The Kyle Rittenhouse Case: Civilian’s Thoughts

A constant feature of the United States of America has ironically been division. Take a look at politics; we have two primary parties who, more often than not, differ in core principles to the point it feels like a person almost has to be one or the other. We could even look at religion where it’s basically Christianity vs the world. Even within Christianity there’s God vs Satan or holiness vs hell. No matter how you slice it, division is a part of our nation and it has certainly been present in the Kyle Rittenhouse case. But instead of Democrat vs Republican, the Rittenhouse case has shone the light on a new set of opponents: Team Self-defense vs Team Murder.

On Aug. 25, 2020, Antioch, Ill. resident, 17-year-old Rittenhouse was recorded opening fire with an AR-15, shooting three people, Gaige Grosskreutz, Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum, leaving Huber and Rosenbaum dead at Kenosha protests in response to the Jacob Blake shooting 

You either believe Rittenhouse had no choice but to fire shots leading to multiple deaths or you believe Rittenhouse is a cold-blooded killer.

A’yanna Smith, 24-year-old cosmetologist from Milwaukee, believes the latter and sides with Team Murder. She believes Rittenhouse should be found guilty as she believes the situation didn’t have to result in multiple fatalities. 

“No matter what, more lives didn’t have to be taken,” Smith said. “It just didn’t have to end like that. Now more families are hurting due to his actions and he needs to be held accountable.”

On the other side of things, 42-year-old Chris Turner, an electrical engineer from Brookfield, Wis, represents Team Self-defense. He believes Rittenhouse is innocent and “had no other choice” but to defend himself. 

“What was he supposed to do,” Turner said. “Was he supposed to just stand there and get trampled by a bunch of people screaming ‘let’s jump him?’ He was out of options. He did what our forefathers would have wanted.”

Smith had suspicions about the judge and wondered if he was on the side of justice or was going to allow a man she deems a killer to walk free due to his questionable behavior; like suggesting the people of the courtroom stand and give a defense witness a round of applause. 

While the witness was a veteran, former criminal law attorney for 27 years, USA Today’s Ron Filipkowski, has “never seen a trial judge during a trial put the jury in a position where they would have to applaud a defense witness right before they are about to take the stand and testify” in all his years of practice.

“And I was both a federal and state prosecutor, and defense attorney,”  Filipkowski said. “A judge in any criminal jury trial should never put members of the jury in a position where they are asked to applaud for a witness about to testify for something that they have done in the past.”

Turner wasn’t concerned about the judge and whether or not he’s a fair judge. He said he has complete faith in the judicial system.

“Have they gotten some verdicts wrong before,” Turner said. “Maybe, but the odds are that they’ll get it right. I guess I just try to put myself in Rittenhouse’s shoes and truly ask myself, would I have done the same thing? While I surely wouldn’t have aimed to kill anybody, I most definitely would have aimed to protect myself.”

Jury deliberations are currently underway which sparked even more conflict when the judge allowed Rittenhouse to randomly draw his jury from a raffle drum. 

Smith felt ‘white privilege’ was the reasoning for Rittenhouse being allowed to draw his jury selections “from a hat, so to speak.”

“I have never seen anything like it,” Smith said. “And how many times have we said that? How many times have we said ‘I’ve never seen anything like it?’ That should tell you all you need to know.”

Turner didn’t see a problem with Rittenhouse being allowed to randomly select his jury.

“At the end of the day, the selection process is randomized,” Turner said. “It’s not like he’s picking his jury based on who he feels will give him the not guilty vote. He’s picking his jury randomly.”

There is much debate as to whether or not Rittenhouse acted in self-defense or is simply a murderer. With the trial currently in progress, many people have strong opinions so I wanted more insight into people’s thoughts on the case.

No matter how you look at the case, whether you think Rittenhouse is a cold-blooded killer or you think he’s an angel sent to protect the streets of Kenosha, people were harmed and lives were lost.

And according to Rittenhouse, he was just there to help, although that “helping” led to the last breaths of two people.