Another "I can't breath" death: Police Reform & Protests in the USA

[Endus]

But Rosenbaum was not just someone. He was aggressive rioter and was trying to provoke fight before (can be seen on video).
Witness said that Rosenbaum was reaching to take his weapon. Thats a fact.

Taunting people and daring them to shoot him does not mean Rosenbaum was instigating a fight.

And again; Rosenbaum trying to disarm Rittenhouse would not in any way justify Rittenhouse shooting him. You keep claiming that as if it's a defense, and it isn't one.

[Krakan]

Even if this were all true, it does not warrant shooting Rosenbaum. What you're describing does not meet the legal requirements for lethal force used in self defense, under Wisconsin law.

What you're describing is a motive for a homicide, not a legal defense.

"But Rittenhouse felt he had to shoot, because X and Y and Z!"

Unless that falls into the narrow self defense exception, against imminent death or great bodily harm (again, legal term, don't pretend it means "any injury"), then what you're talking about is motive, not a legal defense.

I just disagree with you. It's as simple and complex as that. It is up to the courts now. From my view it looks justified though there are a lot of questions surrounding it.

What happened before the video?
Why was he alone? The milita moves in numbers.

There are a lot of key questions we don't have answers to and I am extremely skeptical of taking the group who attacked him word on events.

- - - Updated - - -

Before he ran, or before he shot someone? Or both? Because now I've seen this claim at two different points of time and I think y'all need to get your stories straight. The only witness account I've seen to this effect, from a Daily Caller reporter (lol), was that he lunged to grab Rittenhouse's gun just before he was shot. Nothing about doing so before Rittenhouse ran.

It was before he ran the first time but like any witness testimony its suspect at this point . What we know is what we can see.

[Mayhem]

And again; Rosenbaum trying to disarm Rittenhouse would not in any way justify Rittenhouse shooting him. You keep claiming that as if it's a defense, and it isn't one.

Come to think of it, wouldn't Rosenbaum be in the right about disarming Rittenhouse because Rittenhouse was illegally armed?

[Endus]

I just disagree with you. It's as simple and complex as that.

It really isn't.

You keep making claims that do not hold to the facts. That isn't us disagreeing, that's you lying.

There are a lot of key questions we don't have answers to and I am extremely skeptical of taking the group who attacked him word on events.

He was not "attacked".
There was no "group" chasing him.

This entire position is just you trying to justify why you're ignoring evidence that doesn't support the conclusion you want to draw, rather than the conclusion that the facts show to be true.

[Edge-]

It was before he ran the first time but like any witness testimony its suspect at this point . What we know is what we can see.

Got a citation for that?

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...rs/5651016002/

Because the only references I can find are from the Daily Caller reporter who has only claimed that Rosenbaum tried to grab the barrel of the gun immediately before he was shot. I see nothing about him trying to grab it before this all started.

This sounds like your, "Rittenhouse was calling 911" claim, unless you've got a link.

[Endus]

Come to think of it, wouldn't Rosenbaum be in the right about disarming Rittenhouse because Rittenhouse was illegally armed?

To play devil's advocate, he'd have had no way to know that.

However, witnesses (including McGinnis, who wasn't a protestor) have all said Rittenhouse was handling the weapon incompetently and putting bystanders at risk in doing so, and that could have justified someone trying to disarm him.

I've largely not been talking about that because it'll inevitable devolve into bitching about witnesses and I don't see that as productive, so I've been trying to stick to the video evidence. But sure; if we include it, then Rosenbaum was entirely in the right to try and disarm the danger.

[Krakan]

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/sta...tes/939/iii/48

Particularly this sentence at the end of (1), which specifies the standard for lethal force in self defense;

"The actor may not intentionally use force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself."

For "great bodily harm", Wisconsin's legal definition is here, item 14; https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/sta...dily%20injury.

"“Great bodily harm" means bodily injury which creates a substantial risk of death, or which causes serious permanent disfigurement, or which causes a permanent or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ or other serious bodily injury."

We agree on this the difference comes down to why you believe his attacker chased him.

I see it as him attempting to over power him and turn his weapon against him. You see it as him trying to drive him off or... peaceful disarm him?

I don't want to put words into your mouth.

[Cizr]

Where are his acts of rioting chronicled? Was Rittenhouse witness to these acts of rioting?

Glad you asked because we have that on a video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75uwKcD3dv4 at 3:24 you can see him pushing burning container towards gas station. Some good guy puts the flames down and it gets him really mad.

Btw few seconds before you can see Kyle rushing somewhere with fire extinguisher

[Krakan]

Got a citation for that?

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...rs/5651016002/

Because the only references I can find are from the Daily Caller reporter who has only claimed that Rosenbaum tried to grab the barrel of the gun immediately before he was shot. I see nothing about him trying to grab it before this all started.

This sounds like your, "Rittenhouse was calling 911" claim, unless you've got a link.

A link to what?

We don't have the police report in front of us. All I witness reports right now are at best simply collected by various new agencies. What exactly are you asking for?

[Endus]

We agree on this the difference comes down to why you believe his attacker chased him.

I see it as him attempting to over power him and turn his weapon against him.

There is absolutely fucking zero evidence to support that.

You are making shit up, and expecting us to take your imagination over the facts. Not gonna happen.

You see it as him trying to drive him off or... peaceful disarm him?

I don't want to put words into your mouth.

I think that's more likely, given that Rosenbaum wasn't being violent in any other footage. We have to stick to the evidence there is, not our fanfic of what we wish could've happened.

[Shalcker]

He was not "attacked".
There was no "group" chasing him.

There were at least two people following him closely, Rosenbaum and that Daily Caller journalist; that is already enough for a group.

Throwing things at people is generally seen as attempt to attack, even if it ultimately doesn't hit.

This entire position is just you trying to justify why you're ignoring evidence that doesn't support the conclusion you want to draw, rather than the conclusion that the facts show to be true.

You are not providing alternative analysis of available evidence that would support your viewpoint, you just deny what plenty of people plainly see in videos.

[Krakan]

There is absolutely fucking zero evidence to support that.

You are making shit up, and expecting us to take your imagination over the facts. Not gonna happen.



I think that's more likely, given that Rosenbaum wasn't being violent in any other footage. We have to stick to the evidence there is, not our fanfic of what we wish could've happened.

I am sticking to the events that happened he seemed aggressive and in that situation I would assume he would attempt to turn the weapon on me in a struggle.

There is a strong case for that given he was chasing him.

[Edge-]

Glad you asked because we have that on a video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75uwKcD3dv4 at 3:24 you can see him pushing burning container towards gas station. Some good guy puts the flames down and it gets him really mad.

Btw few seconds before you can see Kyle rushing somewhere with fire extinguisher

While the cops just sat 20 feet away? I don't think pushing a dumpster, even if it's on a fire a bit, a few feet (if that's even the dude, it's dark as fuck) is qualified as "rioting" in any jurisdiction in the US.

I'm not going to uncritically believe snippets edited together by a far-right activist, by the looks of his YT page, so I'd be curious to see all the raw video available rather than just the context he presents.

I mean, remember that time Rittenhouse and his buddies were caught on camera sucker punching a girl? That was fun too.

[Mayhem]

To play devil's advocate, he'd have had no way to know that.

However, witnesses (including McGinnis, who wasn't a protestor) have all said Rittenhouse was handling the weapon incompetently and putting bystanders at risk in doing so, and that could have justified someone trying to disarm him.

I've largely not been talking about that because it'll inevitable devolve into bitching about witnesses and I don't see that as productive, so I've been trying to stick to the video evidence. But sure; if we include it, then Rosenbaum was entirely in the right to try and disarm the danger.

No of course not, but basing a claim for self-defense on fear to be disarmed while illegally being armed just sounds very odd to me.

[Endus]

There were at least two people following him closely, Rosenbaum and that Daily Caller journalist; that is already enough for a group.

Come the fuck on.

Rittenhouse had already been interviewed by McGinnis, directly. There's no way he thought McGinnis was trying to hurt him.

You are not providing alternative analysis of available evidence that would support your viewpoint, you just deny what plenty of people plainly see in videos.

Because they aren't seeing that in the videos.

When people say they see a unicorn in a video if they squint and turn their head sideways, all I have to do is point out there's no unicorn. It's on them to prove it.

As for "not providing alternative analysis", what the hell do you think my posts are? They are alternative analysis. So you're just lying about shit, for no reason.

[Edge-]

A link to what?

We don't have the police report in front of us. All I witness reports right now are at best simply collected by various new agencies. What exactly are you asking for?

A link to any supporting evidence for your claim. We have the criminal complaint, which includes McGiniss's witness account that Rosenbaum tried to grab Rittenhouse's gun right before he was shot, but I see exactly zero evidence to suggest that there was an attempt to beforehand.

Either you have evidence to back up your claim, or much like your "He called 911" claim, you're just slinging misinformation.

[Endus]

No of course not, but basing a claim for self-defense on fear to be disarmed while illegally being armed just sounds very odd to me.

I mean, he also fled the scene and the State knowing he'd killed people, which demonstrates clear mens rea. Which makes all this talk of "self defense" pretty blatantly untrue, when not even Kyle thought he'd acted within the law.

- - - Updated - - -

I am sticking to the events that happened he seemed aggressive and in that situation I would assume he would attempt to turn the weapon on me in a struggle.

There is a strong case for that given he was chasing him.

And if you'd shot him, as Rittenhouse did, that would make you a murderer. Just like it did for Rittenhouse.

You're describing a criminal, violent mindset.

[Krakan]

I mean, he also fled the scene and the State knowing he'd killed people, which demonstrates clear mens rea. Which makes all this talk of "self defense" pretty blatantly untrue, when not even Kyle thought he'd acted within the law.

- - - Updated - - -



And if you'd shot him, as Rittenhouse did, that would make you a murderer. Just like it did for Rittenhouse.

You're describing a criminal, violent mindset.

I'm describing a " I'm being attacked and would rather not die mindset" it isn't inherently criminal.

I can't excuse him running from the law he should of reported it and turned himself in till a investigation was performed but I would need to know why he ran. Was it guilt or simple fear?

[Mayhem]

Glad you asked because we have that on a video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75uwKcD3dv4 at 3:24 you can see him pushing burning container towards gas station. Some good guy puts the flames down and it gets him really mad.

Btw few seconds before you can see Kyle rushing somewhere with fire extinguisher

Wow, you just gobble up everything if it fits in your mouth don't you?

[Krakan]

A link to any supporting evidence for your claim. We have the criminal complaint, which includes McGiniss's witness account that Rosenbaum tried to grab Rittenhouse's gun right before he was shot, but I see exactly zero evidence to suggest that there was an attempt to beforehand.

Either you have evidence to back up your claim, or much like your "He called 911" claim, you're just slinging misinformation.

There isn't any evidence at this point at best there is hearsay.