What Rittenhouse did was not self-defense, it was combat. There is no death penalty in Wisconsin.

See photos from Day 8 of Kyle Rittenhouse's trial in Kenosha (click here)

There was no self-defense. He came into a crowded street with an illegl AR-15 and shot people that were trying to remove the gun from him. Rittenhouse engaged in combat to keep his military style weapon in his possession. On several occassions he stated he believed people were removing his gun. It is not legally owned by Rittenhouse and at the age of 17 he shouild not have been carrying it into a dangerous situation. 

He also stated he headed for the line of police officers as he was assaulted. Those trying to remove the gun from his possiession were somwhat winning until Rittenhouse fired and killed or wounded them.

HE WAS THE PROBLEM and people were trying to disarm him to save lives. If someone wades into an unarmed crowd with a military style weapon, there is going to be scared people and those that will attempt to take the weapon away from the gunman.

You can call it immature or wrong-headed, but, no one can call it self-defense and the Rittenhouse lawyers are grasping at straws if they think they can force a mistrial. Mistrails occur after the jury has the case to decide.

I think the prosecution, in trying to get the jury to realize that Rittenhouse was formulating a story as the trial rolled out, over reached in his office's authority. In stating Rittenhouse was silent until the trial is a strategy the jury should understand, but, it was not the prosecutor to attempt to dissolve the right of self-incrimination. I understand all that as a strategy and the prosecutor was correct in trying to illustrate it to the jury, but, Rittenhouse had the right to remain silent based in Fifth Amendment rights. The judge was correct to point that out to the prosecutor and telling him Rittenhouse was exercising his right. The fact it was inconvenient for the prosecution to make their case that Rittenhouse' silence lead to a different trial testimony on record, is allowed under the law. One has to hope the jury is thinking clearly about events as they unfolded during the trial and perhaps realize the defendent was deceiving the jury about his silence and now testimony.

Rittenhouse's importance as a law enforcement volunteer, fire volunteer and emergency medical volunteer is all self-aggrandizement. He had no legal authority to carry out any of those roles and there were trained personnel there to act on any of his ideological roles that night.

That is the problem with these weapons and the people that use them. They are self-determining their own authority over and above what is allowed by law. Rittenhouse compromised the police that night and caused greater danger to those protesting and rioting. Rittenhouse and his faciliators increased the problems for police and did not make the evening safer. Vigilantes. There is no definition other than that for people armed to enter combat.

Santa Rosa County (click here) Sherrif's Office Captain Blevin Davis, the department's lead firearm instructor gets ready Wednesday to demonstrate how to use one of the SRSO's newly purchased AR-15.

This is what we are doing to ourselves. We are turning our streets into war theaters.

White Supremacists?Nationalists are recruited and groomed as teenagers. Rittenhouse is a prime example. They don't have to be members of any organization and/or attend meetings to qualify.

Someone or something is responsible for his orientation in life. Killing is legal and best.

End of discussion. 

Kyle Rittenhouse is not a saint.

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.