As my one and only post so far on the topic made pretty clear, I am nothing like as sanguine about the chances of True American Hero Kyle Rittenhouse being accorded any semblance of justice from his persecution-by-law as a great many of my esteemed colleagues seem to be. The mistake my more-optimistic colleagues of mine are making, in my view, is one I’ve brought up hereabouts before—a mistake so common that even I sometimes don’t pick up on it right away myself. This malady consists of estimating the outcome of specified events, actions, or policies based wholly on an incorrect assumption, the defective assumption or premise itself being the product of a habit of mind so deeply embedded in the thinking of many if not most of us that those affected by it maybe don’t even realize what’s going on, or how the closely-entwined mental processes work together to lead their victim astray. Both habit and assumption are incredibly difficult to rid oneself of, particularly since so many simply don’t want to. An attempt to bring the topic up for discussion with someone in the subset of people who are completely unaware of the self-generated delusion could conceivably provoke red hot anger, perhaps even physical violence, in reactions.
And really, I’m more or less okay with what we might label the American Reality Dysfunction; after all, the assumption a pleasant, soothing one, certainly no crime or transgression. Even though en masse indulgence of this cozy delusion might prove costly in the long run, disastrous even, it also serves at least one useful purpose: it must eventually lead to sober reflection regarding precisely what kind of country this now is; what kind of country it was, and was NOT, intended to be; why it was designed the way it was; how drastic the transformation has been, and what ought to be done about it.
The habit, the pattern of thought I refer to here, of course, is the assumption that this country, as grotesquely butchered, battered, and chawed-up as it is, is nonetheless still fundamentally the same dear old America we all grew up in and cherished. There are quite a few issues where this little mental hiccup leads some astray; applied to the Rittenhouse trial, it demands that the demonic farce must surely end justly, fairly, and reasonably, with integrity and fidelity to the core principles of our legal system diligently honored and upheld by all who administrate it, manage it, and sustain it. For those more powerfully infected by this mental-error virus, how could it possibly be otherwise? The evidence supporting acquittal on all charges is as abundant as it is compelling. In the eyes of America That Was, the kid did absolutely nothing wrong, and quite a bit right.
Alas, this is NOT that country, and this trial is NOT being held in one of its courtrooms, adjudicated and presided over by the kind of people who, though certainly imperfect, nonetheless still believe America to be a nation of laws and not men. Who loved their country and revered its bedrock ideals. Whose rage on discovering the systemic corruption and debasement of the legal system entire would be a fearful thing indeed.
Nope—not that country, not that courtroom, not those people. There are incontestably two sets of laws today; one that applies exclusively to the Left’s revered totems, icons, and heros (Mid Level), officially approved Pet Victim Groups and/or perpetual dependents (Bottom-Level), and the wealthy, famous, and/or politically connected (Top-Level). Then we have the much colder, grimmer, more ruthless one used to punish, cow, and ruin beyond hope of redemption the unenlightened, savage, intolerable Deplorables like poor Kyle Rittenhouse. Which is to say, y’know, ALL OF US.
So yeah, could be I’ve reached Peak Cynical at this point, I think. Which has left me unimpressed by the jubilee of celebration each apparent blunder by the prosecution over the last week brought on, and likewise leaves me unsurprised by this development.
Up until Friday, the Kyle Rittenhouse trial was very clear: easily understood videos and witness testimony (including testimony from the prosecution witnesses) showed that Kyle, despite trying hard to avoid conflict, was attacked by a crazed child rapist, whom Kyle shot as the rapist was grabbing Kyle’s gun, at which point a mob went after Kyle. He then shot and killed a domestic abuser trying to bash his head in with a skateboard, and shot and wounded a felon aiming a loaded, illegal gun at his head. On Thursday, however, the court allowed prosecutors to enter into evidence a fuzzy photo from a late-produced drone, an image prosecutors argue shows Kyle “provoking” the attacks against him. Provocation destroys Kyle’s assertion that he acted in self-defense.
Andrew Branca explains how well the prosecution did on Friday. The “unicorn” evidence that the prosecutors successfully fought to get admitted is the drone footage that they just coincidentally found at the last minute before the trial. According to the prosecution, an incredibly fuzzy photo that was computer-enhanced (meaning that A.I. made “educated” guesses about where pixels should go) shows Kyle pointing his gun at Joshua Ziminski, who fired the first shot that saw Rosenbaum, who had earlier threatened to kill Kyle, chase the boy.
The problem for Kyle is that, under Wisconsin law (as is the case under most states’ laws), a person who provokes an attack may not then claim self-defense. If the jury accepts the drone footage as showing Kyle threatening people with the gun, then it was he who triggered (pun intended) all subsequent events, including his shooting three people. However, Wisconsin law also holds that even if someone provokes things, if he withdraws from the fight but pursuit continues, he can regain the self-defense privilege. In that regard, much of the footage shows Kyle desperately running away.
The drone video, of course, is just something for the jury to hang its hat on. The case was always going to boil down to the claim that Kyle provoked the attack merely by showing up at a “protest” with a gun. The gun itself was a provocation as far as the left is concerned, and that was a point that the defense repeatedly tried to make through the trial.
Writing at PJ Media, Victoria Taft explains that, in more bad news for Kyle’s defense, the judge allowed the prosecutors to add several lesser charges to the more serious charges already pending against Kyle. This is disastrous for Kyle because it allows the jurors — who are fully aware of the baying mob that will greet them outside the courthouse and follow them to their homes — to assuage their consciences by finding Kyle guilty of the lesser charges. He’ll still go to prison but not for life. Of course, once in prison, unless he’s kept in solitary, his life will probably be short.
What happened to Kyle is just one more piece of the leftist politicization of law in America.
…All of these were and are purely political prosecutions aimed at destroying the Democrats’ political opponents. With the mob pushing on one side (and invariably getting a pass from government institutions) and the government itself pushing on the other side, conservatives are getting squeezed out of the public square. Social media silence them, the political institutions criminalize them, and the mob physically threatens them. As General Flynn said on Tucker Carlson’s Friday show, this cannot and will not end well.
More precisely, it won’t end well for the losers. The winners, on the other hand, will be more or less okay with how things worked out.
I read Andrew Branca’s scholarly breakdown cited by Andrea above, the very first of Branca’s minutely-detailed series on the Rittenhouse show-trial I bothered to take a look at. It’s actually very, very good, albeit completely depressing, seeing as how Andrews’ most recent analysis strongly suggests a bleak outcome for young Master Rittenhouse is in the offing. While I’d be most happy to be proven wrong, I fully expect Rittenhouse to be convicted on at least one or two of the non-crimes he’s spuriously charged with. Perhaps the jury will convict using the lesser-charges ploy as Branca carefully cautions, but still plenty enough to destroy an innocent youth’s future prospects for the rest of his life. Charged, tried, convicted, sentenced, and imprisoned is the way to bet—all for actions that, in a better, less twisted and corrupt nation, wouldn’t even be crimes at all. A true obscenity is unfolding in the state of Winsconsin, right before our very eyes.
The trial of Kyle Rittenhouse will be over in a few short days, a senseless ordeal perpetrated by a lawless, cruel State acting far outside the civilizing boundaries of moral authority, common sense, human decency, and a sense of propriety and justice so completely out of whack that if it was compass, the needle would be spinning so fast it would be visibly smoking, the metal case so hot you couldn’t hold it in your hand without raising a blister. No matter how the revolting farce concludes, there will likely be trouble following in its wake. If Kyle is acquitted—which I just can’t see happening without Divine intervention, and I mean that quite literally—the Left will surely go all feral again, as is their savage wont. The thing that matters most when the riots and the looting and the gang-beatings, along with all the usual trimmings which are de rigeur whenever the Left doesn’t get their way is not so much that they do all that, but whether normal folks have gotten so fed up with their adolescent horseshit that they’re just not willing to put up with yet another round of it, rising up to meet the Enemy on the mean streets to put an end to it.
Should Kyle be found guilty—and trust me, barring that miracle I mentioned before, he will be regardless of what the law tells you; what the material evidence tells you; what your own eyes and ears tell you; what the nature and conduct of the conniving DA’s, the vicious, half-bright, duplicitous dregs of society they called as witnesses to make their halfassed and reprehensible case for them, and the fiendish curs yapping and snarling with primal fury when the defense team seemed to score a point, anybody at all dared to express so much as mild dissent from their anti-Kyle, antigun, anti-American, anti-propriety and virtue, anti-civil order canon—what all that tells you about just who it is that any properly ordered society would correctly feel were the ones who should actually be denied all further contact with upstanding people—through involuntary confinement within securely-locked cages, tucked deep inside sturdy walls which are patrolled continuously by squads of armed, well-trained, and watchful guards—for purposes of protecting said society from the irredeemable predators who would make them their prey, destroying every last inspiring, beautiful, or ennobling thing created by far, far better men than themselves, men who desired to make some constructive contribution to their society. Structures, adornments, and artworks which the predators would wantonly smash, burn, or otherwise desecrate if they’re foolishly allowed the freedom to do so?
I’ll repeat what I’ve already said after all too many similar injustices: I deeply and sincerely wish young Kyle had ended every goddamned one of these animals, and plenty more of their ideological and ethical litter-mates besides. I find it a crying shame that this Grosskreutz excrescence survived, although it’s no small compensation to know that the filthy bastard will suffer excrutiating pain and significant physical impairment for the rest of his days. What we desperately need is one hell of a lot more Kyle Rittenhouses, and one hell of a lot fewer Gaige Grosskreutzes. As I stated in the immediate aftermath of the righteous Rittenhouse rat-shoot: Rittenhouse is a hero, not least for providing an example worth emulating and showing us the way forward.
Kill. Them. ALL. God will surely know His own, and straight to Hell with the rest.
At a minimum I expect him to be convicted on a least a few of the lesser charges, if not the most serious. More critically, there is a decent chance he will be convicted by a jury terrified of seeing their city burning again. That says volumes about the state of our “justice” system and why White men should consider an arrest to be synonymous with summary execution.
Usually, in my experience trying criminal cases, judges don’t let enhanced images into evidence. This judge allowed images in for the defense, where the brightness and contrast had been adjusted, so allowing the “enhanced” image of Rittenhouse pointing the gun would be reasonable as well. “According to the prosecution, an incredibly fuzzy photo that was computer-enhanced (meaning that A.I. made “educated” guesses about where pixels should go) shows Kyle pointing his gun at Joshua Ziminski, who fired the first shot that saw Rosenbaum.”
Except that Ziminski didn’t charge at Rittenhouse, and wasn’t shot; if Rittenhouse had been charged at by Ziminski, and shot Ziminski, and raised the affirmative defense of self-defense as to Ziminski, Ziminski could argue provocation to negate self-defense. But that didn’t happen. Rittenhouse did not point the gun at Rosenbaum, so the prosecutor can’t raise provocation in *that* case or any of the lesser-included charges. And then there’s the fact that *Ziminski* fired the first shot – so if there was any provocation, Ziminski did it. And I don’t see that any of the charges involve Ziminski. In any case, this is going to be up to the jury, whether they believe the prosecution or the defense. My bet is that there’s a finding on all charges except the gun possession charges of not guilty, and it’s going to be pretty quick.
The judge and persecutors work for the same company. They get to choose who gets called to appear as tryouts for the jury. It’s rigged from bottom to top with the only hope being an honest juror. My second sentence covers that.
Until we burn down their cities for the bogus show trial and law they will keep doing this to us.
And here’s a really good comment from the Branca article: “If this judge is so worried about getting overturned on appeal, he better not give a provocation instruction because there is not sufficient evidence in the record to support it. It is the courts job to determine if the evidence is legally sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Rittenhouse was the aggressor and the judge has already gone on record saying he didn’t see sufficient evidence. Asking a jury to make a finding of fact beyond a reasonable doubt based on insufficient evidence is plain error. It is just inviting the jury to go ahead and make a finding of fact that is not supported by legally sufficient evidence. And the jury, not knowing what legally sufficient evidence is may just go ahead and make that finding of fact without the evidence to support it.”
So there’s definitely grounds for appeal if it should come to that.
“definitely grounds for appeal”
All the while grinding KR into dust under the jackbooted thugs.
I can’t predict what the jury will do, but if they saw the same trial that I did, Kyle walks. Lesser charges? Perhaps.
These days Rule of Law amounts to, “Lets don’t get caught, shall we?”
A decent enough article and all, I suppose. But what is the point? I have not watched a single second of this farce, nor have I read any learned legal scholars’ analysis. Why bother? None of that applies. This is a political show trial, full stop. Facts, law, logic, and reason are not involved in the outcome. Only pure political force matters. Has the mob convinced the jurors that their cities — and the jurors themselves and their families — will burn for the “wrong” verdict? That is the only calculation that matters.