Analysis of the Rittenhouse Case
On 23 August 2020, a 29-year-old black resident of Kenosha, Wisconsin – one Jacob Blake, was shot in the back 4 times by a police officer. The police had attempted to arrest Blake on account of an outstanding warrant for several charges. Blake refused to drop a knife and attempted to climb into a vehicle to escape.[1] The shooting left him paralysed from waist down and protests started in Kenosha because of the shooting. These were not peaceful protests despite what some try and propagate: they involved arson, vandalism and theft – some of which are distinctly captured on video.
Kyle Rittenhouse of Illinois, aged 17, made an attempt to defend property from attacks by the protestors. He had worked as a lifeguard in Kenosha and been through police cadet training. On 25th August 2020, Rittenhouse and a friend were informed about a planned strike on a local car dealership whose owner was concerned about the potential property damage. They headed to the general area, with Rittenhouse being armed with an “AR-15 styled rifle” (according to the police) and medical supplies. During the conflict, a 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum made 2 counts of threats to Rittenhouse and others in the area. He chased Rittenhouse into a used car lot and according to Rittenhouse, “cornered” him. Rosenbaum lunged forward and grabbed for the rifle, leading Rittenhouse to shoot him 4 times. Rittenhouse stayed while Rosenbaum was being administered with first-aid, before the latter eventually died of his injuries. In retaliation, the mob chased Rittenhouse, with 26-year-old Anthony Huber striking him with a skateboard and reaching for his weapon. Rittenhouse would fire a single shot that killed Huber.[2]
Rittenhouse surrendered on 26 August and his trial began on 1 November.
The significance of the case lies in the fact that this has now become political beyond the facts of the shooting itself. The Left see Rittenhouse as victimising ‘innocent’ protestors (even though this has been proven countless times to be false), while the Right see this as a mere exercise of self-defence against a very real and imminent threat. The Left have also tried and, thankfully failed, to make this a racial issue – claiming that Rittenhouse is a “white supremacist” (Joe Biden’s own words),[3] presumably because he opposed the protestors’ destruction of property motivated by anger towards the shooting of Blake. Incidentally, this isn’t the first time Biden has attempted to race-bait; with him criticising Donald Trump for refusing to condemn those against Black Lives Matter riots as white supremacists.
The exculpatory evidence in favour of Rittenhouse is overwhelming. First, in all accounts of the shootings, it was confirmed that Rittenhouse was the one being attacked first. In the case of Rosenbaum, he had recently been discharged from the hospital after an attempt on his own life. Secondly, Rittenhouse was carrying medical supplies on his person and it was proved that he did in fact render aid to a number of injured people. Rittenhouse also attempted to surrender immediately after the shootings, and he was never part of any white supremacist groups.
The Prosecution’s argument that Rittenhouse pointed the gun at those men, and therefore that may have caused them to attack Rittenhouse out of fear, is weak since those men were the ones who chased Rittenhouse down in the first place; and were not innocent bystanders. Wisconsin, being an open-carry states, allows its citizens to carry weapons in plain view into volatile areas for the purposes of lawful activity – the only legal issue is that Rittenhouse was underage and could not legally possess a firearm.
To reiterate, the case against Rittenhouse was weak even before bringing in the underhanded and shameless tactics used by Prosecution attorney Thomas Binger – who apparently cared more about winning the case for his own personal record than seeking the truth. In Binger’s own words, he continued to insist that Rittenhouse had “chased Joseph Rosenbaum down” and shot him even after clear video evidence pointing to the contrary. Binger continued to attempt to introduce evidence that Judge Schroeder had held was inadmissible regarding the Defendant’s silence between the shootings and the trial which some speculate was a ‘backdoor way’ of trying to get a mistrial.[4]
In hindsight, it is fortunate that this case resulted in the acquittal of the accused – it is vital to protect the doctrine of self-defence; failure to do so would result in disastrous consequences.
[1] Julie Bosman, ‘What to Know About the Trial of Kyle Rittenhouse’ (The New York Times, Nov ’21) https://www.nytimes.com/article/kyle-rittenhouse-trial.html accessed 18 Jan 2022
[2] Eric Levenson, Brad Parks and Carma Hassan, ‘Kyle Rittenhouse testifies he knew Joseph Rosenbaum was unarmed but acted in self-defense during fatal shooting’ (CNN, Nov ’21) https://edition.cnn.com/2021/11/10/us/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-wednesday/index.html accessed 18 Jan 2022
[3] Nikki Carvajal, ‘Biden reacts to Rittenhouse verdict: 'The jury system works, and we have to abide by it'’ (CNN Politics, Nov ’21) https://edition.cnn.com/2021/11/19/politics/joe-biden-kyle-rittenhouse-verdict/index.html accessed 18 Jan 2022
[4] Andrew Mark Miller, ‘Kyle Rittenhouse trial: Who is lead prosecutor Thomas Binger?’ (Fox News, Nov ’21) https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-prosecutor-thomas-binger accessed 18 Jan 2022
