On Rittenhouse and U.S. culture war
He is a darling of the radical, and not-so-radical, right, this teenage boy with baby-fat cheeks.
He is a cause célèbre for the pro-gun lobby.
He is a hero to vigilantes everywhere.
And, as had been widely predicted, Kyle Rittenhouse is not guilty of intentional homicide, or anything else, in the killing of two men and the wounding of another.
A jury in Kenosha, Wis., on Friday acquitted the 18-year-old on all charges in a trial laden with controversy that came to symbolize the bitterly entrenched divisions of America.
It pitted claims of self-defence, in a country where the righteous lone avenger still resonates deeply as an avatar of frontier justice, against accusations of vigilantism.
The jury bought the core defence narrative, which Rittenhouse delivered when he took the stand, in testimony interrupted by his sobs: “I didn’t do anything wrong. I defended myself.”
The teen, then 17, indeed, did do that, lethally, firing the Smith and Wesson semi-automatic he’d strapped on before he travelled the short distance from his home in Illinois.
Assessed narrowly, under a state law that allows use of deadly force if a person reasonably believes such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself, the jury — it had deliberated for nearly four full days — cannot be assailed for their verdict. In open-carry Wisconsin, there is “no duty to restraint before using force.”
It’s not the jury that got it wrong; it’s the culture.
Although it is entirely possible, even probable, that the verdict would have gone the other way if Rittenhouse were Black.
Whiteness is a shield and that, too, is cultural in a nation that has yet to reckon with its ingrained, congenital racism.
But racialism had no traction in this particular trial. Everybody involved was white.
However, the genesis of the crime was grounded in a volatile protest in Kenosha following the shooting of Jacob Blake, a Black man shot in the back by a white police officer responding to a domestic disturbance on Aug. 23, 2000. It happened in the summer of Black Lives Matter, of rage and protest, following the killing of George Floyd. Blake survived, paralyzed from the waist down, and prosecutors announced earlier this year no charges would be brought against the cop.
On the day Rittenhouse pleaded not guilty, he flashed a white supremacist symbol, according to media reports.
In a telling early ruling, Judge Bruce Schroeder directed that the racial justice protesters killed and wounded could not be described by the prosecution as “victims,” but could be described as “looters” and “rioters.”
That bias was baked into the trial. Lead prosecutor Thomas Binger had attempted to portray Rittenhouse as an antagonist who chose to exacerbate tensions. “The evidence will show that hundreds of people were out on the street experiencing chaos and violence, and the only person who killed anyone was the defendant, Kyle Rittenhouse.”
Schroeder had banned as too prejudicial any reference to a photo of Rittenhouse drinking with members of the Proud Boys and wearing a “Free as F--k” T-shirt, while out on $2million bail.
Rittenhouse had gone to Kenosha, which had been in the throes of protests, ostensibly to help protect police protect property. He’d taken his military-style rifle and a medical kit. He was captured, on videos, walking through the throng of demonstrators against police brutality. In a livestream interview earlier in the evening with The Daily Caller, a conservative news and opinion site, the onetime youth police cadet says he’s guarding a car dealership from looters.
Six minutes later, there is footage showing Rittenhouse being chased by an unknown group into the parking lot of another dealership a few blocks away. Someone fires into the air. Rittenhouse turns toward the sound of gunfire as another pursuer lunges toward him. Rittenhouse then fires four times. He appears to make a phone call before running away, and someone shouts: “That’s the shooter!” He trips, falls to the ground — all of this is on video that the jury watched many times — and fires four more times at three people rushing toward him.
This was the crux of the selfdefence position.
He’d shot and killed Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, and injured Gaige Grosskreutz, 26.
Witnesses testified Rosenbaum had lunged for Rittenhouse’s gun during the chase. Rosenbaum had just been discharged from hospital — he was treated for a bipolar disorder, had attempted suicide — and was not armed. Huber had wielded a skateboard at Rittenhouse when he was shot dead.
A witness recounted that Rosenbaum had tried to grab Rittenhouse’s gun in the split-second chase confrontation. When Binger pressed the witness to concede he had no way of knowing Rosenbaum’s intent, the man responded: “Well, he said, ‘F--k you!’ and then he reached for (his) weapon.”
Most damaging to the prosecution was the testimony of their own witness, Grosskreutz, who ended up bolstering the defence.
Grosskreutz disclosed he was carrying a loaded gun that night and had aimed it at Rittenhouse when he was shot.
Under cross-examination, the defence asked the witness: “It wasn’t until you pointed your gun at him, advanced on him … that he fired, right?” Grosskreutz: “Correct.” Despite Grosskreutz insisting he was there as a trained paramedic who’d volunteered for the protest, and had not intended to point his gun at Rittenhouse, it was impossible for Binger to rehabilitate him as a defence witness.
After the verdict, Hubert’s parents released a statement: “Today’s verdict means there’s no accountability for the person who murdered our son. It sends the unacceptable message that armed civilians can show up in any town, incite violence and then use the danger they have created to justifying shooting people in the street.”
One victim chased Rittenhouse yelling threats and racial epithets. One victim hit him with a skateboard. One victim pointed a gun at him.
The prosecution could not overcome the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that Rittenhouse had not acted beyond the realm of reasonability to defend himself. The jury didn’t even find him guilty of reckless endangerment, for wading into the environment of an incendiary mob environment with a loaded rifle.
In his closing argument, Binger had urged the jury: “Look for the truth! So many people look at this case and they see what they want to see.”
They saw it through the eyes of Kyle Rittenhouse.