When it comes to writing these opinion pieces, I typically choose topics that I want to learn about. The process of writing a well-defended opinion forces one to consult a large number of resources, and I always come out of the process having gained additional insight. The story of Kyle Rittenhouse has proven to be more convoluted than I admittedly expected, so I’ll address some questions that I myself have answered throughout my writing process.
Research. But first, here’s some background regarding the case:
1) Was Kyle Rittenhouse a White supremacist?
At trial, there was evidence presented showing that at the time of the shooting Rittenhouse was involved with any White supremacist groups. Before the trial, Judge Schroeder dismissed motions made by the prosecution that they said linked Rittenhouse with the Proud Boys, a far-right group linked with political violence. The prosecution was referring to Rittenhouse posing with individuals flashing the “OK” sign months after the shooting, which the prosecution claimed was a symbol of White power (regarding this symbol, the Anti-Defamation League “particular care must be taken not to jump to conclusions about the intent behind someone who has used the gesture” given its complex history). The Judge stated “For me to let that in as evidence for a motive that existed four months earlier? Can’t see it.”
2) Was Rittenhouse a 17-year-old with no connections to Kenosha?
Rittenhouse has frequently been described as a 17-year-old who drove across state lines from Illinois to Wisconsin to get involved in a community that wasn’t his. However, Rittenhouse worked as a in Kenosha, WI, home to his father, grandmother, aunt, uncle, and .
3) Did Rittenhouse drive across state lines with a gun the night of the shooting to oppose the protests?
His primary residence in Antioch, Illinois is 20 miles from Kenosha, Wisconsin. This is closer than we are to Mishawaka. Rittenhouse also under oath that he had traveled to Kenosha for his job the night before the shootings and was staying with a friend. Additionally, Rittenhouse testified that the gun never crossed state lines and stayed with a friend in Kenosha as Rittenhouse was too young to purchase the gun. Under Wisconsin Law, 17-year-olds are not allowed to carry rifles if they are short-barreled. As Rittenhouse’s rifle’s barrel was over the 16 inch minimum barrel length, the Judge dismissed the gun possession charge.
4) Was Rittenhouse out there that night looking for a fight?
Based on the evidence presented at trial, there’s no clear indication that Rittenhouse went there that night intending to kill anyone. What we know is that Rittenhouse came out that night with a first aid kit and an AR-15 style rifle. Video and Rittenhouse’s own indicate that he offered medical aid to protestors and ran with a fire extinguisher to put out fires, and only after he was pursued did he kill two and injure a third. There is drone of the first shooting and cellphone of the second and third shootings, which anyone can watch, but they are violent in nature. Based on the videos, it does appear that Rittenhouse attempted to flee the situation at every opportunity and only shot at when confronted. During cross examination, the third person shot by Rittenhouse, Gaige Grosskreutz, that Rittenhouse only shot him after Grosskreutz pointed his own gun at Rittenhouse, as he believed Rittenhouse was an active shooter and a threat.
5) Why was Rittenhouse originally being chased?
The second and third people who were shot by Rittenhouse believed he was an active shooter after learning that he had shot the first man, Joseph Rosenbaum. Rittenhouse shot Rosenbaum because he was being chased and cornered, as evidenced by and his . So why was Rosenbaum chasing him in the first place? The morning that he was killed, Rosenbaum was released from a Milwaukee hospital after being admitted following a suicide . Ryan Balch, a witness for the prosecution, that Rosenbaum had been “hyperaggressive” and that he angrily threatened to kill any of those in Rittenhouse’s group if they were caught alone.
6) Would this verdict have happened if Rittenhouse was Black?
Many have stated they believe Rittenhouse would be found guilty if he was Black and not White. When looking at the data, one analyzed how juries perceive self-defense and found that homicides with a White perpetrator and a Black victim are 10 times more likely to be ruled justified than cases with a Black perpetrator and a White victim. When accounting for confounding factors, i.e. whether the perpetrator and victim are strangers, cases with a White perpetrator and Black victim are 281% more likely to be ruled justified. So yes, it is much more likely that Rittenhouse would have been found guilty if he was Black. However, a systemic issue such as this cannot be put on trial. We cannot adjudicate systemic issues in a criminal court of one individual.
7) Should Kyle Rittenhouse have gone to Kenosha that day?
It’s hard to imagine why any teenager should have been walking around in the chaos that night with a semiautomatic rifle. Does this forfeit his right to self-defense? No. Especially given that he apparently ran at every opportunity to do so rather than engage and only shot when threatened. However, the question of whether Rittenhouse should have been there is not the same as whether he legally met the definition of self-defense. The acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse doesn’t mean that what he did was right or that he did nothing wrong; it only means that the jury didn’t think that the prosecution proved Rittenhouse was not acting in self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Student Movement is the official student newspaper of 老司机传媒. Opinions expressed in the Student Movement are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editors, 老司机传媒 or the Seventh-day Adventist church.