Riots, looting, vandalism, etc.

[JoeMorgue]

Obey instructions, don't resist.

Oh let's ask Breonna Taylor how that worked out for her.

 

[johnny karate]

Obey instructions, don't resist.

Haha... good one.

 

[angrysoba]

Well the lists of way black people can't respond to being openly murdered in the streets by cops keeps getting longer.

Again I ask what are they supposed to do? Because y'all got a problem with every single way they do it.

Not sure who you are talking about here, but Michael Reinoehl is not black.

 

[Meadmaker]

Would it be felony murder or straight-up-murder?

My understanding is that felony murder occurs when in the act of a felony someone else gets killed, but if you are the one who did it, say in the act of an armed robbery, then it would simply be a murder if someone rushed you while you were holding a gun.

You might be right. One way or another it's murder, but exactly which sort is something the prosecutors will have to sort out.

And yet, even then, if the firearm was being illegally carried, then do you even get to claim self-defence even if someone is trying to take the gun off you?

IANAL, but I think so.

"Castle doctrine" certainly would not apply in this case, but "stand your ground" might. I don't know the specifics in Wisconsin. However, even "stand your ground" isn't a free pass for killing people. You still have to show that your life was in danger.

It seems like there are a bunch of gun toting yahoos in our country who think that if they are threatened they have a right to pull a gun and blow the people away. No. You can only use deadly force if you are threatened with death or great bodily harm. "He pushed me." isn't a good enough reason to pull your weapon, much less pull the trigger.

I don't know what happened in the Rittenhouse case, but unless he can show that a reasonable person would have believed that his life was in danger when he fired the first shots, he is going to jail for a very long time, quite possibly for life.

 

[Ziggurat]

Rittenhouse illegally took a weapon, transported it illegally across state lines

You are pulling that out of your ass. Rittenhouse himself crossed state lines (not illegal). According to his lawyer, he acquired the gun legally in-state, not out of state. No evidence has been presented yet to contradict this claim. You are simply parroting the assumptions of others.

The rest of your post is just attempted mind reading.

 

[angrysoba]

Obey instructions, don't resist.

Whatever the instructions, you must obey or get shot?

Do you really think that simply being disobedient to a police officer means that you have forfeited the right to life?

Do you really think that the police should behave like fascist stormtroopers?

 

[johnny karate]

I don't know what happened in the Rittenhouse case, but unless he can show that a reasonable person would have believed that his life was in danger when he fired the first shots, he is going to jail for a very long time, quite possibly for life.

He illegally armed himself with an AR-15 and was patrolling the streets after a police-mandated curfew was in effect.

Do those seem like the actions of a reasonable person?

 

[angrysoba]

You are pulling that out of your ass. Rittenhouse himself crossed state lines (not illegal). According to his lawyer, he acquired the gun legally in-state, not out of state. No evidence has been presented yet to contradict this claim. You are simply parroting the assumptions of others.

The rest of your post is just attempted mind reading.

IANAL, but my investiGoogling suggests that it was illegal for him to open carry a weapon in Wisconsin because he is a minor.

Do we agree on that bit?

Also, it seems that open-carrying in Illinois is illegal regardless of age.

Do we agree on that bit?

In which case, he was presumably concealed-carrying when he took it from his home in Illinois. Would that not also be illegal?

 

[Meadmaker]

He illegally armed himself with an AR-15 and was patrolling the streets after a police-mandated curfew was in effect.

Do those seem like the actions of a reasonable person?

So, you don't understand the "reasonable person" standard when applied to self defense assertions? I can explain it if you wish, but your question isn't relevant.

 

[angrysoba]

I don't know what happened in the Rittenhouse case, but unless he can show that a reasonable person would have believed that his life was in danger when he fired the first shots, he is going to jail for a very long time, quite possibly for life.

I assume he would need to demonstrate that the person he shot was trying to take his gun (with the assumption that he was doing it in order to kill Rittenhouse). If he can persuade the jury of that, then he will probably get off with relatively minor convictions.

That said, I would have thought that demonstrating that will be difficult.

 

[angrysoba]

He illegally armed himself with an AR-15 and was patrolling the streets after a police-mandated curfew was in effect.

Do those seem like the actions of a reasonable person?

That's not the issue. We are not trying to figure out if Rittenhouse is a reasonable person, but whether or not a reasonable person would have felt threatened enough by Rosenbaum to feel their life was in danger. If a reasonable person could agree to that, then Rittenhouse would have acted in self-defence.

 

[JoeMorgue]

And the "Let's start writing 40 pages of self insert 'Member of his defense team' fan fiction about why the white guy was totes in the right because of what was going on his head" begins...

 

[angrysoba]

And the "Let's start writing 40 pages of self insert 'Member of his defense team' fan fiction about why the white guy was totes in the right because of what was going on his head" begins...

Who are you directing this at?

We know that someone has been arrested, and we know that they are standing trial for murder.

People here are speculating about how the trial will play out.

What is your problem with that?

 

[johnny karate]

So, you don't understand the "reasonable person" standard when applied to self defense assertions? I can explain it if you wish, but your question isn't relevant.

Yes, I understand that it’s not relevant as a matter of law.

But that’s the problem. It should be.

 

[Thermal]

Still trying to wrap my head around a minor declaring martial law of his own terms and not being gunned down for that alone.

 

[Suddenly]

I assume he would need to demonstrate that the person he shot was trying to take his gun (with the assumption that he was doing it in order to kill Rittenhouse). If he can persuade the jury of that, then he will probably get off with relatively minor convictions.

That said, I would have thought that demonstrating that will be difficult.

There is a concept called "imperfect self-defense" that could apply to the second killing.

Where the intent is to defend self but the circumstances do not justify it. This mitigates intent and would make it a lesser form of homicide. Classically manslaughter.

It looks like Wisconsin has a revised homicide statutory scheme not similar to common law so generalities are less likely to be accurate.

 

[Thermal]

That's not the issue. We are not trying to figure out if Rittenhouse is a reasonable person, but whether or not a reasonable person would have felt threatened enough by Rosenbaum to feel their life was in danger. If a reasonable person could agree to that, then Rittenhouse would have acted in self-defence.

When you are the actual criminal in the midst of your actual crimes, I'm not confident self defense claims are valid.

 

[JoeMorgue]

What is your problem with that?

How selectively it is done.

 

[johnny karate]

And the "Let's start writing 40 pages of self insert 'Member of his defense team' fan fiction about why the white guy was totes in the right because of what was going on his head" begins...

It’s funny how we get into the specificity of what the law dictates not at the point where illegally armed white vigilantes are roaming the streets, but rather at the point that said illegally armed white vigilante has killed multiple people and we’re judging the merits of his self-defense claim.

On the other hand, if you’re black, shut up and do everything the police tell you to do, or face possible execution.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

RIP Michael Forest Reinoehl. May his courage be an example to us all.