According to legal experts, Rittenhouse has a strong case under Wisconsin law. It is not clear whether the prosecution will be able convince the jury Rittenhouse caused a dangerous situation by arriving in Kenosha armed with an AR-style semiautomatic weapon and forfeiting his right to self-defense.
Rittenhouse (18) from Antioch, Illinois faces six charges, including homicide, in the Aug. 25, 2020 deaths of Joseph Rosenbaum, and Anthony Huber. If convicted of the most serious, he could spend life in prison.
Rittenhouse was 17 years old when he responded to social media calls to Kenosha to bring weapons to defend the city against violent protests. These were the result of a white officer shooting Blake, a Black male, in the back, on Aug. 23. (An officer was later cleared by a prosecutor, who found that Blake was facing the officer with a knife.
Rittenhouse, Rittenhouse, and all three of the men he shot were white.
Here are some legal issues that were raised in the Rittenhouse case.
WHAT HAPPENED?
The Rittenhouse case doesn’t involve a whodunit. The majority of the shots were captured by a witness.
The video shows Rosenbaum, unarmed, following Rittenhouse into a parking lot at a used car dealer. Rosenbaum throws a bag at Rittenhouse at one point. Rittenhouse then fires the fatal shots around 11:45 pm.
Rittenhouse, accompanied by several protesters, is soon seen running down the street. He falls. Huber seems to hit him in his neck and head with a skateboard. Rittenhouse then shoots Huber in the heart.
Seconds later, Gaige grosskreutz walks toward Rittenhouse with a gun in his hand. Rittenhouse fires at him, injuring Grosskreutz’s right arm. Rittenhouse then steps up and leaves the scene.
WHAT IS THE DEFENSE CLAIM?
Pure and simple self-defense. According to Rittenhouse’s lawyers, he didn’t come to Kenosha to harm anyone, but rather to protect businesses from looting and damage. They also claim that Rittenhouse was forced to shoot the people he did not choose.
They are expected to draw attention to Rosenbaum’s pursuit Rittenhouse and Huber, Grosskreutz then coming after him. According to defense, Rosenbaum and Huber attempted to take Rittenhouse’s rifle from Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse was afraid that he would be killed with his own gun.
Defense also wants to present evidence that Rittenhouse was given water by police to other rifle-carrying citizens and said, “We really appreciate you guys.” They claim that Rittenhouse thought there was nothing wrong in his presence on the streets that evening and that this undermines any argument that Rittenhouse acted recklessly.
What do PROSECUTORS SAY?
Rittenhouse’s trip from Chicago to Kenosha is a crucial part of their case. They paint him as a wannabe cop, who arrived looking for fame and trouble, and that he brought a gun to the late-night protest which led to deadly encounters.
They claim Rittenhouse was not there to protect businesses, but to join other armed counterprotesters who he sympathized with. Prosecutors have stated that Rittenhouse was the aggressor and there to clash violently with those who oppose his beliefs.”
Prosecutors wanted to strengthen their case and introduced as evidence a short video that Rittenhouse recorded 15 days prior to the protest shootings. It shows Rittenhouse looking at some men leaving a CVS pharmacy. He comments that he wishes he had his gun so he can shoot them. Thomas Binger, lead prosecutor, stated that it demonstrated Rittenhouse’s mindset of a “teenage vigilante, getting involved in things that don’t concern him” but Judge Bruce Schroeder doubted the relevance of this video to the charges. It was not allowed. However, he said he might reconsider that decision later.
Schroeder also prevented prosecutors from linking Rittenhouse with the far-right extremist group, the Proud Boys. Rittenhouse was photographed with Proud Boys members in January at a Wisconsin bar. However, his attorneys claim Rittenhouse did not have any affiliation with the group.
WHAT DO THE WISCONSIN LAW SAYS ABOUT SELF DEFENSE?
It permits someone to use deadly force only when “necessary” to prevent imminent death or great bodily injury.
They must first decide if Rittenhouse truly believed he was in danger. He may have been wrong in hindsight. But was he truly convinced at the time?
They will then need to determine if Rittenhouse believed that Rittenhouse was objectively reasonable. Jurors will be asked to consider whether Rittenhouse would feel the same.
WHAT OTHER LEGAL FACTORS ARE AVAILABLE?
Wisconsin law does not require anyone whose life is at risk to flee from danger to shoot before they can. However, jurors may consider whether the victim tried to flee from danger when deciding whether a self-defense claim is reasonable. If someone was an aggressor, self-defense cannot be invoked.
Wisconsin does not have a “stand-your-ground” law. This law gives people broad rights to remain put and defend themselves against attacks no matter what the circumstances.
Rittenhouse is charged with two counts each of homicide and attempted homicide. He also faces two counts for recklessly endangering safety because he fired his gun in close proximity to the people he shot. All five counts could be covered by a successful self-defense argument.
Rittenhouse is facing a sixth charge of possession of a dangerous firearm by a person younger than 18. The defense unsuccessfully attempted to dismiss this charge. Andrew Branca, a Colorado attorney who wrote “The Law of Self Defense: Principles,” stated that Rittenhouse’s legal carry of the gun on the night should not affect his right to self defense.
What are the CHANCES of RITTENHOUSE TESTIFYING?
Lawyers representing defense clients are generally against putting them on the stand. They do not usually do this in the last-resort bids to acquit, as the risks are too great. Some legal experts believe defense calculations can change when self-defense is invoked.
Paul Bucher, a Milwaukee lawyer and ex-Waukesha County District Attorney, stated that once jurors hear the defense claim that a client was afraid for his life they will expect to hear directly from the defendant about the shooter’s mindset.
The chance for Rittenhouse to be cross-examined in front of jurors would be a welcome opportunity for the prosecution.
HOW DO LEGAL EXPERTS VIEW THE CASE?
According to self-defense law, precedent and some other laws, Rittenhouse’s motives to be in Kenosha is irrelevant to whether he was allowed to shoot when threatened. Legal experts disagree. Branca stated that what occurred in the moments surrounding the shooting is the most important thing.
“I wouldn’t encourage my 17-year-old son to engage in such behavior if I had him.” Poor judgment is not a crime,” Branca said. He believes Rittenhouse has strong self-defense arguments.
Even though it’s not directly relevant to the self defense claim, legal experts agree that the trial will be dominated by the question of Rittenhouse’s presence in Kenosha.
“Everyone in that courtroom will think he deserved the punishment he received because he placed himself in a hostile environment. Bucher said, “What are you doing down here with a gun?”
Branca stated that the law and facts should lead Rittenhouse to acquittal. However, he said that he isn’t certain that it will happen.
He stated that trials are unpredictable and dangerous, and that innocent people are convicted every day. It’s possible that Kyle Rittenhouse could face a conviction in this case, even though the charges are not legal.
