11.16 - Rittenhouse: You be the Judge

Last updated over 3 years ago
9 questions
1

Count 1: First-degree reckless homicide. Kyle Rittenhouse is accused of this crime in connection with the fatal shooting of Joseph D. Rosenbaum. Under Wisconsin law, the crime is defined as recklessly causing death under circumstances that show utter disregard for human life.

1) Define "Reckless"
2) Define "Disregard"

Based on these definitions, and what you saw in the video as well as what you know about the case, do you think that Rittenhouse is guilty of this charge? Explain your answer.

1

Counts 2 and 5: First-degree recklessly endangering safety. Mr. Rittenhouse is charged with recklessly endangering two people who, according to the criminal complaint, had shots fired toward them but were not hit: Richard McGinnis and an unknown male seen in video of the episode.

1) Define "endangering"

Based on these definitions, and what you saw in the video as well as what you know about the case, do you think that Rittenhouse is guilty of this charge? Explain your answer.

1

Count 3: First-degree intentional homicide. Mr. Rittenhouse faces this charge in connection with the fatal shooting of Anthony M. Huber. The crime, analogous to first-degree murder in other states, is defined as causing the death of another human being with intent to kill that person or someone else.

1) Define "Analogous"

Based on these definitions, and what you saw in the video as well as what you know about the case, do you think that Rittenhouse is guilty of this charge? Explain your answer.

1

Count 4: Attempted first-degree intentional homicide. Mr. Rittenhouse faces this charge in connection with the shooting of Gaige P. Grosskreutz, who was struck and wounded.

Based on these definitions, and what you saw in the video as well as what you know about the case, do you think that Rittenhouse is guilty of this charge? Explain your answer.

Could the suspect carry the rifle legally?

Under Wisconsin statutes that say anyone under 18 who "goes armed" with any deadly weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor, Kyle Rittenhouse, 17, was not old enough to legally carry the assault-style rifle he had.

But 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.

Tom Grieve, a Milwaukee defense lawyer who also specializes in gun cases, agreed the exception might apply beyond hunting, but said that part of the law is poorly drafted. He said he would argue to apply a rule of law that interprets ambiguous criminal statutes in favor of the defendant.
1

1) Define "Loop Hole"
2) Which text above indicates where the loop hole in the gun law is. (Copy in quotations here). Explain your answer.

Could the suspect carry the rifle legally?


Rittenhouse could be in violation of having a gun within a gun-free zone, if there was one covering, 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.

Rittenhouse did not own the gun, his lawyer said Friday.
"Kyle did not carry a gun across state line," L. Lin Wood said in a tweet Friday morning. "The gun belonged to his friend, a Wisconsin resident. The gun never left the state of Wisconsin."
1

Count 6: Possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18. The judge dismissed this charge prior to closing arguments, agreeing with a defense argument that Mr. Rittenhouse wasn’t technically prohibited under a strict reading of Wisconsin state law from carrying the particular type of weapon he used, even though he was 17 at the time of the shootings.

Based on the information provided, and what you saw in the video would you dismiss this charge. Explain your answer.

1

Which line(s) in the text above indicate why Rittenhouse may not have been in violation of the law by possessing the gun?

1

Should a person be allowed to provide the funds to purchase a gun if they cannot legally own the gun themselves? Why or Why not?

1

In your opinion is there a benefit to society by allowing semi-automatic weapons to be purchased by NON-Law Enforcement Professionals? What is the benefit or what is the harm?