As an attorney who routinely practices criminal defense, I am a staunch advocate for making absolutely certain about the facts before coming to any conclusions. Situations in the real world can unfold very quickly and eyewitness accounts can, at times, be unreliable and/or biased. That being said, I have reviewed the attached criminal complaint/ probable cause statement from the arrest of Kyle Rittenhouse in Wisconsin and will point out the following things while keeping in mind that (i) there appears to be a fair amount of video footage of many of the events described therein and (ii) there is a long way to go in the case before final conclusions can be drawn:
1. Wisconsin law appears to prohibit minors from possessing firearms. If this is true, then it would appear from the complaint that Mr. Rittenhouse was committing a criminal offense by walking around Kenosha, Wisconsin with a loaded firearm.
2. The encounter that is described between Rittenhouse and the first victim, Mr. Rosenbaum describes an armed individual shooting an unarmed individual. If this turns out to be accurate, there is no law I am aware of in Wisconsin (or anywhere else) which permits the use of deadly force to repel a non-lethal attack (if what Mr. Rosenbaum was doing could even be categorized as an "attack"). If this is true, Mr. Rittenhouse's behavior cannot legally be described as self defense.
3. Once Mr. Rittenhouse shoots Mr. Rosenbaum, the complaint asserts that Rittenhouse attempted to flee from the scene of his crime. This behavior, if true, would probably make him a "fleeing felon" under the law. While the rule about apprehending "fleeing felon's" varies under the law, there is absolutely NOTHING in the law which permits a fleeing felon to hurt or kill other people so that he may escape. In many states, either police OR citizens may apprehend a fleeing felon and in some instances, the use of deadly force to stop them from fleeing is allowed.
4. In the criminal complaint, it appears that multiple people became aware of Rittenhouse shooting Mr. Rosenbaum and video footage appears to demonstrate that there was an attempt to prevent Rittenhouse from getting away. The complaint asserts that Mr. Anthony Huber is one of the individuals who attempts to apprehend Mr. Rittenhouse and that he is holding "a skateboard" which he used to hit Rittenhouse as he attempts to disarm him of the firearm that Rittenhouse is illegally in possession of. This also appears to occur after Rittenhouse took two more shots at another unarmed individual who attempted to disarm him.
If the facts alleged in the criminal complaint turn out to be accurate, the subsequent killing of Anthony Huber would be considered murder.
4. Again, if the complaint is accurate, once Mr. Huber has been shot by Mr. Rittenhouse, Rittenhouse is not only a fleeing felon, but he has then become a fleeing felon who is clearly willing to use deadly force to escape. Under most laws in the United States, this would likely make it legal to use DEADLY FORCE to stop him.
5. The complaint then states that the third victim, Mr. Grosskreutz approached Mr. Rittenhouse holding a firearm. Having witnessed Rittenhouse gun down Huber, Grosskreutz is clearly within his rights to possess a firearm and/or to attempt to apprehend Rittenhouse. Instead, the complaint asserts that Rittenhouse shoots Grosskreutz in the arm in an yet another attempt to avoid apprehension. This is not legal and almost certainly amounts to some type of aggravated assault.
6. I would finally note that in reading the criminal complaint, it appears that (i) neither of the individuals who died were armed with a gun or knife; (ii) Mr. Grosskreutz did not discharge his firearm prior to being shot by Rittenhouse and it is not even clear that he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse; (iii) after shooting Grosskreutz, Rittenhouse appears to have gotten up off the ground and threatened to shoot anyone else who came near him.
While Mr. Rittenhouse is absolutely entitled to to a fair trial and there may end up being additional information that will later come out there are two things that appear to be unequivocally true which CLEARLY establish that this did not need to happen: (i) 17 year old Kyle Rittenhouse should NOT have been in the Town of Kenosha at midnight on August 25, 2020 and (ii) Kyle Rittenhouse should NOT have been in possession of a firearm at all.
I will be watching this case with great interest and I would caution those of you who are rushing to the defense of Rittenhouse by posting single photographs and short video bursts of the events on social media. If the contents of the criminal complaint turn out to be accurate, Mr. Rittenhouse is likely to be in some sort of prison for a very long time.
https://www.mystateline.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2020/08/Rittenhouse.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1jCWNz4DBOmyKVajqMu_2LO6CGkqjSrLecg8cKMEsP7pczn6FYRGMYfSE
MYSTATELINE.COM
www.mystateline.com
Curious about some of the penalties for Driving Under the Influence in the Commonwealth of Virginia? Check out our new article which briefly summarizes some of the things that can happen if you are convicted of drunk driving.
https://www.nagylawva.com/Articles/What-are-the-penalties-for-DUI-convictions-in-the-state-of-Virginia.shtml
NAGYLAWVA.COM
What are the penalties for DUI convictions in the state of Virginia? | The Law Office of Louis K. Nagy, PLC | Harrisonburg
This post is a little bit late, but we wanted to thank the NACDL for a fantastic CLE on Defending Sexual Assault Crimes!!! As always, Las Vegas was a FANTASTIC time and gave the Nagy firm a few days to unwind while also learning some valuable information to help us better serve our clients.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2018/09/06/in-reversal-virginia-courts-to-allow-defendants-to-see-police-reports-witness-lists/?utm_term=.08db95b6769d
WASHINGTONPOST.COM
In reversal, Virginia courts to allow defendants to see police reports, witness lists
So after almost 40 years, the General Assembly has amended the law concerning larceny in the Commonwealth to bring it more into line with the rest of the country... Check out the new article on our website to learn more about this important change in the law.
https://www.nagylawva.com/Articles/Virginia-finally-raises-its-grand-larceny-threshold-after-nearly-40-years.shtml
NAGYLAWVA.COM
Virginia finally raises its grand larceny threshold after nearly 40 years | The Law Office of Louis K. Nagy, PLC | Harrisonburg
Questions about expungements in Virginia? Check out the newest article on our website that gives some general tips about the process!!
https://www.nagylawva.com/Articles/Expungement-in-Virginia-Limitations-and-benefits.shtml
NAGYLAWVA.COM
Expungement in Virginia: Limitations and benefits | The Law Office of Louis K. Nagy, PLC | Harrisonburg
