Alan Dershowitz
Alan Dershowitz (AP Photo/Frank Franklin II, File)
Previous Post
Next Post

 

Kyle Rittenhouse “should be acquitted” of killing two men and wounding a third during last year’s Black Lives Matter protests in Kenosha, Wisc., and then he should hold liberal news outlets accountable for insisting he’s guilty of murder and committed vigilante justice, Harvard Law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz insisted on Newsmax Saturday. 

“If I were a juror, I would vote that there was reasonable doubt [and] that he did act in self-defense,” Dershowitz told Newsmax’s “Saturday Report.”

“Then he’ll bring lawsuits, and that’s the way to answer… vigilante justice is what CNN is doing, not what a 17-year-old kid under pressure may have done right or wrong. It’s CNN who is involved in vigilante justice. It’s The New Yorker that’s guilty of vigilante justice.”

“The idea is to make the media accountable for deliberate and willful lies,” said Dershowitz. 

— Sandy Fitzgerald in Dershowitz to Newsmax: Liberal Media, Not Rittenhouse, Guilty of ‘Vigilante Justice’

Previous Post
Next Post

68 COMMENTS

  1. With Kyle, our right to self defense and a fair trial lives or dies. There hasn’t been a case with more and more clear video evidence. If Kyle can’t get justice, nobody can

  2. Yes, he is clearly NOT GUILTY and the MSM press and Liberals keep lying about the case and Kyle needs to sue them all in one big defamation lawsuit asking for hundreds of millions of dollars. Shame on them!

    good luck Kyle, all true Americans support you!

    Maybe you could run for office? With the millions you get from the lawsuits, go to law school, get your degree, pass the bar and go in to politics. Also be a true supporter of the NRA!

    We are with you brother!

  3. The fat lady hasn’t sung, yet. There is still plenty of time for miscarriage of justice.

    Just throwing spitballs, here, but….

    What if Rittenhouse is convicted because he triggered people because he was open carrying a rifle? Wouldn’t that set off quite the spectacle?

      • “According to opencarry.org, Wisconsin is an open carry state.”

        A circumstance doesn’t need to be illegal for it to have a negative effect on Karens.

        As a “reasonable person” sitting on the jury, my thinking would go like this….”He crossed state lines to get involved in what he knew was a volatile, dangerous situation. No reasonable person would do that. He was where he didn’t need to be. Then, he had that gun thingy showing out, which scared a lot of people who feared Rittenhouse came to kill protesters. People in fear of their lives have a right to defend themselves. With that gun sticking out like a sore thumb, Rittenhouse “started it”, and he got what he deserved – – self-defense by people he posed a threat to. Caint claim self-defense when you provoke an attack. It ain’t reasonable”.

        Or maybe I hate guns, and would vote guilty just because I hate guns.

        • As open carry is legal, it’s a defense against prosecution.

          As to the question of people freaking out over seeing someone open carrying…some will.

        • A few years ago I was called in for jury pool selection. The prosecutor asked that if you had not done anything wrong, would you let the police search your belongings/car/home/etc…? A woman sitting in front of me said, “Yes”, and used the classic explanation of “I don’t have anything to hide…”
          She was one of the people chosen for the jury that day.
          So, yes, the term “reasonable person” is highly subjective.

      • Its open carry if one legally possess. Kyle was underage at the time and could not legally posses a firearm for general open carry so he had no legal right to open carry in Wisconsin like he was doing.

        • Wrong tell that to all the kids who open carry while hunting in Wisconsin. Or are open carrying while shooting trap and skeet and so on. Then try and arrest them for it and see how that goes.

        • He could not legally PURCHASE a firearm until he was eighteen. In an open-carry state, anyone not prohibited can open carry. How else would you take your child hunting?

    • “What if Rittenhouse is convicted because he triggered people because he was open carrying a rifle? Wouldn’t that set off quite the spectacle?”

      Two versions of that argument have, at this point, been presented by the prosecutor.

  4. They didn’t learn after paying millions to Sandman after what they did to him.
    What makes you think it would be any different here?

    • “They didn’t learn after paying millions to Sandman after what they did to him.”

      Or Richard Jewell, the man who saved lives at Centennial Olympic Park in Atlanta, Georgia…

      • They are on standby to assist police if the police request it. They can do that with National Guard in title 32 status and not violate posse comitatus. If they had been activated in title 10 status they could not do that, they would have been federalized.

        • Served with the National Guard and I understand the roles and rules.

          The point I am making is; will the Governor authorize them to do their job, or just sit there and watch thugs burn the city? Past actions result in questions like this.

        • @Ragnar

          The governor has already authorized them to do their job. That’s why they were placed on standby subject to the needs of the police. They have been released to police control, that is their job.

        • They are skirting the laws like having to pass a budget every 2 years so we can remain in a constant state of war with a standing army. The Founders of this country are rolling over in their graves over this stupidity. Sadly you not only accept it but also endorse it. Gun owners really are their worst enemies.

  5. I hope he can and does successfully sue media outlets for the way he and the case have been portrayed. Zimmerman had little success going that route (IIRC, something about the claim he was a “public figure” made the matter more difficult to pursue or something?) But you also have the Covington Kids.

    I fear that unless he does take some of these media outlets to court, Rittenhouse will get the same treatment as the aforementioned George Zimmerman did after he was acquitted. Meaning months of quasi-doxxing articles about where he’s been seen, what he’s doing for a living, etc.

    • The police officer who killed Micheal Brown in order to save his own life has been chased from one job to another. He was smeared by the mob. The Left only accepts a decision when it comes to getting their way.

  6. No. Kyle is the vigilante. And there is nothing wrong with that.

    “a member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority, typically because the legal agencies are thought to be inadequate.”

    The New Yorker, The New York Times, and other media are a mob against Kyle.

    A mob
    “a large crowd of people, especially one that is disorderly and intent on causing trouble or violence.”

    Any mob needs leaders. And the media are the mob leaders.

  7. Once again Dershowitz reveals he is nearly alone as a classic liberal who doesn’t judge a case on his bias. Bravo. Dunno what’s gonna happen. I’m locked n loaded for whatever the “mostly peaceful” scum device. Go & so likewise. Free Kyle!

  8. @Prndll”
    “As open carry is legal, it’s a defense against prosecution.”

    Which is why I used open carry as a justification for my reasoning as a juror, not as a legal argument.

    • @Prndll”
      “As open carry is legal, it’s a defense against prosecution.”

      Not always, its a myth born of “internet lawyers” that it is defense against prosecution. It depends on more than just “open carry being” legal.

      In Kyles case, for purposes of legal general open carry, he could not legally carry open due to being under age at the time unless he were someplace like, for example, on a firing range practicing under supervision.

      • I think you misunderstood. I was not commenting on Rittenhouse. I was commenting on open carry.

        As to Rittenhouse himself, I would not have been there to start with. I would not have done that even when I was 17. But then I’m not likely to be at an Astro world concert either.

        I do find it interesting that BLM gets away with their rioting. The bigger problems always seem to ignored.

        I do wonder what (if anything) would have been said if Rittenhouse was killed without a shot fired at all.

        Interestingly enough, it looks as though the underage thing has been dismissed.

        • “I do find it interesting that BLM gets away with their rioting.”

          Mere revenge; justifiable revenge. Ooooppps, I meant “equity”.

      • Let’s say Kyle did not have a driver’s license and he was being chased. Does that mean he could not drive himself in a motor vehicle to safety, etc? Should he not take over the controls of a plane if a pilot falls unconscious because he is underage without a pilot’s license? In this case this age/license crap is crap that has no place on the table.

      • They already covered this and you keep repeating the lie. The hunting laws were specifically brought up which exempt 16 and 17 year olds one of the reasons the illegal possession charge was dropped.

  9. Kyle will be convicted on some lesser included charge. The prosecution structured the indictment to preclude a complete acquittal. I agree with Alan but I fear the worst.

    • “Kyle will be convicted on some lesser included charge.”

      Since he has already spent a number of months in jail while raising the 2 million in bail, he stands a good chance of walking with time served…

  10. The media comes out all the time against “bullying.” When violent bullying happens right in front of them they turn hypocrite and roll out the red carpet for, “bullies.” That’s a mistake and it’s also a mistake to assume everyone in America marches to the drumbeat of the obviously slanted media.

    What is really going on behind closed doors is the media cheering for their team of deceased and wounded bullies. The bullies do the dirty work the media is too gutless to do. Seeing anyone who may be a Trump Voter getting beaten, etc. brings the media great satisfaction. By the same token the vast majority of Americans enjoy seeing bullies and their cohorts get a taste of their own medicine.

    The obvious cliff hanger is waiting to see if Kyle Rittenhouse was judged by a Jury of His Piers. A jury selected based on their hate for firearms and ignorance of self defense is by no means a jury of his piers. Any decision of guilt says the cards were stacked. Frankly this so called “trail” should have been over before it began.

  11. The Burn Loot & Murder crowd & some politicians aka Maxine Waters , has already threatened the jury in this trial. Also trying to Dox the judge.
    So this is going to be something to watch.
    FREE KYLE…
    Buck FIDEN…
    Lets go Brandon…!

  12. In retrospect, Rittenhouse should have stayed home. I think that he would agree with that proposition now. Frankly, only a madman would trust his freedom to a group that is composed of 12 people of above-average ignorance who don’t know anything and can’t read.

    However, Rittenhouse had every right to go to Wisconsin. He had every right to accept the AR from his friend. He had every right to carry it. And he had every right to defend himself.

    If people were frightened by a young man carrying a gun, well, that’s too damn bad. Rittenhouse didn’t threaten anyone with the rifle until he was jumped by a gang of communist thugs.

    If people get the vapors from the mere sight of a gun, they’re mentally ill. Even in the supremely hoplophobic Commonwealth of Massivetwoshits, the state’s top court has ruled that an open carrier is not responsible for alarm — alarm is the viewer’s fault, not the carrier’s.

    I’m afraid that Rittenhouse might be screwed over by the political farce that we refer to as a trial. But from what I’ve seen and read, if what happened that night wasn’t self defense, then self defense does not exist in America.

    • So many people keep bringing up the ‘fact’ that Rittenhouse ‘shouldn’t have been there,’ which is logically true from the standpoint of avoiding stupid people doing stupid things for your own good; However, that really doesn’t have any bearing on his RIGHT to be there, that being a public place, so long as he isn’t, ahem, ‘protesting’ in a boisterous and highly inflammatory manner to the detriment of somebody else.
      Although it is somewhat dim, I can rightfully walk into a mob of ‘protesters’; I can walk down dark alleys with cash hanging out of my pockets, or I can stride into a biker bar and politely voice my negative opinions of large, burly, tattooed white guys and how much I disapprove of Harleys. None of these ‘provocations’ is sufficient to allow someone to attack me physically, nor do any of them remove my right to self-defense.
      No matter what happens to me afterwards, I am NOT to blame should others wish to illegally assault me, and I have every right to defend myself during an attack, as my attackers are the ones in the wrong. True, I shouldn’t have done those things, but I have a perfect right to do them.
      The failure of people to understand this concept is baffling.

      • “True, I shouldn’t have done those things, but I have a perfect right to do them.
        The failure of people to understand this concept is baffling.”

        With “rights” come responsibility and prudence. (“All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.” )

        And “prudence” is a single word to sum up “stupid people, doing stupid things, in stupid places.” Indeed, one (a juror, perhaps?) might apply “prudence” to the calculus of “what a ‘reasonable’ person would do in the same or similar circumstance”.

        Thus, while you and Kyle have a “right” to be slap in the middle of contested gang turf, it is the “reasonable” juror who ultimately decides if a “reasonable” (prudent) person would have reasonably gone onto that contested turf if the first place, then begin to assess your actions accordingly.

        In Kyles’s situation, a “reasonable” juror might conclude that, while you have/had a right to be at the location of what became a riot, you bear some amount of blame for the shooting incident. In such a case, I, as a “reasonable” person might want to assess a penalty for an incident, and two deaths, that wouldn’t have happened had Kyle not been at the location of the riot in the first place.

        Asserting “rights” should not be thought of as some form legal Kryptonite.

        BTW: as a juror, I would vote “not proven”/”not guilty”. But, don’t count on people like me being on your jury.

      • Even though they really did not go there, Kyle was there to help protect a car lot. He was probably paid to help out, but that opens up a new can of worms. Let’s just say that he had a legitimate reason to be there and was attacked by a mob – because that is what happened.

  13. Sue the pants off ’em. They have a clear video record of what happened that night, and they chose to lie about ALL of it to make the world think Kyle Rittenhouse is a villain. That’s slander and libel if ever there was any.

  14. Did anyone see the Nancy Grace shitshow on Fox last night? The ultimate karen-pig snorted her way through a typical rino-like speech, basically “I’m pro 2a, but…” (I’m paraphrasing). She even said he was basically toting a machine gun, right after having it explained to her that it was NOT a machine gun. Some psychoanalyst on her panel kept referring to his S/W [email protected] 15 as “this HUGE gun” (now I’m directly quoting) – like WTF??? – and all but called Kyle a sociopath for owning a gun in the first place, while the panel’s “threat assessment expert” made his fudd-status known and the panel’s coroner talked about these “high-power bullets” travel 2200 mph and are the ONLY bullets that cause “cavitation” which basically obliterates the bullet in it’s entirety along with every organ in the chest cavity including the heart and doesn’t leave a trace of the bullet behind. He failed to note, however, that ballistics was not his, um, forte. The only panel member who seemed to possess a modicum of common sense was a defense attorney from Los Angeles – I shit you not.

  15. Hopefully Rittenhouse will be acquitted but a lawsuit by him against the media would likely just result in money that will be attached by relatives of those he shot suing him successfully.

  16. Kyle used that weapon in a defensive manner to save his life period! Every witness and video and picture shows that! That’s why we have the 2nd amendment!

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here