The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© The ConversationHere
and
Now
opinions
Rittenhouse verdict flies in the face of legal standards for self-defense
By Ronald Sullivan CAMBRIDGE, Ma©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
9 Comments
itsonlyrocknroll
The most logical sensible form of self-defense Rittenhouse could have embraced is to have stayed at home.
jeancolmar
This is likely not the end of the matter, with possible federal charges and law suits.
divinda
He did not "illegally obtain an AR weapon", nor did he "cross state lines with it" (despite how many media reports also falsely claim these myths).
It was fully legal for him to possess the rifle as per Wisconsin law (which is why the judge threw out the weapon's charge).
And he got the rifle from his friend in Kenosha. He never carried it over a state boundary.
Facts matter.
Fortunately, the writer of the article here didn't repeat (part of) your mistake:
cla68
This article’s title contradicts what the article actually says, which is that Rittenhouse did, indeed, act in self-defense.
kurisupisu
@zichi
There’s also a lot wrong with 3 grown men chasing a teenager down, is there not?
RegBilk
eancolmarToday 08:34 am JST
Yes, it is likely Rittenhouse will sue MSNBC, CNN, and even president Biden.
zichiToday 09:11 am JST
Rittenhouse's possession of the gun at the time legal. And the gun was already in Kenosha the night of the incident, based on police records and court testimony.
This is basic, information.
RegBilk
The Wisconsin jury believed Rittenhouse’s claims that he feared for his life and acted in self-defense
This is a simple concept.
Great decision by the jury. Prosecutors never should have gone forward with this case anyway because the evidence was so overwhelming to show Kyle acted within his rights.
Anyone criticizing the decision is obviously looking at irrelevant aspects, because the facts were clear cut, and the decision was clear cut. It is the law.
Simple as that.