Kyle Rittenhouse - guilty or not guilty?

[CountValentine]

I will say I have formed an opinion based on the evidence I've seen, but I have not decided this case by any means. You are stating a falicy. If I wanted, I could have formed the same opinion of you when you were stating opinions PRIOR to any real evidence. Some people are open to seeing more, even if they have an option, and I'd consider both of us that type of person.

Seems every post of yours is slanted one way. There is only one conclusion any reasonable person would make.

Most of my posts are the other way to try and show the other side but all I get is "lol".

The still shot shows the gun pointed at someone. That is a fact. Now one side can say it was while he was lowering his weapon and the other side can say it was while he was raising it. The fact is at that point in time it was pointed at someone.

[CountValentine]

Why?

Anyone that watches this trial and takes away what he did does not understand the responsibility that comes with owning a firearm.

[as2]

Seems every post of yours is slanted one way. There is only one conclusion any reasonable person would make.

Most of my posts are the other way to try and show the other side but all I get is "lol".

The still shot shows the gun pointed at someone. That is a fact. Now one side can say it was while he was lowering his weapon and the other side can say it was while he was raising it. The fact is at that point in time it was pointed at someone.

Well, in that case, I'll bow out again as we can't have a productive conversation with that being your feeling.

I gave you one, one single "lol" (after you responded to several posts with ONLY an "lol") when you literally took what I pointed out as a ploy by the prosecution, and used it the exact way they did.


A still shot shows nobody being killed, so let everyone walk. There is context that surrounds everything. Context is more valuable than anything in many cases. Look at every person/media/whoever sending out contextless headlines and snippets that GROSSLY misrepresent the facts. I have seen what the jury has for several days now, and have formed an opionion as I've stated multiple times. I'm sure much of the jury has an idea of how they would rule as of today. If someone gets on the stand with proof, I'll factor it in as I have been since the beginning.

[YitzyS]

Anyone that watches this trial and takes away what he did does not understand the responsibility that comes with owning a firearm.

Um, I wasn't being serious. I was just trying to depict how idiotic the prosecutor sounded. The unfortunate thing is the prosecutors can sway juries with nonsense, and people go to jail needlessly because of it.

I was once at a trial in which the prosecutor used the closing argument to say a bunch of complete rubbish, in an effort to contort the jury's opinion at the end of a trial in which the prosecutor's witnesses imploded, and he managed to get a few guilty charges out of the jury over it.

[Something Fishy]

We need @Something Fishy on this one.
Does the zoom feature on your phone add pixels when zooming?

No idea what the convo is (this is my first time opening this thread) but typically not. When they do add, it's fake, extrapolated data.

[Yehuda57]

Self defense, that will be a hard sell.

Aged like fine milk

[CountValentine]

Aged like fine milk

Coming from someone who was kicked off a jury! 

[yesitsme]

Coming from someone who was kicked off a jury! 

okay

[CountValentine]

...when you literally took what I pointed out as a ploy by the prosecution, and used it the exact way they did.

This is it in a nutshell.
Prosecution is trying to make the point KR pointed his gun at Grosskreutz which in turn made Grosskreutz react by pointing his gun at KR.

You call this a ploy in your mind but it is supported by testimony.

[CountValentine]

okay

Were did you come from? Should we expect the rest to come out of the woodwork?

[avromie7]

This is it in a nutshell.
Prosecution is trying to make the point KR pointed his gun at Grosskreutz which in turn made Grosskreutz react by pointing his gun at KR.

You call this a ploy in your mind but it is supported by testimony.

Thats a very weak claim if all evidence shows GG advanced on KR.

[CountValentine]

Thats a very weak claim if all evidence shows GG advanced on KR.

He said he thought KR was an active shooter. He advanced with his hands up. It shows he didn't want to shoot KR and was in a defensive position.

[Yehuda57]

This is it in a nutshell.
Prosecution is trying to make the point KR pointed his gun at Grosskreutz which in turn made Grosskreutz react by pointing his gun at KR.

You call this a ploy in your mind but it is supported by testimony.

Ha? He testified himself that KR didn't lift his gun until he pointed his gun at KR! They trying to impeach their own witness?

[CountValentine]

Ha? He testified himself that KR didn't lift his gun until he pointed his gun at KR! They trying to impeach their own witness?

The gun was pointed at him while KR re-racked the weapon. Jurors need to pay attention to testimony. 

[avromie7]

He said he thought KR was an active shooter. He advanced with his hands up. It shows he didn't want to shoot KR and was in a defensive position.

Let's say we accept this as fact, just because GG though he was being noble and savings lives doesn't mean KR wasn't justified in seeing him as a threat to his life.

[CountValentine]

Can anyone who has actually shot an AR15 explain how you shoot someone in the back when the first two shots are to the front of the body?

If he was charging like a bull and diving like the defense claims how were the first two shots to the front of the body?

[CountValentine]

Let's say we accept this as fact, just because GG though he was being noble and savings lives doesn't mean KR wasn't justified in seeing him as a threat to his life.

Lets not accept anything as fact. Lets find out who is smoking rope first. If it was me you would have no issue calling me out.

Prosecutions point is if he has his hands up in a defensive position and you point your gun at him that would make you the aggressor. Now the question is KR actions consistent with what a reasonable person would do?

[CountValentine]

Had some time to kill so watched the doctors testimony.

first shot R was upright and shot to the pelvis, no contact with the barrel
second shot to the hand which could have been in contact with the barrel
third and forth shots to the back and head, not sure of order

When Kyle says he grab the barrel that was only possible after he shot him the first time and shattered his pelvis.
Pelvis shattered and falling forward he gets shot in the hand either with his hand on the barrel or within inches.
Why was the third and forth shots necessary?

[grodnoking]

Had some time to kill so watched the doctors testimony.

first shot R was upright and shot to the pelvis, no contact with the barrel
second shot to the hand which could have been in contact with the barrel
third and forth shots to the back and head, not sure of order

When Kyle says he grab the barrel that was only possible after he shot him the first time and shattered his pelvis.
Pelvis shattered and falling forward he gets shot in the hand either with his hand on the barrel or within inches.
Why was the third and forth shots necessary?

The same way it takes a person a second or two to realize that they are being attacked and they must respond, it also takes a second or two to realize the threat is over. A skilled responder can have this click in about a half second, a less skilled person will take longer. Even skilled responders can continue to fire a shot or two before it clicks that the threat is over.

[Yo ssi]

https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/10/22775580/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-judge-apple-ai-pinch-to-zoom-footage-manipulation-claim