All the moral "content of character" the defense attorney is bringing up is common with white supremacists/nationalists. They also claim to be close to god. There is not one African American in that picture.
There are two men dead and one seriously wounded. They were in the process of trying to end his assault on the people. That should not have cost them their lives, but, it did. Even with the other man that was wounded, he was compelled to draw a pistol to try to attempt the same moral purpose, end the assault. That gun in Rittenhouse's hands was preceived by three men to be a danger to everyone. Rittenhouse was infalmmatory to the events of the night and was grossly out of place in his content and intentions.
The person throwing a brick at a policeperson needs to be held responsible for his attack on a policeperson.
Vigilantes. Trying to put out fires that came under control by firepersons. I would love to know where he got the idea his vigilante status was okay and needed.
His reporting of bad people is his perspective alone and perhaps an audience of unsumpathetic people that don't care to deal with racism. Good and bad ideas about people are subjective and not fact.
Is he a survivalist? That is all reason to be a volunteer anything. Experience and training that has a self-serving component as well as being a darling of mercy. Not an EMT. Free training for being a volunteer. He is not an EMT but continues to believe he can do things necessary that may be harmful without proper training. The ONLY reason for a bystander without professional training to provide care is for fire and/or active bleeding and/or difficulty in breathing.
No matter his saintly ideas, he is still a vigilante.
I doubt I have anything else to add. The jury needs to hear from the prosecution at closing statements about the REAL issues.
