Rittenhouse, wearing a dark jacket with a burgundy tie and shirt, stood behind the defense table as each not guilty verdict was read. Schroeder said he was inclined to agree with the prosecution. Prosecutors asked for lesser charges of attempted second-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless endangerment and second-degree reckless endangerment. Grosskreutz testified he pulled out his own firearm because he believed Rittenhouse was an active shooter. But he would likely allow lesser charges of second-degree intentional homicide and first-degree reckless homicide.Ĭount 5: Attempted first-degree intentional homicide, use of a weaponĬount 5 states Rittenhouse attempted to cause the death of 27-year-old Gaige Grosskreutz, with intent to kill him.Īfter shooting Huber, Rittenhouse testified, he saw Grosskreutz lunge at him and point a pistol at his head. The judge said he "embraced" the defense's argument. Prosecutors asked that the jury also be instructed on second-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide and second-degree reckless homicide.ĭefense attorneys objected to second-degree reckless homicide. Huber swung his skateboard at Rittenhouse after Rosenbaum was fatally shot. It's the most serious charge he faced, with a mandatory life sentence. Rittenhouse fired at the man twice and missed.Ĭount 4: First-degree intentional homicide, use of a dangerous weaponĬount 4 states Rittenhouse caused the death of 26-year-old Anthony Huber, with intent to kill him. "I thought if I were to be knocked out, he would have stomped my face in if I didn't fire," he said. The man jumped at Rittenhouse at one point, trying to kick him and the teen opened fire. Wisconsin law allows the use of deadly force only if "necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm."Ĭount 2: First-degree recklessly endangering safety, use of a dangerous weaponĬount 2 states Rittenhouse recklessly endangered the safety of Richard McGinniss - a journalist with the conservative Daily Caller - under circumstances that show utter disregard for human life.Ĭount 3: First-degree recklessly endangering safety, use of a dangerous weaponĬount 3 states Rittenhouse recklessly endangered the safety of an unknown male, referred to as "jump kick man" in court, under circumstances that show utter disregard for human life. These are the charges he was acquitted of:Ĭount 1: First-degree reckless homicide, use of a dangerous weaponĬount 1 states Rittenhouse recklessly caused the death of 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum under circumstances that showed utter disregard for human life. If convicted on the most serious charge, Rittenhouse would have faced a mandatory sentence of life in prison. The jury of five men and seven women deliberated more than 25 hours over the past four days in a closely watched case. Kyle Rittenhouse, the teenager accused of killing two people and shooting another during unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, last summer has been found not guilty on all charges. ![]() Kyle Rittenhouse reacts after being found not guilty on all counts on Friday. "Of course, the two people who were killed might have been in a position to do so, but they couldn't testify, they were dead," she said, adding that the third person who was shot, Gaige Grosskreutz testified that Rittenhouse fired when Grosskreutz aimed his gun at him. In order for the prosecution to successfully make its active shooter argument, attorneys would have had to present evidence that disproves Wisconsin's self-defense threshold, according to Coates. Wisconsin law requires that when a self-defense claim is raised, prosecutors must disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt, not the other way around as it is in other jurisdictions, Coates explained. "He believed that it was reasonable to do so and now the burden went back to the prosecution where it always should stay to say, hey, we have proven that he was not reasonable in his belief, that he was in a kill or be killed scenario," she added. "When you saw him take the stand and explain why he himself thought he was in lethal danger at that point, that probably was the one that tipped the needle," Coates said. The jurors had to access the reasonableness of Rittenhouse's actions and decide whether it was his belief that he had to use self-defense. She said the jury instruction said jurors had to look at the case through the eyes of then 17-year-old Rittenhouse, not in hindsight. "That proved unpersuasive it seems to this particular jury for two reasons. One, Wisconsin is a place that has a gun culture that's not synonymous with criminal activity. The idea of saying you want to alienate a gun owner would not have been persuasive enough. The idea of saying, hey, they were acting in self-defense might have been compelling, except for the jury instruction," Coates explained.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |