I said I wasn’t going to dive too much into this case because watching the trial was like watching a circus side show.
The judge, short of a few marbles, clearly and brazenly assisted the defense essentially swaying the jury and even allowing the defendant to draw jurors like bingo numbers.
On the end,
KKKyle Rittenhouse was acquitted of ALL FIVE CHARGES and allowed to ride off into the sunset all smiles after killing 2 people and injuring a 3rd during the Jacob Blake protests in Kenosha.
Rittenhouse, then 17 years old, claimed he had traveled from his home in Antioch, Ill., to protect private property and help as a medic.
Amid protests that had turned violent and destructive, Rittenhouse fatally shot two men with an assault-style rifle.
My main issue is like most of America, I felt like Rittenhouse went to the protest with full intentions of causing more trouble. He claims he went as the “Good Samaritan” but he showed up with an AR-15 assault style rifle and 3 people ended up shot.
I could maybe understand if he was going to protect his own private property but he was not. He went to play vigilante. Had he never traveled 15-20 minutes to the scene to engage and antagonize the situation, none of this would have ever happened. The fact that he got away with killing people, claiming self defense, is what’s so mind blowing and damn right unfair.
Not even a slap on the wrist — a full acquittal of every charge, including first-degree intentional homicide, in a case that’s captivated, and divided, a nation.
What are your thoughts? Do you think the not guilty verdict is fair and appropriate in this case? Do you think Rittenhouse went to the protest with the intentions of rendering aid or murdering people?
Let me know what you think!
You must be logged in to post a comment.