• sunbeam60@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    42
    ·
    3 months ago

    Has it been proven that he was hoping to kill somebody when he drove across state lines?

        • YeetPics@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          You’re asking others to “prove his murderous intent”, as if kyle travelling to an active riot zone with a murder weapon is too deep of a fucking mystery for you to crack.

          Is it possible for you to prove he only brought that AR to Waukesha for a fish fry? Didn’t fucking think so.

          • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I don’t understand why you think I’m trying to prove something or asking some random person to prove anything. I was asking what was proven in court.

            • YeetPics@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              You seem quite well versed on the matter.

              You’re not here to receive facts, you’re here to push your narrative, Sisyphus.

      • yeather@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        Counter-protesting, and it is legal to bring a firearm in many cases if legally acquired.

            • YeetPics@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              3 months ago

              He was 17

              Womp womp

              Can’t own firearms (or travel across state lines with them) as a minor.

              Sucks you can’t see the truth we’re feeding you

              • TheFonz@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                3 months ago

                You don’t seem to know a single honest fact about the case. Yet you voice your opinion very confidently. Why?

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I don’t think “teen vigilante car dealership security” is a real job, so we can confirm he wasn’t there for that.

      • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Well he wasn’t there to sell ice cream either.

        But in a court of law, making a statement like “he went there to kill” is a statement that requires proof. And I’m simply asking if there has been any proof that he travelled there with intent to kill?

        Bear in mind I’m not American, nor am I arguing about his guilt or innocence. Simply asking what proofs the attorneys brought to court.

    • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      There was a video from 15 days before the incident where he fantasized out loud about shooting some people he believed to be shoplifters. The prosecution tried to admit the video to evidence in order to demonstrate his mental state but was denied.

      Kyle Rittenhouse showed up to a protest armed with an AR-15 intending to defend property that was not even his with lethal force, having been encouraged to do so by other militant conservative groups on social media. He then proceeded to shoot and kill two unarmed people who were attempting to disarm him and injured another who was armed with a pistol and who was also attempting to disarm him.

      • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        That video is incredibly damning. Do you know why it wasn’t allowed to be admitted?

        • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Judge argued it wasn’t relevant to the case. Obviously I disagree, and so did the prosecutors. The prosecution mentioned it during the trial anyway and was scolded by the judge, which was later used by the defense to try calling a mistrial.