508

Kyle Rittenhouse texts pledging to ‘murder’ shoplifters disillusion his ex-spokesperson (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 2 months ago by Stopthatgirl7@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

117 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A former spokesperson for Kyle Rittenhouse says he became disillusioned with his ex-client after learning that he had sent text messages pledging to “fucking murder” shoplifters outside a pharmacy before later shooting two people to death during racial justice protests in Wisconsin in 2020.

Dave Hancock made that remark about Rittenhouse – for whom he also worked as a security guard – on a Law & Crime documentary that premiered on Friday. The show explored the unsuccessful criminal prosecution of Rittenhouse, who killed Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

As Hancock told it on The Trials of Kyle Rittenhouse, the 90-minute film’s main subject had “a history of things he was doing prior to [the double slaying], specifically patrolling the street for months with guns and borrowing people’s security uniforms, doing whatever he could to try to get into some kind of a fight”.

Hancock nonetheless said he initially believed Rittenhouse’s claims of self-defense when he first relayed his story about fatally shooting Rosenbaum and Huber. Yet that changed when he later became aware of text messages that surfaced as part of a civil lawsuit filed by the family of one of the men slain in Kenosha demanding wrongful death damages from Rittenhouse.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee 228 points 2 months ago

Wait are you trying to tell me that the kid who took a gun he didn’t own to a state he didn’t live in to shoot protestors he didn’t know ostensibly to protect businesses he’s unaffiliated with wanted to kill people?? Wow I am shocked. Shocked!

Honestly of course he wanted to murder people, anyone who disputes that is and has always been deliberately lying.

load more comments (27 replies)

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 102 points 2 months ago

This fuck should be in jail.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 30 points 2 months ago

Sounds like he will be soon enough considering the path he's been on.

[-] Hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works 41 points 2 months ago

Jail or Presidential prospect.

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Or assassin after his brain can no longer handle the cognitive dissonance.

[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

Por qué no los dos?

[-] macarthur_park@lemmy.world 26 points 2 months ago

I thought the same thing about George Zimmerman, but despite multiple domestic violence arrests involving a gun, and numerous other scandals he’s apparently still free, living his best life.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

Good point.

[-] Wiz@midwest.social 5 points 2 months ago

Can he also be sued into oblivion?

[-] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 61 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Sure wish this had come to light during the trial.

[-] EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world 85 points 2 months ago

A ton of evidence was blocked iirc, this was probably included.

[-] Zahille7@lemmy.world 74 points 2 months ago

The judge was doing his damnedest to make sure we all knew where they stood.

[-] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 5 points 2 months ago

This was known back then. The judge blocked it. I can kind of see why because he didn't shoot any shoplifters. He shot people who threatened, chased, and assaulted him.

The whole situation was stupid and he shouldn't have been there but from all the video I've seen of the actual event he was pretty selective with his targets when it came to actually shooting people. It wasn't consistent with his bragging. I kind of wish people would stop giving him attention at this point because all they're accomplishing is giving him a platform to grift rightwingers from.

[-] EpeeGnome@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

The analysis I read from a lawyer explained how Wisconsin's state laws on self defense are weirdly complex, and due to the exact order of events, under those laws, his intent technically didn't matter, and that's why it was inadmissible evidence. In most states it would be admissable, and he would be guilty. He even listed the laws out and while I don't recall any of the details now, it did seem perfectly logical to my layman's understanding. So it's not that the judge was biased, it's just that Rittenhouse, through dumb luck, happened to fall through a legal loophole. Wisconsin needs to fix it's laws, because it's abundantly clear he wanted to kill those people and morally speaking, I consider him to be an unrepentant murderer.

[-] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 3 points 2 months ago

because it’s abundantly clear he wanted to kill those people

I don't see that to be clear at all. He fled from the first person who attacked him and didn't shoot him until they guy caught him and was trying to take his weapon after verbally threatening him. The other two men he shot both attacked him as well when he was fleeing the first incident. If I recall correctly one had struck him with a skateboard and the other pointed a handgun at him while he was down. Considering there were other people chasing after him he didn't shoot I'd consider him to have been fairly restrained. Usually people trying to fake a "I was just defending myself" defense put less effort into creating their pretext for shooting.

To me this entire situation was the people on both sides of it playing stupid games and winning stupid prizes.

[-] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 3 points 2 months ago

This is how Wisconsin's law is so fucked up: The three men he shot were not working together, were not coordinated, did not know each other. So, on the one hand, Rittenhouse may have subjectively felt under coordinated attack, he was not, but the subjective feeling is what matters for the law.

From Huber:s POV, he was trying to disarm a murderer. Maybe he felt threatened, too? But the law is so fucked, his POV doesn't matter because he's dead. In Grosskreutz's POV, he was approaching an active shooter who'd just killed two men and trying to defuse the situation. When Rittenhouse pointed his gun, Grosskreutz would have been justified under the same law in blowing him away.

In short, the law incentivizes shooting first.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (8 replies)

[-] Soup@lemmy.cafe 54 points 2 months ago

All those people that defended this douche when I said there was proof of intention that was dismissed by a biased judge can fuck all the way off.

[-] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Yup, it was clear from the start he was cruising for a fight, which the law is literally supposed to prohibit even from police officers

[-] Travelator@thelemmy.club 24 points 2 months ago

Let's stop giving this idiot a voice in the media, please.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] 58008@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago

The prosecution team was 100% to blame for this little shit not getting what he deserved. I hope the litigants in the civil suit do a better job, but to be honest, they barely even need to try. Even I could put on a suit and walk in off the street and convince the jury of his liability in those killings. And that's just using the evidence we had back in 2020. With these text messages, I could call it in over Zoom while driving around delivering pizzas for 40 minutes.

[-] Schmoo@slrpnk.net 21 points 2 months ago

It's easy to talk out of your ass about how you would have done a better job, but you clearly have no idea what the circumstances were that the prosecution team was dealing with. This particular piece of evidence for example was attempted to be admitted but was denied by the judge for being "irrelevant to the case." The prosecution was fighting a court stacked against them and you would have had a hard time as well.

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 21 points 2 months ago

Murderous sociopaths gonna murderousociapathize

[-] Crikeste@lemm.ee 16 points 2 months ago

So many gun owners I know share similar sentiments. Gun ownership to them is all about getting a legal kill. America is disgusting.

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] nutsack@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

what really did it for me was his ADHD pacing around in circles while the riot vehicles rolled in. this was a manic little kid, way too excited to be holding a gun.

[-] darth_tiktaalik@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 months ago

Why this specific instance of Rittenhouse exposing himself as bloodthirsty when there were many more instances before it?

Is there some "fifty flags" rule before you can say they're planning to murder people?

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

Had to check if this was theonion@

load more comments

this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2024

508 points (95.8% liked)

News

23618 readers

3261 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

rjc@lemmy.world

Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

jeffw@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world