then politicians use the psychopaths to further their own ends, in a macabre dance. This is the mark of many totalitarian regimes, by the way (perhaps another post for another day): the use of psychopaths and/or sociopaths to meet certain nefarious ends.
Revolver’s Case For Disbarring Binger: https://www.revolver.news/2021/11/disbar-thomas-binger/
It is not too late for the judge to do the right thing, which is to declare a mistrial with prejudice after the jury foreman declares the jury has reached a verdict, but before those verdicts are announced.
I have read everything Branca has posted on Legal Insurrection, and I admire his truth-telling. Yes, he is a criminal defense attorney, so knows whereof he speaks/writes.
The prosecutors in this case have been bizarre, 4 standard deviations removed from any proximity to reality. Their chief witness, Grosskreutz, admitted he was illegally carrying a concealed pistol (which he aimed at Ritternhouse, provoking the accused to shoot first; one does not have to wait until the assailant shoots before shooting to defend one’s self), but has he been charged with any law violation? Nah. And withholding the FBI drone video from defense!
This whole thing tells us where we are headed, right into an era of Stalinism.
Yup, this is in Wisconsin, the birthplace of Progressivism, the rule of the many by a few elites.
“Why would they do that?” Asked in a tone of outrage.
When pointing out a nefarious plot coming up, the question is asked. If you can’t prove a nefarious motivation–and you can’t “prove” it against, “That’s not possible!”–then imputing the motivation condemns you and even proves the obviously predictable result isn’t possibly going to happen.
As far as I know, the people who do this reflexively believe it leads to truth, or against falsehoods.
But, when some things are so obvious, as Neo puts it, I’m not sure anybody could honestly quibble. So the ones who do…..are in on it.
“I can’t believe you said that!”
These prosecutors appear to be sociopaths as well.
Kate,
Babylon Bee has a piece up on advice for the prosecutors. The first recommendation was 1) Go to law school.
I’m a retired physicist who has a basic question about trial procedure: Why isn’t Rittenhouse’s defense, **on its own**, allowed to bring up the character — via their histories — of the two deceased and/or of the injured witness? My question is prompted by Ann Coulter’s current article: https://www.breitbart.com/crime/2021/11/17/ann-coulter-get-rittenhouse/
Such on-the-record histories seem manifestly germane to the situation Rittenhouse encountered, even though he obviously had no knowledge of them at the time. Is the explanation simply that the law is an ass? Or is there some actual defensible principle involved? (I don’t think an idea such as ‘every day is a new world, and everybody starts every day fresh’ is such a principle.)
Paul Nachman:
I believe the argument might go something like this: their criminal histories were unknown to Kyle, and it’s his perceptions that are relevant to his actions that night rather than their histories. Plus, he’s on trial and they are not.
Thanks for your reply, Neo. I understand the point.
But haven’t the prosecutors [pfui!] been painting the scenario that the two late [unlamented] targets and the wounded witness were just out there being responsible citizens, trying to calm the situation and protect others from a crazed gunman? Seems to me that their histories would be relevant to the plausibility, for the jurors, of the prosecutors’ fancy.
Rosenbaum type attitude
https://twitter.com/choeshow/status/1460768267191025665
The State of Wisconsin only allows the past actions by an attacker to be entered into evidence if the defendant can prove that he knew of them before the shooting took place.
Some other States do allow such evidence in to show that the defendant’s fears were credible even if he didn’t know of the attacker’s past, but not Wisconsin.
Andrew Branca’s book “The Law of Self Defense” page 271.
@expat: Haha! I once considered law school, and then realized I don’t like to argue. But at least I would have tried to stay within the law.
About the prosecutor that improperly held the rifle – I think he was trying to get obvious negative reactions from the jury and the courtroom so that he could “prove” that simply having that scary looking rifle is a provocation. Therefore, Rittenhouse loses his self-defense position.
As some have noted, if he is successful in the theory that carrying a gun is a provocation, then it impacts the Second Amendment and the right to have guns for protection. Scary thought.
Meanwhile….
https://vdare.com/posts/why-is-immigrant-mass-murderer-billy-chemirmir-s-trial-getting-so-much-less-coverage-than-kyle-rittenhouse-s
Looked at one way, the criminal histories of the dead and wounded men are no more relevant to this case than Rittenhouse’s supposed coffee klatsch or whatever it was with the supposed Proud Boy: they could have been saints or sinners, KR a white supremacist or a scared kid or a hero or anything in between, and the legal question is only, “Did he shoot in self defense?”
Looked at another way, their criminal histories and KR’s activities before the shooting (cleaning graffiti, providing first aid) are incredibly relevant with regard to the states of mind of the participants.
I guess the legal view is the former, and I guess I support that view in the interests of due process for ALL. But it does stick in my craw that it’s the OTHER guys, manifestly not KR, who actually came looking for trouble.
The left-right nexus is leftist. #HateLovesAbortion
Many important Truths being put out on stage now.
“…the [political] use of psychopaths and/or sociopaths to meet certain nefarious ends.”
In previous years, we’ve become familiar with Islamists taking political power advantage through terrorist rabble, using deranged Believers to sacrifice themselves — didn’t Mohammad specialize in this sort of Macabre dance? Or was it his followers trying to extirpate the alien Mongol rulers in the Twelfth Century who first practiced this?
He should be sentenced to work without benefit of supervision in …
https://dailycaller.com/2010/04/09/americas-top-20-most-liberal-friendly-counties/
… nursing homes for the next 10 years.
@DNW:
Bingo.
Those who seek to control a society through oppression, as well as those who assist in that goal, deserve the very harshest of consequences.
Relevant comment at the LI post
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/11/pro-conviction-protesters-arrested-for-attacking-kyle-rittenhouse-supporters/#comment-1230231
And this reminder:
murkyv in reply to DaveGinOly. | November 18, 2021 at 5:42 pm
Hell…Hillary was hiring mentally defectives to disrupt Bernie and Trump events
@ sdferr > “Revolver’s Case For Disbarring Binger:”
Excellent post. After describing other cases of egregious misconduct (including Nifong):
Buttressed by these stories of people fighting back.
https://redstate.com/brandon_morse/2021/11/18/when-it-comes-to-cancel-culture-a-good-offense-is-the-best-defense-n478059
Another instance of fighting back:
https://redstate.com/smoosieq/2021/11/18/jpmorgan-chase-and-wepay-just-stepped-on-the-cancel-culture-rake-n477099
…with the usual “you broke our rules but we aren’t going to tell you which ones or how” boilerplate.
Here’s where it helps to have friends in high places.
With the same “looks like we made a careless mistake — oopsies!” garbage.
That “someone with … authority” is the one who needs to be directly held responsible and brought to account. Preferably with a lawsuit that has some bite because “it’s too late now — the damage is done.”
That’s the point of all the Left’s cancel mobs: once the process is in motion, they don’t care what happens afterwards.
“The process IS the punishment.”
Only individuals with “skin in the game” can be made to care.
Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals can be used by conservatives too.
https://gla.americansforprosperityfoundation.org/adapting-alinskys-rules-for-radicals-hold-them-accountable/
#LetsGoBrandon
In reference to a recent discussion on the relative merits of Search Engines, DuckDuckGo on Brave brought up the gla post as the first hit for “alinsky target.”
Looks like an excellent series; links to the other rules at that post.
In other news … Those poor Newsome supporters. Our hearts bleed.
https://tv.gab.com/media/618ea75d21318b27258d8963?viewKey=af0bb10a-1b31-4cc9-83f0-dcf078724a0e&r=1080p
So if the deserving woke folk can rob a Walgreen’s with impunity, why not also privileged “problematic” types whose cars, homes, wealth, and even their very conceptions and continuing lives are the illegitimate fruit of the exploited labor of “POC”?
You didn’t build that! You don’t deserve that! You are living in my house! You are driving my car!
‘Stand and deliver me progressive darlin’s… your money AND your life …‘
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4B2a6l6wM2k&t=8s
Neo: “This is the mark of many totalitarian regimes, by the way (perhaps another post for another day): the use of psychopaths and/or sociopaths to meet certain nefarious ends.”
Aesopfan beat me to it with her description of Antifa’s recruiting practices. It’s become clear to me from reading about the Antifa perps in Seattle ad Portland that these are not ordinary citizens who support progressive causes. They’re by and large sociopaths/psychopaths who are attracted to violence. Antifa gives them permission to destroy things and think they are doing something worthy. No normal person would be on the streets of Portland for 100 straight nights committing arson and smashing things up unless they enjoyed it. That’s what they did.
It began some years ago in Eugene, Oregon. It has become a nationwide group. There’s seemingly money available to fly these people to where the action is. For the most part they are well trained at destruction. They purposely don’t carry fire arms as they don’t want to give the police the motivation and justification for using their fire arms. But they carry “non-lethal” weapons like hammers, crowbars, Molotov cocktails, bricks, bats, and saws for cutting locks/fences. They have a uniform of sorts. They dress mostly in all black. They are kitted out with gloves, knee pads, elbow pads, small back packs, helmets, face shields, some body armor, and plastic shields. They can be very formidable, but their modus operandi is mostly to strike at weak points, move quickly, and get out of the way when confronted with superior force.
Not all are as disciplined as the Portland Antifa, but one thing is sure. They all love violence.
J.J. —
The specifically violent ones throwing the bricks and Molotovs and beating up passersby are not “ordinary citizens who support progressive causes”, true. But many of the ones who fill out the crowd numbers, who the thugs hide behind when they throw, are such. Many friends and acquaintances of mine in Seattle went to the CHOP, went to the “protests”, and were the ones spouting “outrage! how could they!” when the police declared a riot (because it was) and deployed tear gas. They thought they were just being part of a movement, doing their part for justice, for some kind of inchoate “revolution”. The kind of misguided but generally well-meaning people who would be first against the wall if their precious “revolution” ever actually happened.
Good post by McCarthy (his personal animosity toward President Trump being in abeyance). He hammers the essential point about the Hocus Pocus video.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/11/rittenhouse-mistrial-motion-looms-as-jurors-appear-deadlocked/
BTW, I’m sure most of you have already seen stories about this, but might as well put it in the record.
https://redstate.com/streiff/2021/11/18/rittenhouse-prosecutor-concealed-the-identity-of-a-key-player-in-the-kenosha-shootings-from-the-defense-team-n478188
Jump Kick Man was known to the prosecution, and also inoculated against witnessing by manipulating charges against him.
He seems at least sociopathic.
AesopFan:
That’s one of the topics Frei andBarnes discuss at some length.
Long discussion in comments on Branca’s posts at LI, about the jury being permitted to take home the Jury Instructions, with the potential for either arm-chair-online-detective mischief, bringing notes back to the jury room, or taking notes OUT of the jury room on the instructions.
Consensus was this could be another rationale to rule for a mistrial or reverse on appeal.
Here’s a case involving a “rogue juror” who brought “information pamphlets” in to the others. The judge didn’t declare a mistrial, for practical reasons, but that didn’t change the fact that what she did was expressly forbidden.
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2021/11/18/latest_opioid_trial_augurs_reversals_most_frequent_804088.html
Paper of record has the scoop.
https://babylonbee.com/news/msnbc-reporter-seen-hanging-the-jurors-are-here-sign-on-their-hotel
https://babylonbee.com/news/doh-here-are-8-critical-errors-made-by-the-rittenhouse-prosecutors
https://babylonbee.com/news/op-ed-we-dont-need-due-process-for-people-we-know-are-guilty
https://babylonbee.com/news/every-man-in-america-except-kyle-rittenhouse-found-guilty-of-not-showing-up-to-kenosha-to-defend-their-fellow-americans
Oddly, a few of the commenters on Branca’s posts have made similar observations: he was out doing what every citizen of Kenosha should have done, in light of the dereliction of the mayor and police in not providing security to the town.
Bryan Lovely: “But many of the ones who fill out the crowd numbers, who the thugs hide behind when they throw, are such.”
Very true. The Antifa are the shock troops that smash widows, set fires, cut locks, tea down fences , etc. They create the openings for the looters and foment a sense of anarchy among the crowd. In many cases the Antifa fade away after the looting begins. Many average citizen protestors get caught in the crossfire. When they experience crowd dispersing tactics, it’s no fun. But, since the DAs in these blue run cities don’t prosecute the protestors, it’s all an invitation to do it again and again.
It seems that there are three basic types at these protests. A small group o Antifa, a much larger group of outraged average citizens, and the even larger group of looters. Each group has their motivations. The Antifa are motivated by the chance for unchecked violence, The average citizens ae motivated by political ideology. The looters by greed. Disparate groups that serve one another’s needs.
Pingback:Strange Daze: Rittenhouse vs The Swamp, Do-It-Yourself Anal Swabs, and other Undead Democrats
Liz said: “About the prosecutor that improperly held the rifle – I think he was trying to get obvious negative reactions from the jury and the courtroom so that he could “prove” that simply having that scary looking rifle is a provocation. ”
Very possible. I’m a career prosecutor and there is a line of case law out the door that says that you can’t do things like this to the jury. You just can’t stand in front of them and say, for instance, “Imagine how the victim felt when a man came up to her (prosecutor steps right up to the bar, screaming in the juror’s faces) and screamed ‘Give me your money.'”
I can’t believe these prosecutors did what they did. I know lots of judges here who would have thrown their asses straight out the door for some of the stuff they pulled.