Kyle Rittenhouse finds big-name support in legal fight as building evidence suggests he acted in self-defense

Get the latest BPR news delivered free to your inbox daily. SIGN UP HERE.


Two big names have joined the fight to defend Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year-old Illinois teenager who’s been charged with intentional homicide for opening fire on and killing two left-wing extremists who’d attacked him during a riot Tuesday in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

One of those names is L. Lin Wood, the renowned attorney made famous first for defending media-smeared security guard Richard Jewell and then later for helping media-smeared former Covington Catholic High School student Nicholas Sandmann win a defamation lawsuit against The Washington Post.

In tweets posted Thursday morning, Wood said his colleagues have assembled a legal team to defend Rittenhouse and also revealed that conservative commentator Michelle Malkin will be “assisting.”

Look:

The announcement provoked widespread praise and appreciation.

Look:

This movement in defense of Rittenhouse erupted Wednesday after local authorities charged him with first-degree intentional homicide and took him into custody.

The growing outrage is rooted in the strong belief that Rittenhouse should not have been charged given evidence that he’d been acting in self-defense.

The evidence is extensive and includes multiple video clips of Rittenhouse being chased and attacked by the left-wing extremists in Kenosha.

View some of the evidence below (*Graphic content):

In all of the clips above, Rittenhouse was the one being chased.

According to Wisconsin law, fatal shootings are allowed in cases of self-defense.

“In plainer terms, you can use force against another person if you reasonably believe force is necessary to prevent the imminent death or serious bodily injury of yourself or another,” the Madison-based law office of Nicholson, Gansner & Otis, S.C. notes.

“The law does not require that you become injured before using self-defense. It doesn’t even require you to actually be in any danger. Instead, the law is all about what you reasonably believe under the circumstances”

Besides being charged with intentional homicide, Rittenhouse has also been smeared by an elected congressional Democrat who’s claimed without any evidence that he’s a “white supremacist” and “domestic terrorist” who’d showed up in Kenosha to purposefully stir up trouble:

However, multiple parties have debunked this false narrative, including The New York Times, which confirmed that Rittenhouse had shown up not only to protect suffering local business owners, but also to provide medical assistance to protesters.

Look:

One of the interviews mentioned by the Times can be watched below:

With all the evidence known thus far accounted for, the chances of prosecutors being able to obtain a conviction against Rittenhouse for homicide seem extraordinarily low, especially now that someone like Wood has his back.

Learn more about Wood below:

Prosecutors may however be able to obtain a successful conviction if they choose to pursue illegal firearm charges.

Rittenhouse “was not old enough to legally carry the assault-style rifle he had, according to statutes, which say anyone under 18 who ‘goes armed’ with any deadly weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor,” the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel notes.

“John Monroe, a lawyer who specializes in gun rights cases, believes an exception for rifles and shotguns, intended to allow people age 16 and 17 to hunt, could apply.”

He may also “be in violation of having a gun within a gun-free zone, if there was, for instance, a school nearby. Also, Illinois law requires anyone who owns any kind of firearm in that state to have a Firearm Owners Identification card, but that is only available to someone 21 or older, or someone with a sponsor who is 21 and eligible for a card.”

Powered by Topple

Vivek Saxena

Comments

Latest Articles