• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

17-year-old arrested in killing of 2 people in Kenosha

meh said:
Here's a non-judgmental account of the questions that need answering:



One point that isn't made here is what it might mean, or not, when an attacker without a weapon tries to disarm you. Not sure of Wisconsin law, but in a lot of states, attacking with a shod foot can be considered assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.
Click to expand...


The angles suck when Kyle fired his first shots...but if they hang him on anything, it'll be the first one. even though he was clearly running away, there's nothing (that I can see) to suggest that his life was in danger or that the force he used was required. But what do I know? Just calling it like I see it.
 
xtry51 said:
Aren't women screaming about equality all the time? Why is it then a problem for him to hit a girl who started a fight?
Click to expand...


Never mind that, just ask them about, the two fine woke, 'rich and vibrant' individuals referring to a white girl as a "bitch"... several times.
 
76Too said:
The angles suck when Kyle fired his first shots...but if they hang him on anything, it'll be the first one. even though he was clearly running away, there's nothing (that I can see) to suggest that his life was in danger or that the force he used was required. But what do I know? Just calling it like I see it.
Click to expand...
How does a guy chasing you, charging you, with clear violent intent, NOT qualify as a threat? The only consideration is distance and that depends on what weapon you may see or not. In Kyles case the perp had thrown his weapon so Kyle held back until the perp was on top of him. I'm not so sure I would have waited that long.
 
Stacking charges - including both intentional and reckless homicide is an effective technique to manipulate the jury. It allows for "compromise verdicts" in which a jury who thinks a client is "sorta guilty" or is not really sure if they are guilty but don't like what he did, can render a compromise between the jurors who want to convict and those who want to acquit. It is this sort of thing that counsel will no doubt explain when discussing a possible "few years" plea deal with the defendant..

It is not always so simple as "the truth will set you free".
 
Last edited:
Springfield_trapdoor said:
Besides the guy who fired at shot behind him as her ran from the pedo
Click to expand...

This needs more attention. Firing a shot in the air while an unarmed man overtakes and attempts to grab the rifle of a retreating person is only going to escalate the situation. And that is exactly what happened...
 
76Too said:
The angles suck when Kyle fired his first shots...but if they hang him on anything, it'll be the first one. even though he was clearly running away, there's nothing (that I can see) to suggest that his life was in danger or that the force he used was required. But what do I know? Just calling it like I see it.
Click to expand...

Note that self-defense is not an affirmative defense in Wisconsin. The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was not self-defense. Here are the jury instructions. Myself, I have not been able to interpret the video of the first shooting well enough to see much of anything, just the chase leading up to it, but note that in Wisconsin there is no duty to retreat, and he certainly established a willingness to do so. There's an eyewitness statement on the first shooting. I can't remember what it said, so I'll have to review it.
 
Nick Fury said:
Besides the guy who fired at shot behind him as her ran from the pedo
Click to expand...
This needs more attention. Firing a shot in the air while an unarmed man overtakes and attempts to grab the rifle of a retreating person is only going to escalate the situation. And that is exactly what happened...
Click to expand...
Red shirt pedo (Joseph Rosenbaum) appears in proximity to the first shooter (Alex Blaine), in several video clips from earlier that evening, including the "dumpster fire" incident.
1599104603531.png 1599104839809.png
 
white feather said:
I am pretty sure that I read that the 5' 3" pedo leprechaun had multiple gunshot wounds and the fatal shot came from behind...
Click to expand...
Milwaukee County Medical Examiner’s Office's autopsy was paraphrased in the charging documents, nothing about any bullet recovered nor the distance from which the bullet to the back was fired.
 
Buck Faker said:
Aside from the fact that there’s no way to tell that it’s actually him, or what really happened, it would never be admissible in court.
Click to expand...
And has no application to the shooting. One thing does not lead to another. Two seperate things.
Oh, and notice how the headline says it is him, then the byline says "suspected" to be him?
The media really is the enemy of the people. These are the people that need to be strung up first.
 
babygorilla said:
And has no application to the shooting. One thing does not lead to another. Two seperate things.
Oh, and notice how the headline says it is him, then the byline says "suspected" to be him?
The media really is the enemy of the people. These are the people that need to be strung up first.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately while it does have nothing to do with this shooting, the prosecution will argue to have it included to demonstrate that Kyle is a monstrous woman beating, racist, bigoted, white supremacist. This will be found relevant to the establishing his intent to murder peaceful protesters and the defense will still have to deal with it.

But yes, complete and total bullshit.
 
amm5061 said:
Unfortunately while it does have nothing to do with this shooting, the prosecution will argue to have it included to demonstrate that Kyle is a monstrous woman beating, racist, bigoted, white supremacist. This will be found relevant to the establishing his intent to murder peaceful protesters and the defense will still have to deal with it.

But yes, complete and total bullshit.
Click to expand...
But this would also open up the history of those shot, which the prosecutor won't want.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
The public perception is spun as a kid walking down the street with an AR15. The reality was an in-duh-vidual who had the AR15 to guard a business against criminal attack who is old enough to enlist in the USMC who competently handled a tough situation. The trial and pre-trial publicity management by the state is going to paint him as someone "looking for trouble" eager to solve a problem with a gun.

I remember an interview with the Zimmerman jury afterwards. That case shared many of the same characteristics - issues surrounding "could the defender have avoided the need to shoot", and the jury member basically said that they wanted to convict but were duty bound to apply the law as explained by the court, and could not fit Z's actions into the framework of a crime as defined by the judge. They collectively displayed more intellectual honesty than many judges, ruling based on law rather than desired outcome.

One big mistake of his was not calling the police as soon as he got to a safe place from which to do so.
Click to expand...
I believe he went to the police and turned himself in after he was able to evade everybody. The prosecution itself stated that Kyle was acting in self defense in the criminal complaints. The prosecution also used statements from a witness who said Kyle was acting in self defense. Kyle did give written statements to the police before lawyering up, hopefully that doesn’t screw him.
 
42! said:
But this would also open up the history of those shot, which the prosecutor won't want.
Click to expand...

Why would it? Keep in mind that Kyle is the one on trial, not the scumbags he shot. As Rob already noted, unless Wisconsin allows the introduction of that evidence then it's immaterial to the case, since the assumption is that Kyle would not have known in advance that dipshit #1 is a sex offender, dipshit #2 a wife beater, and dipshit #3 a burglar. A judge won't allow this to be submitted in that case.

And if Wisconsin already has that precedent, then it's going to be brought up anyway so it doesn't matter. Don't forget they've already tried to paint him as a psychopathic murdering racist white supremacist. That's their narrative and they're stickin to it.
 
10thSFFD said:
THIS!!! [bow][bow]
I am surprised by the volume of posters who do not understand this new reality yet. They are stuck in the old normal and that alone represents a potentially dangerous situation which has many historical examples.

One for many:
After WWII., when Allies gave Stalin half of Europe Stalin had to solve a huge dilema; Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia were democratic states which were actually fighting Nazis and had their governments in exile. Communists were weak or were anti-Stalin and anti-Soviet back then. The exiled governments were residing in London. Stalin immediately created another set of exiled governments in Moscow. When WWII. came to the end free elections were organized. But before that Stalin pressured governments in exile to "integrate" his well trained commies. Confused and weak democrats from London wanted to show how nice they are and integrated commies by giving them interior, defense and education. New elections were full of frauds and stuffing of boxes. Nobody investigated, nobody cared and those who did care were investigated by commie police as enemies of the people.

YOU CAN'T COMPROMISE WITH COMMIES! Your only option is to accept them and let them rule for 50-60 years. Commies will always fail and they will destroy the country, but that will take few decades and none of us will be around to bitch about it!
Click to expand...

I agree with most of what you said but...
Some of us will be around in 50-60 years, Ok boomer!
 
amm5061 said:
Why would it? Keep in mind that Kyle is the one on trial, not the scumbags he shot. As Rob already noted, unless Wisconsin allows the introduction of that evidence then it's immaterial to the case, since the assumption is that Kyle would not have known in advance that dipshit #1 is a sex offender, dipshit #2 a wife beater, and dipshit #3 a burglar. A judge won't allow this to be submitted in that case.

And if Wisconsin already has that precedent, then it's going to be brought up anyway so it doesn't matter. Don't forget they've already tried to paint him as a psychopathic murdering racist white supremacist. That's their narrative and they're stickin to it.
Click to expand...
Becasue it shows the dishits intent to create harm since they have a record of already trying to commit harm. The video of the fight that may or may not even be KR is immaterial or hurts the prosecution since it is hard to determine if it was him AND backs up the fact that he only acts in self-defense of himself or his friends.
 
meh said:
Note that self-defense is not an affirmative defense in Wisconsin. The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was not self-defense. Here are the jury instructions. Myself, I have not been able to interpret the video of the first shooting well enough to see much of anything, just the chase leading up to it, but note that in Wisconsin there is no duty to retreat, and he certainly established a willingness to do so. There's an eyewitness statement on the first shooting. I can't remember what it said, so I'll have to review it.
Click to expand...

I stopped a former childhood friend, who went USMC Officer 40yr when I left the Navy, in his tracks when he indicated his opposition to Vigilantism. I reminded him that the root of Vigilante is Vigilance - a term he is well invested in. I told him that when police are held back from protecting by Mayors (I didn’t have to say Democrat, Socialists, etc.) that does not *disempower* citizens from self-defense - if anything, it empowers them.

While decades of ugly in the Middle East have made a brave Marine oppose private ownership of semi-automatic firearms holding more than 4 rounds, I reminded him that his Position, role and experiences justify his opinion of what laws ought to be, but do not invalidate the current laws. He was able to disengage with face, which is important to such men. First time he’s backed down.

These are the cracks in the Democratic dam that they are desperately trying to plug. Whether that dam springs enough leaks to keep potential Biden/Harris voters home, or at least not voting Biden/Harris, will be a close call, aided by ANtifa/BLM on one side and a colluding media on the other.
 

Similar threads

85-year-old Idaho woman hailed as 'hero' in fatal shooting of home invasion suspect
Replies
7
Views
136
Tartakovsky
Tartakovsky
Grand Jury Declines to Prosecute Texas Mother Who Shot 14-Year-Old Boy During Break-In
Replies
2
Views
140
Agnotology
Agnotology
We need 200 people like this in congress. NH residents, you need this woman in congress.
Replies
12
Views
361
Qwikdraw45
Qwikdraw45
2 men found guilty of murder in Jam Master Jay killing
Replies
9
Views
267
inerlogic
inerlogic
Pennsylvania Court Upholds Right of Young People to Carry Guns in Public
Replies
6
Views
210
Coyote33
Coyote33
Back
Top Bottom