Scott Tibbs

Thoughts on the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict

By Scott Tibbs, December 3, 2021

The "not guilty" verdict for Kyle Rittenhouse was the only acceptable outcome to this attempted lynching of a teenager, but I was nonetheless surprised that the jury actually did reach the only correct decision - especially given that they were threatened with harassment and even violence by radical Leftist mobs determined to see a teenager go to prison for defending himself against a violent pedophile.

President Joe Biden said he was "angry and concerned" about the verdict. For a man who spent a year promising to not be Donald Trump, this was a very Trumpian move. Trump was unable to keep his mouth shut for five minutes and felt the need to comment on everything, behaving more like a pundit than the President. This, of course, was extremely divisive and was one of the reasons he lost the election. Biden could have taken a different path: "I am the President, and it is not appropriate for me to comment on individual trials. That is all." Biden could not do that, because he had to please his "woke" activist base. At a time when he could have been a calming voice, Biden chose to be hateful and divisive.

Probably the most enduring image of the trial was of the prosecutor with his face in his hands after his star witness Gaige Grosskreutz admitted that Rittenhouse only fired when Grosskreutz pointed a gun at him. The prosecution even withheld critical video evidence from the defense, which itself should bring criminal charges and massive punitive damages. In a perfect world, this would bring much more scrutiny of prosecutors by conservatives, who have woken up to the fact that even prosecutors and police can be corrupt. Sadly, I do not see this happening, but it should if we are truly limited government conservatives.

The prosecutor made an absurd closing "argument" to the jury, one he knows is false. Thomas Binger claimed that when attacked with fists and feet, it is "cowardly" to use guns to defend yourself. First, fists and feet can and do kill people every single year. Second, the "argument" ignores the law, which does allow for the use of firearms to defend against someone attacking you "unarmed" or with a melee weapon. Third, when a fight is three on one, a rifle evens very unfair odds. Finally, Binger knows one of the so-called "victims" pointed a handgun a Rittenhouse. Binger thoroughly humiliated himself with this "argument."

It actually is possible to think that Rittenhouse should not have gone to Kenosha, or that his parents should not have allowed him to go, and that he still acted in self-defense when attacked by "Antifa" terrorists. While I understand the desire to protect private property when the civil magistrate rebels against God and refuses to carry out the duties God gave them, it is nonetheless foolish for a teenager to drive to a riot and put his life in danger. It is deeply irresponsible for conservative pundits to laud Rittenhouse as a "hero" who had a "duty" to go to Kenosha and protect others. But whether Rittenhouse should have been there or not does not take away his right to defend his life when violently attacked and beaten.

And the fact of the matter is this: Rittenhouse only fired to defend his life. He attempted to retreat from a violent mob, which chased him. He did not initiate violent action: He tried to escape it. He only fired when he was knocked down. An "Antifa" terrorist ran up and viciously kicked Rittenhouse in the head, and another bashed him in the head with a skateboard. Anyone who knows anything about brain injuries knows how dangerous these actions are. One "Antifa" terrorist attempted to grab Rittenhouse's gun, and almost certainly would have murdered Rittenhouse had that been successful. Before any of this happened, an "Antifa" thug sprayed Rittenhouse with pepper spray and Rittenhouse did not respond with lethal force - hardly the act of someone looking for an excuse to shoot people.

But "woke" Leftists ignore the violent mob attacking Rittenhouse, chasing him when he tried to retreat, and then trying to beat him when he stumbled. Rittenhouse fired when there was no other choice to save his own life. New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio rushed out a statement that the "victims" should still be alive. Unlike de Blasio, I do not weep for dead pedophiles. With that said, they should indeed still be alive. The rioters (not "victims") should not have attacked, chased and viciously assaulted a teenage boy, forcing him to defend himself. They should have spared their own lives by making better choices.

Opinion Archives

E-mail Scott

Scott's Links

About the Author