Kyle Rittenhouse speaks to Tucker Carlson in first TV interview

[mandrill]

Here our hero gives another interview.
He says he has no interest in politics and will not accept any internship that has been offered to him. Said he doesn't want to be used for a cause. He has enrolled at Arizona State where he hopes to take nursing.
Also says he fired his past lawyers because of their Qanon Beliefs and election fraud statements. He calls them insane.
Goes on to state that his formers attorneys set up the meeting with the proud boys in the bar. He didn't even know what the ''okay'' symbol signified at the time. He was told at the time that the guys in the bar were going to help him with his security. Said when he found out who they were he didn't want anything to do with them.
Says if he could go back he would have stayed home that night.
He thinks this case had nothing to do with race and everything to do with self defense.
He believes everybody has the right to peacefully protest for change. On Tucker Carlson he supported BLM.
He has retained civil attorneys to handle any potential lawsuits he might have going forward.
Man he is composed. I like at the end where he says he learned he's a lot stronger than he thought......

Congratulations to those PR coaches. They did a FANTASTIC job.

 

[sshotrr]

So if I decide to walk around with a gun during a riot, and someone who is unarmed hits me with a skateboard, I can kill them?

Deadly force is only supposed to be used when you are in fear for your life, not an asskicking. Kyle was afraid of a buttkicking or a black eye.

He was being pursued AFTER he was witnessed murdering someone.

Thank god not everyone in the riot was armed, because everyone would feel threatened at some point and everyone would be dead.

I thought the defence he used was only allowed if you are not already in the comission of a crime? Which he was.

No kid should be walking around with a gun, especially an assault rifle, during a riot.

I think the ruling in this case is going to cause a shitstorm of problems for the US now. It has set a precedent, a bad one.

Do you actually have any true facts from the case ?

 

[sshotrr]

People shouldn't be "allowed" to cross state lines with a fucking gun. Full stop.

That is the law . But KR did not cross state lines with a gun . What is your point ?

 

[Rorschach]

Kyle at 17 stopped 3 rioters, shown them you can't just come to his community and burn and loot....I doubt you would've done anything close to that...

NO, because we're not idiots.

 

[bearjew]

People shouldn't be "allowed" to cross state lines with a fucking gun. Full stop.

Why not? you do realize they are all part of the same country and the constitution applies to the entire country its perfectly legal to transport firearms across state lines you just need to abide by the laws of the state/county your in.

NRA-ILA | Guide To The Interstate Transportation Of Firearms (nraila.org)

Kyle did not cross any state lines with the rifle.

no different here you can live in one province/territory and take your rifle to any other perfectly legal and done all the time.

 

[Valcazar]

its not self defense if you saw him do something, he has to threaten your safety and since he was the one chasing after Rittenhouse and was not threatened it would be murder the videos taken would show what happened and would convict him

Not so crystal clear at all.
Look up the Self Defense law in Wisconsin.
He needs to reasonably believe. He doesn't have to be right.

 

[bearjew]

Not so crystal clear at all.
Look up the Self Defense law in Wisconsin.
He needs to reasonably believe. He doesn't have to be right.

he would have been convicted there was crystal clear video

 

[Valcazar]

Interesting.

I'm not sure whether Wood has a close affiliation w the Proud Boys or not. I have never noted that he does. He's more of a QAnon wacko grifter. And Kyle was certainly flashing the White Power Hand in those photos. And I didn't see Wood or any other handlers in those shots.

KR is being "cleaned up" now in order to market him. A lot of that involves Kyle stating that he is not anti BLM, etc. He's the new "benign and lovable" Kyle. The clean-cut all American boy who scrubbed graffiti off the walls. That's the hook.

Giving Kyle the benefit of the doubt, most of this will come out over time.

Being a good media-savvy person working the circuit isn't actually a skill everyone has.
If he has to maintain a front, odds are he won't be able to.
If he actually is a clean-cut American Boy but weak on camera, he won't last long since there will be a new flavor of the week soon enough.
The problem is that most of the people celebrating him who would pay him a lot of money don't actually want "benign and lovable" Kyle.
They want "shooter Kyle". They want the good kid who had to take up a gun and shoot those people and they won't keep listening to him if he doesn't maintain the image.
He may be able to work the "I was victimized by the press" for a while, but that will fade out no matter what he does unless he provokes further "victimization by the press".
His other option is giving tours about "defending your community" and showing up to counter protests.

If he really is a kind-of-dumb kid over his head I expect he will disappear pretty soon because he will just want to live his life.

 

[Valcazar]

he would have been convicted there was crystal clear video

Crystal clear video of him shooting an active shooter in a crowd.
Wisconsin self-defense law lets you kill someone to protect a 3rd party.
I don't think this is as clear as you think it is if Rittenhouse dies and Grosskreutz lives to tell the story.

The point of it is that whether Grosskruetz would have won the trial or not is irrelevant.
Just like a bunch of right wing yahoos think this means if they take a gun to a counter protest and shoot a BLM guy they won't be guilty because Kyle got away with it, a bunch of black-bloc type yahoos have concluded that this means "shooting them before they shoot you" is the only realistic thing to do.

Both attitudes mean more dead bodies if people don't start realizing that's really stupid.

 

[Valcazar]

He says he has no interest in politics and will not accept any internship that has been offered to him. Said he doesn't want to be used for a cause. He has enrolled at Arizona State where he hopes to take nursing.

Good.
If he really is like "fuck this nonsense, I am just going to go live my life" then more power to him.

Also says he fired his past lawyers because of their Qanon Beliefs and election fraud statements. He calls them insane.

Goes on to state that his formers attorneys set up the meeting with the proud boys in the bar. He didn't even know what the ''okay'' symbol signified at the time. He was told at the time that the guys in the bar were going to help him with his security. Said when he found out who they were he didn't want anything to do with them.

Says if he could go back he would have stayed home that night.

Again good.
Maybe being used by those sharks like Wood made him realize he just wants nothing to do with these assholes.
In which case fantastic, he disappears from media and lives a productive life.

 

[Valcazar]

Those were points that were made during Chris Cuomo's interview w the defence attorney. CC made the point that WI changed its self-defence laws. Under WI law, you now just have to prove that the accused SUBJECTIVELY feared for his life or serious injury. Previously, the accused also had to prove that those views were objectively REASONABLE.

CC also brought up the same issue you did. If Rosenbaum was just going to take KR's gun and beat him up, does KR have the right to kill Rosenbaum.

These are good points. OTOH, I think KR might have objectively reasonably feared for his life. Being wacked to the ground with a skateboard isn't trival and would suggest to me that I was going to be seriously beaten and injured. Ditto Grosskreutz's pointing a pistol at me.

I will need to go look at that interview.
The law still says "reasonably" but presumably that is defined somewhere as this subjective fear.

But this all goes to what I've been saying about the conclusions people are drawing that Grosskreutz should have shot first.
From his point of view, there was a shooter, he had killed two people already.
Subjectively fearing for his life and the life of others was understandable.
Since in reality, Grosskreutz decided that Kyle wasn't trying to shoot more people and decided not to fire but too late since Rittenhouse saw someone with a gun pointed at him and fired.
Which is why people are concluding the smart thing to do if in a similar situation is just kill Rittenhouse and then feel sorry about it later.

This is dumb, and everyone thinking they are justified in shooting other people leads to bad outcomes, but it is what it is.

 

[mandrill]

I will need to go look at that interview.
The law still says "reasonably" but presumably that is defined somewhere as this subjective fear.

But this all goes to what I've been saying about the conclusions people are drawing that Grosskreutz should have shot first.
From his point of view, there was a shooter, he had killed two people already.
Subjectively fearing for his life and the life of others was understandable.
Since in reality, Grosskreutz decided that Kyle wasn't trying to shoot more people and decided not to fire but too late since Rittenhouse saw someone with a gun pointed at him and fired.
Which is why people are concluding the smart thing to do if in a similar situation is just kill Rittenhouse and then feel sorry about it later.

This is dumb, and everyone thinking they are justified in shooting other people leads to bad outcomes, but it is what it is.

Grosskreutz = the McMichaels, if he shoots KR. It doesn't amount to self defence and it's murder.

 

[mandrill]

Good.
If he really is like "fuck this nonsense, I am just going to go live my life" then more power to him.
Again good.
Maybe being used by those sharks like Wood made him realize he just wants nothing to do with these assholes.
In which case fantastic, he disappears from media and lives a productive life.

If he wants a normal life, then he should go far, far away and change his name. But it's going to be almost impossible. Someone will always recognize him There will always be a redneck yahoo offering to buy him a beer. There will always be a leftie wanting to call him out and telling him he's a killer. Add in that I believe KR really does have PTSD because it's unusual not to have it after a "combat situation", let alone one where you stood trial for murder afterwards.

Getting far away from the rightie media grift-circus?... He could make some $$ if he plays it right for a year or two. After that, he's old news. He has to talk the talk "I killed the libtards for Jesus and America and cuz I hate them commies!" bullshit. Because that's what that circus demands.

 

[mandrill]

I will need to go look at that interview.
The law still says "reasonably" but presumably that is defined somewhere as this subjective fear.

But this all goes to what I've been saying about the conclusions people are drawing that Grosskreutz should have shot first.
From his point of view, there was a shooter, he had killed two people already.
Subjectively fearing for his life and the life of others was understandable.
Since in reality, Grosskreutz decided that Kyle wasn't trying to shoot more people and decided not to fire but too late since Rittenhouse saw someone with a gun pointed at him and fired.
Which is why people are concluding the smart thing to do if in a similar situation is just kill Rittenhouse and then feel sorry about it later.

This is dumb, and everyone thinking they are justified in shooting other people leads to bad outcomes, but it is what it is.

I'm struggling with the same issue. Canadian self defence law is the 2-part test. You have to subjectively fear PLUS the fear has to be reasonable.

Even if you just go with subjective fear. there has to be a limit to it. If I think that all Blacks are drug dealing gangsters and any Black in my neighbourhood might kill me and I then get in an argument over a parking space at the mall with a large, tough Black guy, surely I don't get to shoot him based on unreasonable subjective fear??!!??!!

 

[mandrill]

Kyle at 17 stopped 3 rioters, shown them you can't just come to his community and burn and loot....I doubt you would've done anything close to that...

Those 3 "rioters" actually rioting?

Any of them "burning and looting"?

Did KR stand in front of that burning car lot and go mano a mano with burning looters?

No to all of that. He killed an asshole who had been released from the psych ward earlier that day and was emotionally disturbed and aggressive. Then KR killed a self-appointed vigilante who beat him with a skateboard as KR left the scene of the first killing. Then KR blew the arm off another vigilante with a gun. KR was himself a vigilante and the facts could have been quite the opposite.

Had KR attempted to arrest Grosskreutz and pointed his AR at Gk and if Gk then blew KR's arm away, you have the exact reverse fact situation with Gk walking on self-defence.

 

[The Oracle]

That is the law . But KR did not cross state lines with a gun . What is your point ?

Her point is that she doesn't know the facts of the case. She only knows what MSM has told her. Full stop.

 

[Valcazar]

I'm struggling with the same issue. Canadian self defence law is the 2-part test. You have to subjectively fear PLUS the fear has to be reasonable.

Even if you just go with subjective fear. there has to be a limit to it. If I think that all Blacks are drug dealing gangsters and any Black in my neighbourhood might kill me and I then get in an argument over a parking space at the mall with a large, tough Black guy, surely I don't get to shoot him based on unreasonable subjective fear??!!??!!

I think this actually has to do with the general trend in the US that the defense only has the burden of production about their self defense narrative?
Where is that piece where you say the defense attorney explains it? I should see what he says.

The first few minutes of this Legal Eagle video goes over it somewhat and it seems "reasonable" is everywhere but the reasonable standard is inherently subjective.

The jury instructions are public.

RittenhouseJuryInstructions.pdf

drive.google.com

Grosskreutz = the McMichaels, if he shoots KR. It doesn't amount to self defence and it's murder.

Make your case.
Unlike the McMichaels, he did see Rittenhouse shoot Huber, didn't he? (And shoot at that jump kick guy that Rittenhouse didn't hit.)
Am I misremembering that?

 

[Valcazar]

If he wants a normal life, then he should go far, far away and change his name. But it's going to be almost impossible. Someone will always recognize him There will always be a redneck yahoo offering to buy him a beer. There will always be a leftie wanting to call him out and telling him he's a killer. Add in that I believe KR really does have PTSD because it's unusual not to have it after a "combat situation", let alone one where you stood trial for murder afterwards.

Getting far away from the rightie media grift-circus?... He could make some $$ if he plays it right for a year or two. After that, he's old news. He has to talk the talk "I killed the libtards for Jesus and America and cuz I hate them commies!" bullshit. Because that's what that circus demands.

If he runs the circus for a few years and makes his money then he is a pretty cynical piece of shit.

But as Oracle is pitching him, he isn't.
In which case good.

If what we have here is a dumb 17-year old kid who idolizes the police and has these visions of " good men standing with guns against anarchy" or whatever and then meets reality fine.

Maybe the story is the following:
Dumb kid above gets talked into doing this and ends up in a nightmare night where he kills two people and almost kills two more.
Gets swept up in people claiming he is a hero just like he wanted.
Being not a monster he is actually troubled by it, and quickly finds out the people praising him as a hero are pieces of shit using him for publicity and scamming money right, left, and center.
Manages to survive his trial and just wants to tell people the whole thing was fucked up and don't trust the Lin Woods and other shit-peddlers.
Tries to go live his life as best he can.

If that's the story, then fine.
Let him disappear like a decent person.
That's an awful story and two people dying is a shitty price to pay for him to have his learning experience but haranguing the kid gets no one anything better.

I don't really think it is the story but I'm willing to extend the benefit of the doubt for now, especially since if it isn't he will prove it isn't pretty damn quick.

 

[mandrill]

I think this actually has to do with the general trend in the US that the defense only has the burden of production about their self defense narrative?
Where is that piece where you say the defense attorney explains it? I should see what he says.

The first few minutes of this Legal Eagle video goes over it somewhat and it seems "reasonable" is everywhere but the reasonable standard is inherently subjective.

The jury instructions are public.
Make your case.
Unlike the McMichaels, he did see Rittenhouse shoot Huber, didn't he? (And shoot at that jump kick guy that Rittenhouse didn't hit.)
Am I misremembering that?

My off-the-cuff response is because the Huber shooting was clearly self-defence. I don't think that Gk can attempt to arrest KR. But that's a quick response without me thinking about it.

 

[Valcazar]

My off-the-cuff response is because the Huber shooting was clearly self-defence. I don't think that Gk can attempt to arrest KR. But that's a quick response without me thinking about it.

I think establishing GG reasonably thought he was acting in self defense would be pretty easy, and then it is on the prosecution to prove him wrong.