Originally Posted by James Lacey
Grosskreutz, the only survivor shot by Rittenhouse, testified he pursued Rittenhouse because he thought he was an active shooter. An all too common problem when you start inserting lots of armed civilians into volatile situations.
I'm not saying the defense had not put up a good counter-argument. I'm merely saying if you ignore all of the politics and the left versus right, it seems clear to me that Rittenhouse caused the whole situation.
Here's an analogy.
I'm walking down the street, and I see some people vandalizing cars that are not mine. I tell them to stop. Instead, they flip me the bird. I then pull out my gun, point it at them and ask them to stop. One of the vandals then charges at me completely unarmed. He is threatening, and I'm in fear for my life. So, I fire at him four times, hitting him each time killing him. Am I legally justified in my actions, or is this murder? The above analogy is almost identical to Rittenhouse's actions, and I think he was wrong and caused the whole situation. Rittenhouse had no business being there with a rifle trying to protect property that was not his, and the owners did not ask him to watch. It's not self-defense since Rittenhouse provoked and caused the entire situation. When you do something to provoke a crisis, you cannot use deadly force to defend yourself from the threat you caused. Imagine if you could get away with that what our society would look like.
Well, there are the actions taken by Rittenhouse and what he stated his motivations were for being at the scene in the first place. He didn't live in the community and he took it upon himself to come armed when he arrived there. Once there, he lied and told people and caught on camera that he was there as an EMT. He has never been an EMT. So, his stated representation of himself on scene doesn't jive with his stated motivation of being there to aid the community. Perhaps you can recall instances where EMTs are on scene to render aid with an AR15 but I can't.
I don't think the area he was in has a "stand your own ground" law in effect so that negates a defense based upon that idea.
So what's left as his motive for being at the scene armed with an AR15?
I think the dead people there as the result of his actions represent his motivation for being there...