Rittenhouse/Kenosha Shooting Split

[Metaphor]

Fact checking Kyle Rittenhouse’s testimony in Kenosha murder trial​

There is not really a lot of meat to this article and at first glance, the things they are covering seem pretty insignificant. However, they do speak to dishonesty and when one considers further and in the greater context, his motivations maybe are illuminated by where and when he makes up stories.

No one responded. Sorry, I probably should have quoted some of the issues with his testimony...

Here is one fact-check:
"Testimony: Kyle Rittenhouse said he is a student at Arizona State University
In the opening minutes of his testimony, Rittenhouse told the jury he was a “college student studying nursing at Arizona State University.”
An ASU spokesman, however, said Rittenhouse “has not gone through the admissions process with Arizona State University and is not enrolled in the Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation.” Instead, he started a nondegree seeking online program Oct. 13 — less than three weeks before the trial began."

Are you fucking kidding me?!

What is supposed to be deceptive about his answer?

Is the online course not offered by ASU?

Are people who take online courses not fairly called 'students'?

Is the online course about something other than nursing?

Would your pearl-clutching outrage be quelled if instead he had said 'I am studying a non-degree nursing-related course offered by ASU'?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Fact checking Kyle Rittenhouse’s testimony in Kenosha murder trial​

There is not really a lot of meat to this article and at first glance, the things they are covering seem pretty insignificant. However, they do speak to dishonesty and when one considers further and in the greater context, his motivations maybe are illuminated by where and when he makes up stories.

No one responded. Sorry, I probably should have quoted some of the issues with his testimony...

Here is one fact-check:
"Testimony: Kyle Rittenhouse said he is a student at Arizona State University
In the opening minutes of his testimony, Rittenhouse told the jury he was a “college student studying nursing at Arizona State University.”
An ASU spokesman, however, said Rittenhouse “has not gone through the admissions process with Arizona State University and is not enrolled in the Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation.” Instead, he started a nondegree seeking online program Oct. 13 — less than three weeks before the trial began."

Are you fucking kidding me?!

What is supposed to be deceptive about his answer?

You mean other than trying to put legitimacy to his claim he was EMT'ing it?

Is the online course not offered by ASU?

Lies like that can get one fired from a job.

Are people who take online courses not fairly called 'students'?

Maybe it is different down under, but in the Northern Hemisphere, words have meanings.

Is the online course about something other than nursing?

Would your pearl-clutching outrage be quelled if instead he had said 'I am studying a non-degree nursing-related course offered by ASU'?

It is now pearl clutching to consider the notable difference between a "college student studying nursing" verses "in an online program for personal enrichment".

 

[SLD]

Well, I'm late to this, but I am going to stick my neck out and say he gets off on self defense. The whole situation was fucked up from the beginning. I think his mother should be on the stand. He never should've been there with a weapon. He wanted to show he was a tough guy with a gun. And now 2 are dead and a third wounded. what a shit show. He's an example of what happens when we glorify gun culture in this country so much.

But as a legal point, none of that matters. The case turns on narrow issues of self defense at the time of the shooting. I see him getting off. The judge may even throw it out without letting it go to a jury.

 

[Metaphor]

Fact checking Kyle Rittenhouse’s testimony in Kenosha murder trial​

There is not really a lot of meat to this article and at first glance, the things they are covering seem pretty insignificant. However, they do speak to dishonesty and when one considers further and in the greater context, his motivations maybe are illuminated by where and when he makes up stories.

No one responded. Sorry, I probably should have quoted some of the issues with his testimony...

Here is one fact-check:
"Testimony: Kyle Rittenhouse said he is a student at Arizona State University
In the opening minutes of his testimony, Rittenhouse told the jury he was a “college student studying nursing at Arizona State University.”
An ASU spokesman, however, said Rittenhouse “has not gone through the admissions process with Arizona State University and is not enrolled in the Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation.” Instead, he started a nondegree seeking online program Oct. 13 — less than three weeks before the trial began."

Are you fucking kidding me?!

What is supposed to be deceptive about his answer?

You mean other than trying to put legitimacy to his claim he was EMT'ing it?

I mean: what is deceptive about his answer?

Is the online course not offered by ASU?

Lies like that can get one fired from a job.

Is the course he is talking about offered by ASU or not?

Are people who take online courses not fairly called 'students'?

Maybe it is different down under, but in the Northern Hemisphere, words have meanings.

Are people studying their courses online not students?

Is the online course about something other than nursing?

Would your pearl-clutching outrage be quelled if instead he had said 'I am studying a non-degree nursing-related course offered by ASU'?

It is now pearl clutching to consider the notable difference between a "college student studying nursing" verses "in an online program for personal enrichment".

Is the online program about nursing? Does the course being non-award make him a liar that he is studying it?

For fuck's sake, this is so bizarre. Whether his statement is deceptive or not depends on the specifics which you have not elaborated on.

 

[none]

he's just a boy, right? an ageist and sexist answer... not to mention... errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGEDDD

 

[blastula]

Turns out Metaphor will validate those who self-identify in a non-typical manner, sometimes.

 

[Metaphor]

Turns out Metaphor will validate those who self-identify in a non-standard manner, sometimes.

I haven't said his answer isn't deceptive. I have said I don't see how it is deceptive, given the information offered.

If Rittenhouse was indeed enrolled in a nursing-related course, offered by ASU, then his answer was not deceptive, and the people calling it deceptive are clutching at straws.

If the course was not offered by ASU, or Rittenhouse was not enrolled in it, or the course was not nursing-related, then his answer would be deceptive.

 

[none]

yeah I got a bridge to sell....harhar

 

[blastula]

Sorry, the dude would fail the underwear check for a college student. He's got continuing education parts down there.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Fact checking Kyle Rittenhouse’s testimony in Kenosha murder trial​

There is not really a lot of meat to this article and at first glance, the things they are covering seem pretty insignificant. However, they do speak to dishonesty and when one considers further and in the greater context, his motivations maybe are illuminated by where and when he makes up stories.

No one responded. Sorry, I probably should have quoted some of the issues with his testimony...

Here is one fact-check:
"Testimony: Kyle Rittenhouse said he is a student at Arizona State University
In the opening minutes of his testimony, Rittenhouse told the jury he was a “college student studying nursing at Arizona State University.”
An ASU spokesman, however, said Rittenhouse “has not gone through the admissions process with Arizona State University and is not enrolled in the Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation.” Instead, he started a nondegree seeking online program Oct. 13 — less than three weeks before the trial began."

Are you fucking kidding me?!

ETA: One of the things here is the timing. He seems to have been trying to preemptively supplement the narrative he was a medical guy, after previously inflating his lifeguard role to EMT and now saying he is in nursing but not really being in nursing (yet).

Another:
"Kyle Rittenhouse said he was issued his bulletproof vest by the Grayslake Police Department"

Apparently, this is not true. He may have gotten it for purposes of some kind of police training, but he bought it on his own according to the police.

Issued, purchased... what's the diff?

Another:
"Kyle Rittenhouse said he didn’t look at social media between the shootings and the time he turned himself in to Antioch police"

And you guessed it. Yes, he looked at social media.

*shocked face*

Issued, purchased...what's the difference? Think about it. These little things in combination support a narrative about his motives. Why buy a vest? It's because you have plans to be in gun fights. If the police instead issued it to you, then it is more compatible with a narrative of just going the way the wind blows you, like "oh well, I had this vest anyway that someone gave me for free and so I brought it," is kind of different from "no, haha, I'm not really studying to be a nurse trying to help people, but I bought this gun illegally and this vest--don't look into how and when I purchased it and what I told people at the time--...." He seems to have been telling white lies and the big lie to not give the prosecutor any room.

 

[Keith&Co.]

So, if he walks on this trial, they can prosecute him for perjury...?

 

[ZiprHead]

Fact checking Kyle Rittenhouse’s testimony in Kenosha murder trial​

There is not really a lot of meat to this article and at first glance, the things they are covering seem pretty insignificant. However, they do speak to dishonesty and when one considers further and in the greater context, his motivations maybe are illuminated by where and when he makes up stories.

No one responded. Sorry, I probably should have quoted some of the issues with his testimony...

Here is one fact-check:
"Testimony: Kyle Rittenhouse said he is a student at Arizona State University
In the opening minutes of his testimony, Rittenhouse told the jury he was a “college student studying nursing at Arizona State University.”
An ASU spokesman, however, said Rittenhouse “has not gone through the admissions process with Arizona State University and is not enrolled in the Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation.” Instead, he started a nondegree seeking online program Oct. 13 — less than three weeks before the trial began."

Are you fucking kidding me?!

What is supposed to be deceptive about his answer?

Is the online course not offered by ASU?

Are people who take online courses not fairly called 'students'?

Is the online course about something other than nursing?

Would your pearl-clutching outrage be quelled if instead he had said 'I am studying a non-degree nursing-related course offered by ASU'?

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

 

[Metaphor]

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.

What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.

 

[Toni]

For fuck sakes! I went to help... with my gun. Just like when the ambulance showed up when my Dad was suffering a seizure, the medics carried in their medical equipment and several guns.

Your dad had a seizure in the middle of some violent riots?

So clearly and unambiguously self defense that when Rittenhouse immediately sees a police car, he tells then about him shooting of three people and surrenders.

Anti-rape activists often say 'there's no one way for a trauma victim to behave', meaning victims may engage in behaviours that to rational people seem incompatible with having been raped (e.g. messaging the alleged raper the next morning to see if they want to hang out that day, pursuing them romantically and sexually for weeks afterwards)

Take yourself out of this Rittenhouse case--which you've already judged--and imagine a circumstance where you have shot and killed two people in self-defence. Do you think you'd be A-OK afterwards, and act like the 'perfect self-defense victim'? Do you think everybody would?

Most likely, I'd be suffering trauma. This person didn't seem to show any signs of mental trauma. In fact, he continues to act like nothing wrong happened. He faked crying while under questioning by his own lawyer. He has no remorse at all. This is how a sociopath acts.

He may or not be a sociopath. We have to remember that he is was a 17 year old kid who had those who should have been looking out fur his best interests encouraging him to be a pawn in some bigger game. And since that time, instead of being castigated by those who supposedly care for him, he’s been treated to accolades all over the media, mostly right wing. Whatever chance this kid ever had has certainly been squandered. If he were not a sociopath before, this would definitely push him in that direction.

 

[ZiprHead]

Well, I'm late to this, but I am going to stick my neck out and say he gets off on self defense. The whole situation was fucked up from the beginning. I think his mother should be on the stand. He never should've been there with a weapon. He wanted to show he was a tough guy with a gun. And now 2 are dead and a third wounded. what a shit show. He's an example of what happens when we glorify gun culture in this country so much.

But as a legal point, none of that matters. The case turns on narrow issues of self defense at the time of the shooting. I see him getting off. The judge may even throw it out without letting it go to a jury.

Yes, that is the defense's tactic. But actual self defense really doesn't apply here. He crossed a police line illegally armed and in violation of curfew. He had many opportunities to leave. He did so to join a fight. You cannot argue self defense if you willingly join into the fight. You have to have "clean hands" to claim self defense.

I'm sure the prosecutor will explain this in the closing statements. Whether that will be compelling to the jury or not is anyone's guess.

 

[Toni]

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.

What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.

The timing makes it fairly self evident. Previously, Rittenhouse expressed strong admiration for abs aspirations to become a police officer. That’s a pretty big career switch with interesting timing.

 

[Enigma]

Issued, purchased...what's the difference? Think about it. These little things in combination support a narrative about his motives. Why buy a vest? It's because you have plans to be in gun fights.

Indeed, one can't help but spot such obvious signs of malevolence when they crop up.

At least I thought so until I looked around one day and noticed that nobody seems to realize the sinister nature of what I do.

I wear a seatbelt every time I drive because every time I drive I have plans to crash into other cars. Unfortunately, I am incredibly bad at doing so and have thus far failed to crash into other cars.

I have had somewhat more use out of my first-aid kit at home that I purchased because I had plans for myself and any houseguests to become injured at random times.

Don't even ask about my master scheme involving insuring my property against fire and flood damage.

Why is it so obvious for this Rittenhouse kid while I need to spell it out for people when I do it?

 

[ZiprHead]

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.

What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.

Yes, I'm three weeks away from the trial for of life and I'm going to apply to school.

 

[Swammerdami]

Did George Zimmerman cry in public? Donald Trump? Do many other hate-filled murderous sociopaths cry?

I didn't mention Kyle's crying in support of him. I still think he was a sociopathic brat that epitomizes the absurdity of America's gun culture. I just think he showed cowardice; and perhaps killing isn't as fun as he thought it would be.

Therefore he might not follow in Zimmerman's foot-steps and continue to operate as a vigilante. I've not even clicked the videos; did he cry in remorse or something else? It just strikes me as incongruous that this punk, faced with glaring proof of his own cowardice and inhumanity, would continue on a vigilante path.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Issued, purchased...what's the difference? Think about it. These little things in combination support a narrative about his motives. Why buy a vest? It's because you have plans to be in gun fights.

Indeed, one can't help but spot such obvious signs of malevolence when they crop up.

At least I thought so until I looked around one day and noticed that nobody seems to realize the sinister nature of what I do.

I wear a seatbelt every time I drive because every time I drive I have plans to crash into other cars. Unfortunately, I am incredibly bad at doing so and have thus far failed to crash into other cars.

I have had somewhat more use out of my first-aid kit at home that I purchased because I had plans for myself and any houseguests to become injured at random times.

Don't even ask about my master scheme involving insuring my property against fire and flood damage.

Why is it so obvious for this Rittenhouse kid while I need to spell it out for people when I do it?

Right, buying a seatbelt is the same thing as saying you want to shoot people, then buying a vest, illegally buying a gun, not following curfew, crossing police lines, and getting all next to people you think are the bad guys, then shooting a guy with his hands up. Seatbelts and property insurance are EXACTLY the same thing.