Rittenhouse's lawyer wants to include that Rosenbaum was a sex offender in trial
(thepostmillennial.com)
Comments (25)
sorted by:
I will allow it.
You heard the man, it is Allowed!
Beat me to it haahh 👍🏽
Getting into the weeds imo. There are multiple angles of video evidence including evidence that he was shot at (either actually, or from his perspective). The years, months, days, and even moments leading up to that are irrelevant. Every single shot fired was so clear cut and dry self defense nothing else matters.
It matters that he removed a child molester from the world.
It does matter, but it should not be the driver of this case. This case is about defending our inalienable right to defend ourselves. When you make it about something else, it only allows for future such cases (precedence) to require extra stuff (like killed a child molester) to justify self defense.
Self defense is what is on trial in this case. That is what must be defended.
Valid observation...
It comes down to technicalities… to the lay person it may seem like it’s self defense, but the prosecutor will look for another way to spin this. Lawyers.
And I think it is essential that we fight the fight that needs to be fought. The fight isn't about defending yourself against a child rapist (which he was). It isn't even about 2A (though that's close).
This case is so obviously cut and dry self defense, it has become about the inalienable right to defend oneself, whether that defense is against a child rapist or the Church Lady.
This case is a world wide thing. This is so much bigger than any one person. This is an opportunity to show that they don't have the right to take away our inalienable rights, and more important, that we won't let them.
If they fight that fight they will win, so they should fight it, and the world should see it.
It shows callous disregard for life when you have sex.with children.
I hate to say it, but this case is much more important than Kyle.
Kyle's actions in each shot he took were so obviously justified, with multiple camera angles, gun shots, threats, attacks, him trying to run away at every possible moment of escape, that if his actions were not self defense no matter what the rest of the context then there is no such thing as self defense. In other words, if he is not exonerated on self defense, then our inalienable right (can never be taken away) to defend ourselves no longer exists as far as the system is concerned.
That is why this case needs to be defended on his actions at that moment. Because it is his actions in that moment that are in question, and his actions in that moment that were immaculate. Looking elsewhere for justification diminishes those actions, and justifies other future cases against our inalienable rights when that otherwise irrelevant context does not exist.
Valid observation "Bones"....
Logic over healthcare. Shutup Spock 🖖🏽
The kid is a patriot
Most certainly a hero.
Understanding
It should be allowed.
Would have to prove the shooter knew that beforehand for it to be relevant.
Nope, it goes to the character of the dead guy. It's completely relevant. The man had no regard for.life.