Judge won’t allow use of the term ‘victim’

A Wisconsin judge has decided that in order for Kyle Rittenhouse to have a fair trial, the people he killed and shot cannot be called victims.

Rittenhouse, 17, opened fire with an AR-15-style rifle in August 2020, killing two men and wounding a third, while they were on the streets of Kenosha, Wis., during a racial injustice protest. Now a jury must decide whether it was an act of vigilantism or self-defense.

However, the judge said using the term “victim” to describe the men he shot would cast Rittenhouse in a negative light, which may compel the jury to convict him. What’s even more puzzling is that he is allowing Rittenhouse to refer to the men as “looters” and “rioters,” so long as he can present evidence that supports him referring to them as such.

The catch here is that two men are dead and the other has never been charged with a crime for any behavior linked to his part in the protest. This means Rittenhouse will likely only be able to provide “evidence” based on speculation.

Judge Bruce Schroeder’s decision to not allow the men to be called victims is ridiculous. All three were shot and two died as a result of being shot. How does that not make them victims?

“The judge believes the term ‘victim’ is too loaded, but said the prosecution is allowed to theoretically refer to Rittenhouse as a ‘cold-blooded killer’ in its closing arguments,” a CNN report said.

So what, then, are people called, who are killed in cold blood? Do we call them the murdered? The dead? Those who have lost their lives? Schroeder doesn’t seem to care what they are called, as long as they’re not called victims.

Not only is his rationale beyond logic, it’s unfair to the men who were killed. It doesn’t really matter what they were doing at the time of their deaths, or in the other’s case, when he was injured. By definition, they are all victims and should be referred to as such.