Kyle Rittenhouse

[Sawbonz 28,218]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

That assumes they initiated the contact.

Are you saying the two shootings were unwitnessed?

[David Dennison 19,530]

Just now, Sawbonz said:

Are you saying the two shootings were unwitnessed?

Are you saying the deceased didn't feel threatened?

[Sawbonz 28,218]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Are you saying the deceased didn't feel threatened?

Were the shootings witnessed yes or no?

[David Dennison 19,530]

6 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Were the shootings witnessed yes or no?

Sure. Did the deceased feel threatened by Kyle Rittenhouse, yes or no?

[Sawbonz 28,218]

7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Sure. Did the deceased feel threatened by Kyle Rittenhouse, yes or no?

I don’t know. Is there evidence that he committed acts prior to their attacks that would cause a reasonable person to feel threatened by him? Seems like that would be something that the prosecution would focus on if there were

Edited November 12, 2021 by Sawbonz

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Sure. Did the deceased feel threatened by Kyle Rittenhouse, yes or no?

No. They attacked him despite him not doing shit to either.  

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19,305]

7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Sure. Did the deceased feel threatened by Kyle Rittenhouse, yes or no?

Well, we cannot ask them as they are dead.  See that is the big problem with this.  I do not care what their history is, what crimes they had committed in the past. They are dead.  Period.  

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

3 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Well, we cannot ask them as they are dead.  See that is the big problem with this.  I do not care what their history is, what crimes they had committed in the past. They are dead.  Period.  

It’s what happens when you unjustifiably try to kill someone who is armed. I’m sure the kiddie serial rapist you keep defending would have gone on to do great things.  

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19,305]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

It’s what happens when you unjustifiably try to kill someone who is armed. I’m sure the kiddie serial rapist you keep defending would have gone on to do great things.  

Again, it doesn't matter what the crimes of the people Kyle Rittenhouse killed were.  He did not know that in that moment.  And it is absolutely reasonably possible that they felt fear of Kyle since he was carrying an assault rifle.  Sorry, but you bring a gun into a situation like that, you are just automatically escalating everything.  

However, I am done responding to you.  You refuse to see reason or use common sense.  You really are an awful human being.

[David Dennison 19,530]

8 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

No. They attacked him despite him not doing shit to either.  

How do you know?

[David Dennison 19,530]

9 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I don’t know. Is there evidence that he committed acts prior to their attacks that would cause a reasonable person to feel threatened by him? Seems like that would be something that the prosecution would focus on if there were

Again, the people who can answer that best are dead because the defendant killed them and then claimed he felt threatened. We'll never know if they did.

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

How do you know?

Watched videos and trial.  

[tchookem 3,968]

fuck outta here about lazy.  i watched the 41 minute cspan video of the event.  biden was on frame ~20 or so minutes.  he checked his watch once, right near the end, just as i said.  could he have checked his watch another 12 times while off frame?  yeah, maybe, i guess. 

You're trying to argue about appearances with people that are just fine with the way Donald Trump comported himself before, during, and since his presidency. Do yourself a favor... let it go.

[David Dennison 19,530]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

Watched videos and trial.  

So you don't know how the deceased perceived Kyle Rittenhouse at all.

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

Joseph Rosenbaum raped 5 boys age 9 to 11 (those are what we know he was convicted of). He threatened to kill KR.  He chased KR.  Cornered and ambushed him.  Tried to take his gun.  
 

I am very glad he’s dead.  KR is safe because of it.  And so are numerous children who won’t have their innocence shattered by a serial predator.  
 

Some people disagree with me on this. 

[Sawbonz 28,218]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Again, the people who can answer that best are dead because the defendant killed them and then claimed he felt threatened. We'll never know if they did.

How do we ever resolve homicide cases when one of the key witnesses can’t testify?

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

Just now, David Dennison said:

So you don't know how the deceased perceived Kyle Rittenhouse at all.

Doesn’t matter.  I know he didn’t do anything to them. I know they attacked him.  I know Rosenbaum threatened to kill him, chased him and tried to take his gun. I know Huber attempted to kill him and reach for his gun. 
 

I don’t give a shit what they actually subjectively perceived.   Because they couldn’t have an objectionable reasonable belief KR was going to shoot them prior to their decision to attack. 

[David Dennison 19,530]

2 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

How do we ever resolve homicide cases when one of the key witnesses can’t testify?

Sometimes we don't.

[David Dennison 19,530]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

Doesn’t matter.  I know he didn’t do anything to them. I know they attacked him.  I know Rosenbaum threatened to kill him, chased him and tried to take his gun. I know Huber attempted to kill him and reach for his gun. 
 

I don’t give a shit what they actually subjectively perceived.   Because they couldn’t have an objectionable reasonable belief KR was going to shoot them prior to their decision to attack. 

You don't know that.

[Captainant 28,530]

Lol y'all are rolling around in shit with a shitlord. Sack is just excited that he has a new "the media hates conservatives" narrative that he can exploit to dismiss and ignore reporting on any malfeasance that he finds inconvenient

[Sawbonz 28,218]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Sometimes we don't.

Actually if it gets to a jury, we do

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

You don't know that.

All the evidence says he didn’t.  I guess it’s possible he did.  But no testimony or video.  And there were lots of cameras running and lots of people.  Not one witness has even said he pointed a gun at either.  They couldn’t even find some bullshit liar like a Blasey-Ford

Edited November 12, 2021 by Johnny Sack

[David Dennison 19,530]

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

Actually if it gets to a jury, we do

And sometimes they get it wrong.

[David Dennison 19,530]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

All the evidence says he didn’t.  I guess it’s possible he did.  But no testimony or video.  And there were lots of cameras running and lots of people.  Not one witness has even said he pointed a gun at either.  They couldn’t even find some bullshit liar like a Blasey-Ford

I like your tells. You are a good partisan.

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Lol y'all are rolling around in shit with a shitlord. Sack is just excited that he has a new "the media hates conservatives" narrative that he can exploit to dismiss and ignore reporting on any malfeasance that he finds inconvenient

The media is deplorable.  And this kid is about to sue the shit out of them.  He should also sue Brandon for labeling him a white supremacist.  Get some of the Big Guy’s ten percent cash.  

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I like your tells. You are a good partisan.

We can’t all be right down the middle like you and your CR compadres.  

[David Dennison 19,530]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

The media is deplorable.  And this kid is about to sue the shit out of them.  He should also sue Brandon for labeling him a white supremacist.  Get some of the Big Guy’s ten percent cash.  

You know he doesn't have a case.

[Sawbonz 28,218]

Just now, David Dennison said:

And sometimes they get it wrong.

Do you have anything objective you can point to that shows a reasonable person would feel threatened by KRs prior actions that night? 

[David Dennison 19,530]

Just now, Sawbonz said:

Do you have anything objective you can point to that shows a reasonable person would feel threatened by KRs prior actions that night? 

You mean other than running around with an AR-15?

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

Just now, David Dennison said:

You mean other than running around with an AR-15?

Open carrying a long rifle is legal.  Lots of people were open carrying.  Is it your position it should be legal to assault people who are open carrying a rifle?

[hpslugga 4,097]

23 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Again, it doesn't matter what the crimes of the people Kyle Rittenhouse killed were.  He did not know that in that moment.  And it is absolutely reasonably possible that they felt fear of Kyle since he was carrying an assault rifle.  Sorry, but you bring a gun into a situation like that, you are just automatically escalating everything.  

However, I am done responding to you.  You refuse to see reason or use common sense.  You really are an awful human being.

It wouldn’t matter even if he did know about his transgressions. You don’t get to play the role of executioner in your capacity as a private citizen. That’s a right that even adults don’t have, much less some punk kid.

”Dude, you shot that guy!”

”Don’t care. Child rapist”

”oh ok”

That’s seriously how people like sack of shit think the real world works…that you get to just snuff people out in broad daylight if they committed crimes in the past. That’s that bullshit, tiny-dicked Wild Wild West mentality at work. No different than people who defended Amber Guyger because when she broke into Botham Jean’s apartment, “I SMELLED MARIJUANA!!!”

Edited November 12, 2021 by hpslugga

[David Dennison 19,530]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

Open carrying a long rifle is legal.  Lots of people were open carrying.  Is it your position it should be legal to assault people who are open carrying a rifle?

It's my position that reasonable person would feel threatened by someone who is open carrying an AR-15.

[Sawbonz 28,218]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

You mean other than running around with an AR-15?

I don’t think you can make the case that a reasonable person would feel threatened enough by a person doing nothing more than carrying a long gun to violently attack that person. I mean you can try but I don’t think it’s going to work

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

Just now, David Dennison said:

It's my position that reasonable person would feel threatened by someone who is open carrying an AR-15.

You think it’s reasonable to attack someone open carrying an AR15 in public when they aren’t pointing it at you?  Because they have a reasonable belief or death or serious bodily injury?

[Sawbonz 28,218]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

It's my position that reasonable person would feel threatened by someone who is open carrying an AR-15.

I don’t think you are going to convince 12 jurors to agree with you. At least not that a reasonable person would feel threatened enough to physically attack that individual 

[Satchel 6,982]

27 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

It’s what happens when you unjustifiably try to kill someone who is armed. I’m sure the kiddie serial rapist you keep defending would have gone on to do great things.  

/s

Trayvon Martin

[David Dennison 19,530]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

You think it’s reasonable to attack someone open carrying an AR15 in public when they aren’t pointing it at you?  Because they have a reasonable belief or death or serious bodily injury?

Maybe. 

[Captainant 28,530]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Open carrying a long rifle is legal.  Lots of people were open carrying.  Is it your position it should be legal to assault people who are open carrying a rifle?

It's not legal for someone underage to open carry a rifle or shotgun. Unless they're out hunting. 

Which would certainly complicate a self defense claim. 

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

Just now, Captainant said:

It's not legal for someone underage to open carry a rifle or shotgun. Unless they're out hunting. 

Which would certainly complicate a self defense claim. 

It doesn’t.  Carrying a weapon illegally has zero to do with the viability of a self defense claim.  
 

If a woman in Madison, Wisconsin has a Glock 9mm with a twenty round Mag in her purse and shoots and kills someone attempting to rape her, she doesn’t lose her right to self defense because she was illegally carrying without a permit.  It isn’t relevant at all to the self  defense claim and this jury will be instructed on that.  

[Sawbonz 28,218]

Just now, Satchel said:

/s

Trayvon Martin

Zimmerman initiated the confrontation with Martin, Martin beat his ass and Zimmerman shot him. Is there evidence that KR initiated the contact with any of the people he shot? If there is that would definitely hurt his self defense claim

[David Dennison 19,530]

4 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I don’t think you are going to convince 12 jurors to agree with you. At least not that a reasonable person would feel threatened enough to physically attack that individual 

I mean, Kyle was at a riot with an AR-15. That seems pretty threatening.

[David Dennison 19,530]

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

Zimmerman initiated the confrontation with Martin, Martin beat his ass and Zimmerman shot him. Is there evidence that KR initiated the contact with any of the people he shot? If there is that would definitely hurt his self defense claim

Again, the two people who can answer that are dead.

[Sawbonz 28,218]

Just now, David Dennison said:

Again, the two people who can answer that are dead.

Well they could give their version. Doesn’t mean it’s the truth any more than his version is. Is there any other corroborating testimony or video evidence supporting your theory that he confronted them? I think that would be important to the prosecution's case no?

[Sawbonz 28,218]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I mean, Kyle was at a riot with an AR-15. That seems pretty threatening.

Again I don’t think you’re going to convince 12 jurors that simply carrying a long gun would cause a reasonable person to physically attack. 

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

5 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Zimmerman initiated the confrontation with Martin, Martin beat his ass and Zimmerman shot him. Is there evidence that KR initiated the contact with any of the people he shot? If there is that would definitely hurt his self defense claim

It is unclear who did what.  There was some evidence Martin attacked him when Zimmerman was walking back to his truck after losing sight of Martin.  
 

Had Martin gotten his gun, shot Zimmerman, and kept his mouth shut and lawyered up, he very likely walks on a murder charge.  
 

There wasn’t sufficient evidence to convict GZ.  And there wouldn’t have been on Martin had he shot GZ.  
 

So I wouldn’t classify GZ as innocent.  Just not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
 

I’ve seen all the evidence on KR.  He’s innocent. 

[DDD Dad 14,647]

So you don't know how the deceased perceived Kyle Rittenhouse at all.

I would imagine they didn’t perceive anything about him, being deceased and all.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19,305]

16 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

It wouldn’t matter even if he did know about his transgressions. You don’t get to play the role of executioner in your capacity as a private citizen. That’s a right that even adults don’t have, much less some punk kid.

”Dude, you shot that guy!”

”Don’t care. Child rapist”

”oh ok”

That’s seriously how people like sack of shit think the real world works…that you get to just snuff people out in broad daylight if they committed crimes in the past. That’s that bullshit, tiny-dicked Wild Wild West mentality at work. No different than people who defended Amber Guyger because when she broke into Botham Jean’s apartment, “I SMELLED MARIJUANA!!!”

I know.  It's a point I made earlier in the thread only to have Johnny and his fellow KR Butt Boys be complete shitheels.

[JimmyJames 12,271]

47 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I don’t know. Is there evidence that he committed acts prior to their attacks that would cause a reasonable person to feel threatened by him? Seems like that would be something that the prosecution would focus on if there were

Well he had shot and killed a guy already and was running around carrying his assault riffle in a ready position. 

[Sawbonz 28,218]

Just now, JimmyJames said:

Well he had shot and killed a guy already and was running around carrying his assault riffle in a ready position. 

Was he running around or was he being chased? 

[JimmyJames 12,271]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

It is unclear who did what.  There was some evidence Martin attacked him when Zimmerman was walking back to his truck after losing sight of Martin.  
 

Had Martin gotten his gun, shot Zimmerman, and kept his mouth shut and lawyered up, he very likely walks on a murder charge.  
 

There wasn’t sufficient evidence to convict GZ.  And there wouldn’t have been on Martin had he shot GZ.  
 

So I wouldn’t classify GZ as innocent.  Just not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
 

I’ve seen all the evidence on KR.  He’s innocent. 

We all know your position on this case. You’ve stated it probably 290 times so far. It’s dumb but really well known.