I haven't followed much of the Kyle Rittenhouse trial, but every time I hear the defendant was 17 years old at the time he killed Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber, I wonder where the heck were the adults he was rolling with that night, if any.
How could a 17 year old walk around an American town, freely brandishing a semi-automatic assault rifle in the midst of a hostile protest, and NOT kill somebody. Have any adults stepped forward to take some of the blame for influencing and/or lack of supervision? There must have been gun-toting organizations, supposedly there to help patrol the streets of Kenosha, with responsibly acting adults keeping gun-toters in line. Or is this really a case of one teenage boy acting on his own without any outside influence or engagement.
Didn't representatives for the conservative website "The Daily Caller," who interviewed Rittenhouse before the shooting, notice anything unusual about the age and/or demeanor of the youth? Did they think to contact local authorities to disarm the teen? Did they warn him of the harm he might incite or harm that might come to him while brandishing an assault weapon?
I just find it irresponsible of anyone out that night, especially those armed and proclaiming to protect and serve the community, knowingly allowing a teenager to participate in militia-style activities or roam around independently with an assault weapon. And if laws, governing teenagers armed with assault weapons, excuse them from accountability because they lack the intelligence, experience or common sense NOT to bring assault weapons to a heated protest, then United States of America laws should be on trial for murder; along with weapons makers and gun associations.
From what I've surmised, a young man was influenced or coerced to engage in activity he lacked maturity, training, judgement and legal age to participate in. Two people lost their lives during an evening of violence when protestors clashed with an underage, unsupervised armed and dangerous American man-child. Now on trial for murder, the man-child reverts back to being just a scared boy, awakening from a nightmare, unable to grasp the full extent of his actions. And, like most children who feel they did nothing wrong, unapologetic.
In California, if a person ignites a fire, knowingly or unknowingly, in an area or environment at high-risk for wildfires, that person is held accountable if caught. Wildfires put lives and property at risk. I suppose we can say the same for assault weapons in the wrong hands. As well as lies and misinformation spread by influential persons with access to a wide range of citizens via media and/or public office (Ex.: Jan 6, 2021 United States Capitol Attack).
CNN
Binger's closing argument began by noting the trial was not about politics, or looting or rioting -- but instead about how life is more important than property.
"I think we can also agree that we should not have 17-year-olds running around our streets with AR-15s, because this is exactly what happens," he said.
The prosecutor challenged Rittenhouse's motivation for coming into Kenosha that night during the chaotic aftermath of the police shooting of Jacob Blake. He pointed out Rittenhouse traveled across state lines, violated a curfew and was not protecting his family or property. He also spent the night lying about being an EMT, Binger said. Using several videos, Binger walked through the course of events that night, from Rittenhouse's decision to go downtown, to the shooting of Rosenbaum, to the second set of shootings while he tried to flee. Jurors were paying close attention to the series of videos and images, according to a pool reporter in court.
Binger argued Rittenhouse provoked Rosenbaum by pointing a weapon at him before the man chased him. The prosecutor dismissed Rittenhouse's "cockamamie theory" that Rosenbaum -- who did not have anything in his hands when he was shot -- was going to take the teenager's gun and kill other people.
"They have to convince you that Joseph Rosenbaum was going to take that gun and use it on the defendant because they know you can't claim self-defense against an unarmed man like this," he said. "You lose the right to self-defense when you're the one who brought the gun, when you're the one creating the danger, when you're the one provoking other people."
A series of witnesses testified during the trial Rosenbaum had acted erratically and earlier threatened Rittenhouse. But the prosecutor noted there was no video of any threat and questioned whether it really happened. Instead, Binger described the 5-foot-4-inch Rosenbaum as "a little dog" who was all bark and no bite. In the second shooting incident, the crowd of people confronted Rittenhouse because they reasonably believed he was an active shooter, Binger said.
"That crowd was right. That crowd was full of heroes. That crowd did something that honestly, I'm not sure I would have had the courage to do," he said.
Rittenhouse, meanwhile, acted recklessly by loading his weapon with full metal jacket ammo capable of piercing armor and having little understanding of the weapon or the consequences of his actions, Binger argued.
"On the witness stand, he broke down crying about himself, not about anybody that he hurt that night," he said. "No remorse, no concern for anyone else."
