Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
I Have Questions
Twitter is revelatory. The general population has probably always had a stupid streak, but Twitter makes it possible for ignorance to light itself on fire and burn so brightly it overwhelms the sun.
Reading the rants about the Kyle Rittenhouse trial is something else. First, there seems to be a large segment of the population who thinks the prosecution is doing a good job. Now, granted, I just catch the “lowlights,” but from what I have seen, Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger has been surprised way too many times by his own witnesses.
Second, the “conventional wisdom” about the law is astoundingly bad. I mean, most people commenting on the trial would be confused watching a Matlock rerun. I could be a very rich man if I could collect a dollar from everyone who assured their fellow progressives that, no matter what, the prosecution will eventually win on appeal. That’s how bad civics education is. How the hell do that many people believe an acquittal can be appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court?
And the comments about the presiding judge, Bruce Schroeder, are something else, too. Local attorneys describe him as fair but willing to be combative. My theory, which would be easy to prove or disprove with the proper resources, is that this is not the first time this judge has witnessed this prosecutor’s ineptitude. But no journalist seems even remotely interested in any backstory between them. The media loves the clips of Schroeder’s admonitions, but doesn’t go out of their way to make clear that he makes sure the jury is out of the room when he does it.
Rittenhouse will probably be convicted on the gun charge. There is no doubt that he was underage and outside the home with a firearm. The man who supplied the weapon is probably in more trouble than the person who fired it. There is a persistent belief that Rittenhouse, who lives in Antioch, IL, carried the rifle across state lines into Wisconsin. He did not. And even if he did, there is no Federal law against that. (States have their own transport regulations but anything interstate would be the jurisdiction of the Feds.)
But one never knows how a jury will rule. Especially one that feels intimidated. The political pressure has been huge, which is why in so many of these cases overcharging has become the norm. The DA feels the heat, the jury feels the heat, and so does the judge. My only hope is that the jury is more informed than the folks on Twitter.
Published in General
I think I read that his mom drove him to Kenosha. Sorry, can’t find it now.
I’ll just say: 1) I don’t understand that, 2) play stupid games and win stupid prizes.
Wrong – he drove himself. When he got home she gave him the option to turn himself in or leave town. Not sure if she knew where he was going when he went to Kenosha.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12519321/kyle-rittenhouse-mom-wendy-rittenhouse-kenosha-shooting-protests/
I avoid Twitter precisely because I think it’s a weird peek into the lunatic fringe, and unrepresentative of the country. You could well be right that there’s a large segment of the population that believes what you’re reading on Twitter. But it’s always worth remembering that Twitter is almost certainly not representative of a large segment of the population: it’s a strongly left-leaning and probably particularly intemperate subset.
Good post. Your point about jury intimidation is particularly worrisome.
In the era of “the narrative”, Hanlon’s Razor is not valid.
IMHO, he’s doing a job well calculated to give the highest chances of conviction regardless of the merits. That’s not ethical for a prosecutor. He’s throwing a lot of stuff into the air in the hope that some juror will seize on something as a justification for conviction even if legally erroneous or factually dubious. You make the mistake of looking at the 20% of stuff that’s clearly exculpatory. It’s the 79% irrelevant stuff and the 1% dubious inculpatory stuff that’s the real purpose.
I keep referring to Binger as “the defense” and the defense attorneys as “the prosecution” because the roles are historically reversed.
“Paramedic” fits the number one rule in media: Factual, but not truthful.
From what I’ve seen, the jury really should see what a screw-up the DA is.
And come on, man, who expects citizens to defend themselves in this day and age?
Dad wasn’t in the picture for many years. Mom didn’t know where Kyle was that night. He drove (although he did not have a driver’s license at the time–a point the prosecution tried to wear out) to a friend’s house where he picked up the firearm.
Anyone who has or has had a 17-year-old boy in the house knows that they are fully capable of taking off to go to a friend’s house and do stupid things. The definition of stupid varies with the boy. Frontal lobe development or lack thereof and all that.
On the drive to Kenosha stuff: A) The Rittenhouses are either separated or divorced. Dad lives in Kenosha, Mom in Antioch, IL. B) It’s not like he drove a long way. It’s what? 35 minutes at most?
As I recall, in the movie “Absence Of Malice” the expression they used was “accurate, but not true.”
Since it’s already been recommended for the Main Feed, something about Rittenhouse in the title probably would have been a good idea.
First, his mom drove him to Kenosha for community service opportunity for an organization he is a part of (young sheriffs or something like that). He was cleaning off graffiti on buildings. Everything after that was after she dropped him off to do that. Whether he checked in with her or not is unknown. Hey mom, someone hired me to watch his store for a bit. I’ll be with so and so. Call you later.
Good kid, 17. Single mom. Probably trusted him to make good choices.
He made a good choice in a bygone era. Maybe our problem is not enough “men” thought it WAS a good choice.
I hope what he’s been going through since, doesn’t make him less likely to make good choices in the future.
An upcoming good choice would be to relocate to a state where they don’t prosecute you for defending yourself.
He made a moral choice.
#YGDR.
I admire Saint Kyle of the Gun, and have not a single criticism of his attitude, decision-making, fitness, proficiency, situational awareness, reflexes, instincts, or body count.
Have you seen the footage? It’s just mind-blowing.
Most of our active-duty military would be stone cold dead if confronted with the fight that he won. I’ll vote the little guy into office when he turns 35.
Kyle is a man in a way that many men are just boys.
Charles Cooke favorably on the judge.
Trigger warning: this is NRO.
Yes, someone was caught videorecording the jurors as they left the courtoom and waited for the bus. The police made that person erase the video, but unfortunately did not arrest him and give the camera to the judge.
A BLM thug has videoed himself (on Facebook? Twitter?) saying that the judge and jurors should be videoed, identified, and tracked down and dealt with if they do not deliver the verdict that BLM fascists want.
He had angels watching over him.
Apparently he listened,
I, for one, am glad the jury won’t get the case until Monday. We have plans to eat out this weekend with friends just up the road in Racine.
Great detailed context, thank you.
Yet, the defense has taken the opportunity and asked for a mistrial with prejudice, meaning that the prosecution may never try Rittenhouse again on the same incident. Megyn Kelly has the clearest explanation of the trial.
On self defense in Wisconsin:
On the prosecutor and the judge:
Rifle accuracy measured in inverse Minutes of Angel.
I was going to write my own post on Rittenhouse, but since this one is here I’ll just comment here.
Working at home, I’ve had the live trial video going on in the background so I’ve heard most of the testimony and lawyer back and forth. The ADA Binger is smarmy and oozes condescension, besides not being very good. It’s clear to me, at least, that Rittenhouse acted in self-defense and should be acquitted of everything except perhaps the carrying charge.
That said, I go back to the reaction my father and I had when we first heard of this story last year: What the hell is a 17 year old kid doing running around in a riot carrying an AR-15? I wasn’t shocked at all when I learned that Rittenhouse came from what used to be called a “broken home.” He doesn’t have a father around (most of the time), and the result is idiotic teen behavior that isn’t reigned in. The ultimate blame for what happened here I put on the parents.
Kyle Rittenhouse isn’t a hero. He defied a curfew order, and (perhaps) illegally carried a firearm into a riot. (He might get off on this on a technicality in the law, according to Legal Insurrection.) ADA Binger is reprehensible, but he made some good points on cross-examination. He got Rittenhouse to admit he didn’t really know much about the weapon he had or the ammo he was using. He got the AR-15 because it “looked cool.” He also pointed out that Rittenhouse had no “less than lethal” defensive weapons on him, like pepper spray. So he’s a kid going out into a chaotic night with a lot of bad, crazy characters running around – criminals – and if he gets into trouble, his only option is to start shooting, with a weapon he barely understands, carrying ammo that can kill people hundreds of meters away.
I know how teenage boys think having been one once, and I understand the temptation Rittenhouse felt to be “part of the action” that night. He wanted to be one of the good guys running around with his med kit and helping put out fires. Thinking like a teen, he carried the AR-15 because it was cool. Think of the stories he’d be able to tell. Maybe he also thought it would intimidate anyone he ran into. Guess what? Lurking in riots are nuts who aren’t fazed by nerdy looking teenage boys with guns. In fact, those nuts see a teenage boy with an AR-15 as a target, and his gun as a rare prize. That’s why 17 year olds shouldn’t be out there. Do I mourn these guys for getting shot when going after Kyle? No, those are the chances you take getting involved in a riot.
But Rittenhouse was an accident waiting to happen that night, not a hero.
May your chains rest lightly upon you.
Did you see any of his attackers that would have been effectively dealt with by commonly-available pepper spray? I didn’t.
Pretty much in agreement with this, with one exception. I also won’t put the “hero” label on him, since I do think that he was acting unwisely and that people probably wouldn’t have died had he not put himself in harm’s way. However, the fact that so much of the violence and destruction of 2020 went unopposed is disgraceful, and we would have been better off as a nation, I think, if it had been met with responsible force and quelled early. The adults failed to do that. While I don’t approve of young men inviting trouble (and I think he did), I think it’s useful that we have at least one example of someone standing up to the rioting thugs, if only to provide a clear contrast to the feckless cowards who govern most of our cities.
Also, Rittenhouse is embarrassing for legal gun owners. Wisconsin law says that only people 18 and older can open carry weapons without a license. There are several exceptions listed that are clearly in place to allow 16 and 17 year olds to go hunting. They obviously aren’t intended to allow a 17 year old to cruise around a riot with an AR-15. But the poor wording of those exceptions may allow Rittenhouse to slip past the carrying charge. In any case, he clearly violated the spirit of the law.
I hate to see people “working the law” with respect to guns, trying to find loopholes so they can obey the letter but not the spirit of the law. It provides ammo (so to speak) to the gun grabbers who want to tighten the laws even more.
@bdb, I also admire his desire to help and am amazed at how he performed while under attack, but I’m going to identify one failure of judgment. When in a potentially troubling situation, one never gets separated from one’s team. For background, while in the Navy, I did a tour in a USMC Artillery Battalion, and went as part of the unit for training events in other countries. Rule #1 when you’re in the field is never get separated from members of your unit. From everything I’ve heard, Rittenhouse was in Kenosha to help protect a business, but while there he left the business. (I also remember reading reports last year that he was also providing first aid that night, although I haven’t seen that repeated lately.) If he were to leave the vicinity of the business, he should have gone in tandem with other people and stayed together as a group. However, the best posture would have been to take up defensive positions to protect the business and maintain them until the trouble was over.