Kyle Rittenhouse’s trial began on November 3rd, with Rittenhouse pleading not guilty on all counts and claiming self-defense. The charges against him include two counts of homicide and one count of attempted homicide.
For reference, Rittenhouse was arrested after shooting three people, two fatally, after being chased down a street by an angry mob. At the time, he was helping keep order and protecting businesses from looting and arson during a BLM and Antifa-led riot in Kenosha. At the time, he said “People are getting injured, and our job is to protect this business, and part of my job is also to help people. If there’s somebody hurt, I’m running into harm’s way. That’s why I have my rifle, because I need to protect myself obviously.”
While the tensions in the courtroom are high thanks to the shooting he was involved in taking place during a BLM riot in Kenosha, new evidence has come to light that will likely make his argument of self-defense much easier to prove.
All that was initially known is what ZeroHedge reports here:
During the course of the evening, protesters became increasingly violent against Rittenhouse and the group he was with – eventually chasing the teen down the street when protester Joseph Rosenbaum was shot dead in the parking lot of a used car dealership. Shortly thereafter, Rittenhouse could be seen defending himself on the ground from multiple attackers – when he fatally wounded another, and shot the bicep of protester Gaige Grosskreutz who had drawn a pistol and was in the process of aiming it at the teen.
The teen was chased down the street, attacked while on the ground, and shot three people dead. That’s all anyone really knew. His case of self-defense was strong, as he was being chased by an angry mob that was attempting to violently beat him, but not ironclad. As the AP reported before the trial began:
Legal experts say under Wisconsin law he has a strong case. What’s less clear is whether prosecutors will be able to persuade the jury that Rittenhouse created a deadly situation by showing up in Kenosha with an AR-style semiautomatic rifle — and that in doing so he forfeited his claim to self-defense.
A post on Twitter summed up the line of thought that has become the defense’s case reasonably well:
More importantly, they were trying to kill him.
In America, you're allowed to use deadly defensive force against people who are trying to kill you.
— Law of Self Defense (@LawSelfDefense) November 2, 2021
However, since the trial began, yet more evidence has come to light that exonerates Mr. Rittenhouse.
At first, this video is about what we had to go on:
The Kyle Rittenhouse Shooting: WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED!
— Scooter Downey ☦️ 🇺🇸 (@scooter_downey) October 26, 2021
Then, new footage came out, showing that Mr. Rittenhouse was fired upon before he ever fired back:
— Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) November 2, 2021
As you can clearly see above, there is FLIR footage of the attack that shows Rosenbaum firing at Rittenhouse with a 9mm pistol. Here’s another breakdown of the footage:
For anyone who wants a breakdown of that footage, this thread here has what you're after. https://t.co/zBU5XlsvvA
— Selfless Thoughtful Human Delight (@SavageNoMore) November 2, 2021
And, as this tweet notes, the video shows there would have been very good reason for Rittenhouse to think that the pistol shot was fired at him:
FYI, the pistol was fired into the air behind the two as Rosenbaum chased Kyle. There is footage of it from the ground.
There was, of course, no way for Kyle to know it wasn't meant for him, so it doesn't matter as far as the case goes. Just completing the picture a little.
— Jimbo Smiffey (@JSmiffey) November 2, 2021
Boom. That footage conclusively shows that Rittenhouse was fired upon and acted in self-defense when he fired back.
So why are we just now hearing about it, given that it shows the trial never should have happened in the first place? Because, surprise, surprise, the leftists at the FBI were sitting on it and keeping it hidden from the American people, as Jack Posobiec noted in the tweet. Rather than release evidence that would exonerate a young man who was forced to defend himself after being assaulted and fired upon by a mob for having the temerity to help protect businesses, they sat on the evidence. While there are certainly plenty of speculative reasons as to why the FBI did so, it has so far not said.
Article syndicated from Trending Politics