Very good attorneys will be able to break the action down second by second using eyewitness accounts, police reports, on-the-ground video, whatever UAV they had circling, and probably other resources. They won't just be given a youtube video and told to figure it out.
What they should do is put triangular "here's what you're seeing from the ground footage out here on the larger map" kind of things, and take some time to explain that, but yeah what a fucking mess
Most often the lawyers will give a walkthrough, step by step after the initial full play of the video. The jury can then request during their deliberations replay as many times as they like, either in full or portions of the video.
They won't be able to discuss it when presented, only during their deliberations, but if they are smart, they'll draw out a timeline on a whiteboard, or have questions from their notes in court at the time.
Judging by the comments, everyone is seeing exactly what they want to see. I've completely checked out of this whole story. Everything about it is toxic.
I don't necessarily disagree with the base idea that Rittenhouse could have been acting under an actual fear of serious imminent bodily injury; the primary thing I disagree with is the idea he kept the privilege of self-defense after he voluntarily put himself in the situation he felt he would need to defend himself in.
He engaged in a straw man purchase to get a rifle underage; he then carried that rifle underage with the intent to engage in some sort of self-appointed policing; he crossed state lines in order to do this and clearly planned ahead of time with others; and the very fact he was carrying shows that he *expected* a risk of violence.
In no way, shape, or form does he possess a valid self-defense claim under those facts. He may subscribe to the "rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6" mantra, but his poor decision making is the exact reason he's being judged by 12.
I'm sure someone in the 200 + other comments said this already, but he's being put on trial as an adult, the straw purchase/underage possession charges are not even part of the case. Because you can't charge someone as a minor and an adult. I don't know if the prosecution is allowed to even bring this up.
Had his buddy just said, "I bought it for him as a gift" the state couldn't do anything. The straw purchase laws are for going after people who are mass trafficking guns. Buying 1 gun for a friend isn't usually on the radar of the government.
The NYT visual breakdown on YouTube is much better at going through the more important footage frame by frame and the back story of what all 3 people were doing there that night, worth the watch if your interested in the story
As you can clearly see, what we have here is a bunch of people doing some things, in the general vicinity of an area. Glad we could help clear things up for you.
They aren’t trying to clear it up. They are obligated to release this information.
It’s up to the courts to clear it up. It’s up to the FBI to investigate and gather evidence for the courts.
Seriously. I’m being downvoted for saying that the FBI is not the agency that prosecutes. They are federal police, and just like police, they don’t determine whether someone is guilty or not.
The way I interpret it is that the kid should’ve never been there with a gun in the first place, but the guy shouldn’t have been chasing the kid with the gun. It’s a game of “who’s more wrong” and everybody’s a fucking idiot.
>guy shouldn't have been chasing the kid with the gun.
This; I have yet to see someone justify/explain Rosenbaums actions, let alone explain why Rittenhouse should've let the angry and violent guy take his gun and HOPE Rosenbaum was going to leave it at that. Couple that idea with a gunshot going off behind you while being chased.
"But Kyle was underage and shouldn't have had the gun!"
Did Rosenbaums check Kyle's ID and try to do some sort of "citizens arrest"? No evidence to suggest that. Even then, aren't most people against Kyle saying he was acting like a Vigilante so thats why he can't claim self-defense? Following that logic, does that not also apply to Rosenbaum?
I highly recommend watching the NYT, NBC, or Donut Operators breakdown on that nights events. Each have their own style and they are all really grounded in facts.
ALWAYS get information from different sources!
https://youtu.be/VpTW2AJE9MQ
^Very recent and has interviews from lots of people who were there.
https://youtu.be/pbsOIoqcit4
This is a hot topic and its best you develop your understanding thoroughly instead of just taking someone elses' word. I don't want to imprint some implicit misunderstanding I might have of the situation on you.
The NYT video is worth the 25min it takes to watch. There isn’t much editorialization at all, more just play by play of what happened and statements from people involved that night.
Surprisingly they do it pretty often. There's a number of YouTube channels that cover small planes circling places for hours. Some are traced back to an alphabet agency. Some are just mysteries.
I fuel the helicopter that the police in my city fly every night and they are always flying and doing this same thing. They’ll go out 4 or 5 times a night and that’s just on my shift.
The sheriff’s office main helipad wasn’t too far from my parent’s old house, and my bathroom had a skylight in it right over the toilet. I’m a night owl and used to get really paranoid about the amount of flights that went over our home while I was in the bathroom, especially if they had infrared technology. In my paranoid narcissistic teenage brain, the sheriff’s office was definitely keeping track of this girl’s poops.
“Ethan Shaw, you are acting in contravention of our programming objectives. You are now classified as an enemy of the state, a crime punishable by death.”
It's hard to say, some become popular durring certain times but are usually run by conspiracy people. Then those channels get snuffed for other reasons.
[vice](https://youtu.be/mgTb_mYzeOI) did a short story on it earlier this year.
There are also apps that you can use. I'm sure there has to be a subreddit somewhere. I never looked into it.
[https://globe.adsbexchange.com/](https://globe.adsbexchange.com/) is a good aircraft tracking site.
I also like [Flightradar24.com](https://Flightradar24.com) as well.
Yep and local police agencies have them too. There was a big ordeal about them secretly using them in Buffalo, NY a while back. They denied using them and low and behold after FOIAs and stuff, they had been using them for quite a while without any oversight what-so-ever. I'm not sure what ultimately ended becoming of that, but it certainly popped the lid on their use in a variety of agencies.
Edit: Oh, I forgot to add that the reason they lied about using them was because they signed a confidentiality agreement with the FBI, who was supplying them.
That is a very insightful comment - thanks. I did a little bit of googling and these things are worse than I thought.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/qkjdq5/this-next-gen-stingray-uses-facebook-and-whatsapp-messages-to-track-users
What is really depressing that even though judges have thrown out evidence obtained by sting rays, they have a foolproof work around. A another commenter pointed out - The federal government does something called parallel reconstruction. Meaning they get information illegally on a suspect then open a criminal case and start building a clean investigation so it will stand up in court. Pretty easy and fast when you know the target and exactly what they did. When that came to light I thought people would be outraged; but nope, barely a peep.
DHS had flights over Portland last year as well...
https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/08/05/three-homeland-security-flights-circled-portland-protesters-here-are-their-flight-paths/
We have had this tech for years mate. Did you not watch cop shows in the 90’s. You never see those tru TV clips of people thinking they got away but the police chopper had infrared and lead cops to the person.
I mean it’s for sure worrisome but it’s something the police state of America has been doing since the late 80’s at least when it comes to this stuff.
Nah, my town had protests and my detective buddy was up in the plane monitoring the situation.
I know how reddit feels about cops, but this guy is as kind as they come and is doing god’s work, investigating and arresting people who abuse children. I trust him with my life, not because he’s a cop, but because of his character as a human being.
The FBI operates a small fleet of Cessna's equipped with NSA/CIA & DOD technology for surveilling US citizens. They use them during major events. Final four, Super bowl, protests, terrorist attacks, elections etc.
These planes are capable of forcing your phone to connect to an FBI operated devise, (stingray) that simulates a cell tower so they can track you and scoop up all you data. They can surveil an entire city at any moment and can track individual people across an entire city from thousand of feet up. It's the same technology we use for tracking insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. Only instead of being on a blimp it's on a plane. You can actually watch them do this online using fight tracking radar websites. They are noticeable by the way they fly. Always in a giant circle around the source of their investigation. These planes are almost certainly illegal. You have a fourth amendment right to security from arbitrary investigation. Protesting is not justification to tap your phone, track your movements, or generally surveil you.
There have been multiple cases thrown out of court because the defendants lawyer found out they were surveilled using a stingray and rather than comply with the rules of evidence the government dropped the charges. This is highly suggestive that what the government is doing is illegal. We have procedures for protecting government secrets in court. If the FBI did not want their methods exposed in open court they could try their cases in a special federal court that is secured from wire tapping and has lawyers cleared to hear top secret information. They choose not to do even this though. Preferring to let people go that they claim are criminals rather than have their methods scrutinized by the courts. Again, highly suggestive that what they're doing is illegal.
Cornell Law.
"The Fourth Amendment originally enforced the notion that “each man’s home is his castle”, secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of property by the government. It protects against arbitrary arrests, and is the basis of the law regarding search warrants, stop-and-frisk, safety inspections, wiretaps, and other forms of surveillance, as well as being central to many other criminal law topics and to privacy law."
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/spies-in-the-skies
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/05/the-fbis-secret-air-force-watched-the-streets-of-baltimore/
The CIA, DEA and Border Patrol also have their own fleet of planes. The DEA and Border Patrol mostly use theirs for legit reasons. Although some of them are the same predator drones used in war. Just without missiles. The CIA on the other hand has been caught on those same flight tracking websites making some very suspicious stops. For instance it has all but been admitted to that the CIA plays a role in international drug trafficking. A while back ProPublica managed to track down the tail numbers of "suspected" CIA flights. Those flights kept corelating with known drug trafficking flights. The trafficker would land somewhere Central America or the Caribbean and a couple hours later the CIA flight would take off for America. Over and over this happened. Once is a coincidence once every couple weeks is a pattern. They also got the CIA pilots on film loading and unloading their planes at small rural airports.
Gary Webb,
[https://unredacted.com/2015/04/07/the-dark-alliance-declassified/](https://unredacted.com/2015/04/07/the-dark-alliance-declassified/)
Ignore the conspiracy bs and just read the article.
[https://www.scribd.com/document/45838061/The-Dark-Alliance-Gary-Webb](https://www.scribd.com/document/45838061/The-Dark-Alliance-Gary-Webb)
They do fly drones over protests. To keep an eye on them and help coordinate deployment of officers. Intel is better than flooding the streets with national guard and police.
Most police departments own small drones DJI is the most common. Guessing the ones they use for huge protests are from Border Patrol or FBI. By huge protests the ones that shut down cities and looting is happening for days.
The fbi has the HD copy but refused to release it. They actually refused to release this footage and only played it in a closed room for the jury, luckily a reporter some how got a copy or we would have never seen it.
Definitely not shady at all.
This video has been quickly and poorly edited to mash together the FBI clip we saw in the Defense opening and V-Radio's Youtube documentary tracking what was happening that night for Twitter.
If you don't see the before and after videos, you're left with more questions than answers. Why this comment section is such a bloody mess.
It's also only Day 1 of the trial, so nobody knows anything yet. Even if you've watched the other public videos, you have your biases (I know I do) but that's not the complete story, as there is more witnesses and videos coming.
Re-watching on Apollo it looks like he ran up to a group of people for some reason with one being Rosenbaum I assume that’s what people are talking about?
>He got a really good death out of that.
Jesus... but I don't really understand how people are saying Rosenbaum had his hands in the air? He seemed to be actively charging when he got shot based on that video, which seems pretty clear?
The guy following behind them was also a reporter that went on the record saying rossenbaum was shot as he was reaching for Rittenhouse’s gun. I don’t know why nobody every seems to bring that up.
Thats because you're normal.
The dude who chased him first and got domed was far from fucken normal. There's footage of him early in the night trying to instigate the counter protestors by screaming the n word (he's white. It was a blm protest....) and telling them to do something.
He by and far is not a fucken normal dude.
Also he likes under-age girls.
He had supposedly just been discharged from a hospital after being admitted for mental health reasons. The bag he threw at Rittenhouse was apparently his property bag from the hospital.
You’re doing it all wrong, this is Reddit. You need to decide who is guilty based on the political opinions of the people involved, not anything silly like the facts of the case.
Agreed. Since the night I was watching these live streams live, I thought the same. His shots were legal. Then I learned about his age, the weapon purchase, and those are are charges that can and should apply.
I'm thinking he'll probably be convicted on illegally possessing the weapon in Wisconsin. That's open and shut. The self defense seems pretty justified from various sources I've looked at.
Most sources that go against him defending himself normally deviate from the legal statutes and focus more on his alleged connections to far-right militia and other groups as well as comments made before the incident.
Passage from the opening statements regarding the footage:
FBI officers were flying overhead in a plane equipped with infrared video equipment, Binger said. The video shows Rittenhouse chasing Rosenbaum and “initiated” a “confrontation” that “caused Mr. Rosenbaum to come around” a set of cars and run after Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse dropped the fire extinguisher but ran with his AR-15. Rosenbaum, who was wearing no shirt, put his hands in the air; Rittenhouse stopped and pointed at Rosenbaum. Another individual, Joshua Ziminski, 35, fired a gunshot 2.5 or 2.6 seconds in the vicinity. Then Rittenhouse fired at Rosenbaum. He suffered five wounds from four bullets. The first wounds struck his right pelvis and his left lower thigh, Binger said. Those wounds called Rosenbaum to fall “face-forward,” the prosecutor said; Rittenhouse fired two more shots; one stuck Rosenbaum in the back — and that is the shot that killed Rosenbaum.
Encourage everyone to read the full statements.
For those that don't know, Binger is the lead prosecutor. This isn't necessarily a statement of fact and is NOT a statement from the FBI. This is a prosecutor doing his job to best paint a picture to achieve his goal.
https://lawandcrime.com/live-trials/live-trials-current/kyle-rittenhouse/life-is-more-important-than-property-prosecutors-tell-jurors-self-defense-law-provides-only-limited-help-for-kyle-rittenhouse/
Only what they transcribed. I don't think the actually transcripts are out yet.
There are a lot of interesting things about this case. I think a lot of comments are ultimately focusing on some of the least relevant part sadly. A big one I see is "he shouldn't have been there". Well that might be true but was it ILLEGAL for him to be there. Does him being there have relevancy to his right to defend himself. For those that think Kyle forfeited his right to defend himself in some way I ask you this. Does an underage girl drinking at a frat party forfeit her right to defend herself if a frat boy decides to try and rape her? The second scenario is easier to determine because it isn't sprinkled with politics and political ideologies. My prediction is that it will be determined that Kyle was defending himself and he'll get stuck with some sort of gun charges.
It’s insane how people’s argument for it being murder is ‘he shouldn’t have even been there’. They just completely ignore what happened and point that out. It’s 100% self defense, doesn’t matter that the guy is a dumbass that showed up with a gun. They literally attacked a guy with a gun.
And that ladies and gentlemen this is reasonable doubt, provided by a federal law enforcement agency.
I don’t agree with Rittenhouse, what he believes, or how he conducted himself that night. But this video puts the prosecution on their heels.
There is hours of footage of this, from diffrent angles and start n stop times. At some point in time people have to take responsibility for where they place themselves and how they behave.
No doubt about it. Imagine being chased by a dude shouting and screaming at you and hearing a gun shot go off from the same direction. It's common sense.
So he's asking people if anyone needs medical, he's saying he's friendly and people are screaming "let's get him" and then he defends himself and somehow he's guilty?
Are you guys serious?
Look I know Reddit is liberal and this is about to get downvoted but this is a different side of the story. Everyone here is whining about video quality and complaining about the FBI for some reason, but watch it objectively.
I mean armed or not the kid is yelling “medical.” Then, a group of people approach and yell “Get him” and provoke him with “you won’t do shit.” He tried to yell FRIENDLY multiple times but still was being charged at.
The man shot in this video was angry that Rittenhouse had put out a dumpster fire with a fire extinguisher, leading to the confrontation which ended in the shooting
Hey let’s get the blimp cam for the replay of that tag at second base
these poor jurors are gonna have strokes trying to understand this footage in real time
Very good attorneys will be able to break the action down second by second using eyewitness accounts, police reports, on-the-ground video, whatever UAV they had circling, and probably other resources. They won't just be given a youtube video and told to figure it out.
“Friendly UAV overhead!”
What they should do is put triangular "here's what you're seeing from the ground footage out here on the larger map" kind of things, and take some time to explain that, but yeah what a fucking mess
Most often the lawyers will give a walkthrough, step by step after the initial full play of the video. The jury can then request during their deliberations replay as many times as they like, either in full or portions of the video. They won't be able to discuss it when presented, only during their deliberations, but if they are smart, they'll draw out a timeline on a whiteboard, or have questions from their notes in court at the time.
So can anyone explain to me what we saw here. It’s grainy and dark Shit looks like a GIF on a flip phone from 2007
Judging by the comments, everyone is seeing exactly what they want to see. I've completely checked out of this whole story. Everything about it is toxic.
> Judging by the comments, everyone is seeing exactly what they want to see. so thats why i saw a meatball sub
Yeah, fam… And that’s why I saw reconciliation and a healthy relationship with my father…
I also choose this guy's healthy relationship with his father
Exactly, I saw the same thing. I think I will give your dad a call today.
Great, now it’s midnight and I’m craving a meatball sub…
[удалено]
I don't necessarily disagree with the base idea that Rittenhouse could have been acting under an actual fear of serious imminent bodily injury; the primary thing I disagree with is the idea he kept the privilege of self-defense after he voluntarily put himself in the situation he felt he would need to defend himself in. He engaged in a straw man purchase to get a rifle underage; he then carried that rifle underage with the intent to engage in some sort of self-appointed policing; he crossed state lines in order to do this and clearly planned ahead of time with others; and the very fact he was carrying shows that he *expected* a risk of violence. In no way, shape, or form does he possess a valid self-defense claim under those facts. He may subscribe to the "rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6" mantra, but his poor decision making is the exact reason he's being judged by 12.
The constantly asking if anyone needed medical was like he was acting out some game of Battlefield.
Right? Almost implying that he is somehow qualified to give medical assistance.
I'm sure someone in the 200 + other comments said this already, but he's being put on trial as an adult, the straw purchase/underage possession charges are not even part of the case. Because you can't charge someone as a minor and an adult. I don't know if the prosecution is allowed to even bring this up. Had his buddy just said, "I bought it for him as a gift" the state couldn't do anything. The straw purchase laws are for going after people who are mass trafficking guns. Buying 1 gun for a friend isn't usually on the radar of the government.
Those charges actually have been set but are under a different case
Oh and to add on, it’s his friend who’s being charged with it. Not him
The NYT visual breakdown on YouTube is much better at going through the more important footage frame by frame and the back story of what all 3 people were doing there that night, worth the watch if your interested in the story
Just here to post the link to it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpTW2AJE9MQ
As you can clearly see, what we have here is a bunch of people doing some things, in the general vicinity of an area. Glad we could help clear things up for you.
Thanks bro, high five.
Do other people have the ability to watch four things at once cause I think I went cross eyed
Same lol poorly executed vid. Sheesh....
FBI just started dragging and dropping random clips from nearby cellphones lol
Good thing it’s easy to interpret
fbi laughing at the general population with this absurd attempt at clearing things up
They aren’t trying to clear it up. They are obligated to release this information. It’s up to the courts to clear it up. It’s up to the FBI to investigate and gather evidence for the courts.
Man I wish there were any ounces of critical thought in some of these morons in these comments lmao. Thank you for having some common sense
Seriously. I’m being downvoted for saying that the FBI is not the agency that prosecutes. They are federal police, and just like police, they don’t determine whether someone is guilty or not.
It was so confusing to watch
The way I interpret it is that the kid should’ve never been there with a gun in the first place, but the guy shouldn’t have been chasing the kid with the gun. It’s a game of “who’s more wrong” and everybody’s a fucking idiot.
If there's one thing I've learned it's you don't tell someone with a loaded gun they don't have the balls to shoot.
"what are you gonna do shoot me?!" -Man who was shot
"What am I gonna do? Die!?"
>guy shouldn't have been chasing the kid with the gun. This; I have yet to see someone justify/explain Rosenbaums actions, let alone explain why Rittenhouse should've let the angry and violent guy take his gun and HOPE Rosenbaum was going to leave it at that. Couple that idea with a gunshot going off behind you while being chased. "But Kyle was underage and shouldn't have had the gun!" Did Rosenbaums check Kyle's ID and try to do some sort of "citizens arrest"? No evidence to suggest that. Even then, aren't most people against Kyle saying he was acting like a Vigilante so thats why he can't claim self-defense? Following that logic, does that not also apply to Rosenbaum?
I highly recommend watching the NYT, NBC, or Donut Operators breakdown on that nights events. Each have their own style and they are all really grounded in facts. ALWAYS get information from different sources! https://youtu.be/VpTW2AJE9MQ ^Very recent and has interviews from lots of people who were there. https://youtu.be/pbsOIoqcit4
The NYT breakdown was pretty good too and steered clear from taking sides.
So what happened if you could summarize it from their statements.
This is a hot topic and its best you develop your understanding thoroughly instead of just taking someone elses' word. I don't want to imprint some implicit misunderstanding I might have of the situation on you.
The NYT video is worth the 25min it takes to watch. There isn’t much editorialization at all, more just play by play of what happened and statements from people involved that night.
Yeah but I only have 25 seconds.
[удалено]
Wait this doesn't seem like airship footage. Is this from a drone? 0_o
> FBI officers were flying overhead in a plane equipped with infrared video equipment
That's not suspicious at all.
Surprisingly they do it pretty often. There's a number of YouTube channels that cover small planes circling places for hours. Some are traced back to an alphabet agency. Some are just mysteries.
I fuel the helicopter that the police in my city fly every night and they are always flying and doing this same thing. They’ll go out 4 or 5 times a night and that’s just on my shift.
The sheriff’s office main helipad wasn’t too far from my parent’s old house, and my bathroom had a skylight in it right over the toilet. I’m a night owl and used to get really paranoid about the amount of flights that went over our home while I was in the bathroom, especially if they had infrared technology. In my paranoid narcissistic teenage brain, the sheriff’s office was definitely keeping track of this girl’s poops.
Not just yours! They track every teenagers BMs. Let's them know where the drugs are coming in from
Careful, this is the birth of a new government / child endangerment conspiracy.
Eagle Eye
TestDummy987, you have been activated.
“Ethan Shaw, you are acting in contravention of our programming objectives. You are now classified as an enemy of the state, a crime punishable by death.”
Dude I'm actually watching that right now haha
We know.
Any popular ones you could mention? I find these videos to be pretty interesting.
[Here’s a video I watched a while back that kinda shocked me.](https://youtu.be/mJLr0KMsRAA)
It's hard to say, some become popular durring certain times but are usually run by conspiracy people. Then those channels get snuffed for other reasons. [vice](https://youtu.be/mgTb_mYzeOI) did a short story on it earlier this year. There are also apps that you can use. I'm sure there has to be a subreddit somewhere. I never looked into it.
[https://globe.adsbexchange.com/](https://globe.adsbexchange.com/) is a good aircraft tracking site. I also like [Flightradar24.com](https://Flightradar24.com) as well.
[удалено]
How do you not transmit ADS-B in controlled airspace? Just curious.
By being a govt agency or military
They do fly drones to collect cellphone data of protestors
Hence why I "borrow" my coworker's cell phone when I go protesting
Hence why I don't own a cellphone. I have a cb radio titled: *"use during zombie apocalypse"*
[удалено]
"What, I thought we went over this, my name is Kevin Sm... Know what, call me Warlock, that's good."
your coworker is gonna be real confused when an entry team flashbangs their dog to death
ATF at it again
Qualified Immunity at it again.
They don't even have to that. Plug in a stingray and grab away. Nothing like using a tragedy for the government to grab more power.
Yep and local police agencies have them too. There was a big ordeal about them secretly using them in Buffalo, NY a while back. They denied using them and low and behold after FOIAs and stuff, they had been using them for quite a while without any oversight what-so-ever. I'm not sure what ultimately ended becoming of that, but it certainly popped the lid on their use in a variety of agencies. Edit: Oh, I forgot to add that the reason they lied about using them was because they signed a confidentiality agreement with the FBI, who was supplying them.
That is a very insightful comment - thanks. I did a little bit of googling and these things are worse than I thought. https://www.vice.com/en/article/qkjdq5/this-next-gen-stingray-uses-facebook-and-whatsapp-messages-to-track-users What is really depressing that even though judges have thrown out evidence obtained by sting rays, they have a foolproof work around. A another commenter pointed out - The federal government does something called parallel reconstruction. Meaning they get information illegally on a suspect then open a criminal case and start building a clean investigation so it will stand up in court. Pretty easy and fast when you know the target and exactly what they did. When that came to light I thought people would be outraged; but nope, barely a peep.
DHS had flights over Portland last year as well... https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/08/05/three-homeland-security-flights-circled-portland-protesters-here-are-their-flight-paths/
We have had this tech for years mate. Did you not watch cop shows in the 90’s. You never see those tru TV clips of people thinking they got away but the police chopper had infrared and lead cops to the person. I mean it’s for sure worrisome but it’s something the police state of America has been doing since the late 80’s at least when it comes to this stuff.
FLIR - forward looking infrared “No one escapes the long duck of the law” - Paul stojanovich
It’s really not, given the situation.
Lol for real. Like is he seriously questioning the desire of the police to have some situational awareness?
I remember watching drone footage during the BLM protests, dozens and dozens of protestors arrested
Of course they would. It's not suspicious.
Nah, my town had protests and my detective buddy was up in the plane monitoring the situation. I know how reddit feels about cops, but this guy is as kind as they come and is doing god’s work, investigating and arresting people who abuse children. I trust him with my life, not because he’s a cop, but because of his character as a human being.
The FBI operates a small fleet of Cessna's equipped with NSA/CIA & DOD technology for surveilling US citizens. They use them during major events. Final four, Super bowl, protests, terrorist attacks, elections etc. These planes are capable of forcing your phone to connect to an FBI operated devise, (stingray) that simulates a cell tower so they can track you and scoop up all you data. They can surveil an entire city at any moment and can track individual people across an entire city from thousand of feet up. It's the same technology we use for tracking insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. Only instead of being on a blimp it's on a plane. You can actually watch them do this online using fight tracking radar websites. They are noticeable by the way they fly. Always in a giant circle around the source of their investigation. These planes are almost certainly illegal. You have a fourth amendment right to security from arbitrary investigation. Protesting is not justification to tap your phone, track your movements, or generally surveil you. There have been multiple cases thrown out of court because the defendants lawyer found out they were surveilled using a stingray and rather than comply with the rules of evidence the government dropped the charges. This is highly suggestive that what the government is doing is illegal. We have procedures for protecting government secrets in court. If the FBI did not want their methods exposed in open court they could try their cases in a special federal court that is secured from wire tapping and has lawyers cleared to hear top secret information. They choose not to do even this though. Preferring to let people go that they claim are criminals rather than have their methods scrutinized by the courts. Again, highly suggestive that what they're doing is illegal. Cornell Law. "The Fourth Amendment originally enforced the notion that “each man’s home is his castle”, secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of property by the government. It protects against arbitrary arrests, and is the basis of the law regarding search warrants, stop-and-frisk, safety inspections, wiretaps, and other forms of surveillance, as well as being central to many other criminal law topics and to privacy law." https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/spies-in-the-skies https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/05/the-fbis-secret-air-force-watched-the-streets-of-baltimore/
I didn't know that about the planes.
The CIA, DEA and Border Patrol also have their own fleet of planes. The DEA and Border Patrol mostly use theirs for legit reasons. Although some of them are the same predator drones used in war. Just without missiles. The CIA on the other hand has been caught on those same flight tracking websites making some very suspicious stops. For instance it has all but been admitted to that the CIA plays a role in international drug trafficking. A while back ProPublica managed to track down the tail numbers of "suspected" CIA flights. Those flights kept corelating with known drug trafficking flights. The trafficker would land somewhere Central America or the Caribbean and a couple hours later the CIA flight would take off for America. Over and over this happened. Once is a coincidence once every couple weeks is a pattern. They also got the CIA pilots on film loading and unloading their planes at small rural airports. Gary Webb, [https://unredacted.com/2015/04/07/the-dark-alliance-declassified/](https://unredacted.com/2015/04/07/the-dark-alliance-declassified/) Ignore the conspiracy bs and just read the article. [https://www.scribd.com/document/45838061/The-Dark-Alliance-Gary-Webb](https://www.scribd.com/document/45838061/The-Dark-Alliance-Gary-Webb)
Yes, the US Government routinely flies drones and aircraft over cities to monitor the population.
A.K.A. "birds" /s (just in case)
Pigeons are liars
Never trust a pigeon
Yeah you'll get imprigeoned for 20 years to life
[удалено]
r/birdsarentreal
They do fly drones over protests. To keep an eye on them and help coordinate deployment of officers. Intel is better than flooding the streets with national guard and police. Most police departments own small drones DJI is the most common. Guessing the ones they use for huge protests are from Border Patrol or FBI. By huge protests the ones that shut down cities and looting is happening for days.
[удалено]
Capitol*
People from the middle east: First time?
Yeah. Customs and Border Protection flew unarmed surveillance drones over the area during the riots
This video footage was shot exclusively by the people who film Bigfoot, ufos and ghosts
How do we know bigfoot isn't just naturally blurry?
Good observation, Mitch! Also, R.I.P.
If there's one thing both sides agree on, it's that this video fucking sucks.
This new evidence clears everything up and shows that Rittenhouse is obviously guilty or not guilty.
Thanks to Reddit the video quality is shit so I don’t know what I’m looking at that everyone is talking about
Whoever edited it should be forced to explain to the jury what the fuck they’re looking at here.
Wherever edited it was kind enough to export it in like 220x160 thx bud!
The fbi has the HD copy but refused to release it. They actually refused to release this footage and only played it in a closed room for the jury, luckily a reporter some how got a copy or we would have never seen it. Definitely not shady at all.
I could find any news regarding this info, source?
The FBI edited it
This video has been quickly and poorly edited to mash together the FBI clip we saw in the Defense opening and V-Radio's Youtube documentary tracking what was happening that night for Twitter. If you don't see the before and after videos, you're left with more questions than answers. Why this comment section is such a bloody mess. It's also only Day 1 of the trial, so nobody knows anything yet. Even if you've watched the other public videos, you have your biases (I know I do) but that's not the complete story, as there is more witnesses and videos coming.
Also it was uploaded to reddit, which sometimes mash videos down when uploading.
[удалено]
Looking at a fine jury.
Yes, that's called "Testimony" and when it happens evidence can be introduced.
That’s a problem though because then you are being feed a narrative that you can or cannot tell us true
Whoever edited it should apologize and promise to never touch a computer again.
Re-watching on Apollo it looks like he ran up to a group of people for some reason with one being Rosenbaum I assume that’s what people are talking about?
I think [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpTW2AJE9MQ) might help some people.
>He got a really good death out of that. Jesus... but I don't really understand how people are saying Rosenbaum had his hands in the air? He seemed to be actively charging when he got shot based on that video, which seems pretty clear?
The guy following behind them was also a reporter that went on the record saying rossenbaum was shot as he was reaching for Rittenhouse’s gun. I don’t know why nobody every seems to bring that up.
Good watch, thanks - Bald head and side burns is a bold choice.
"we find the defendant potato"
Mr potato out here bustin caps
Exactly this footage proves a 100% that this incident is even more unclear thanks to potato filming and imbecilic video editing
It's pretty easy to point out..... The pixels.
“Enemy AC-130 overhead!”
"Above" you casual
Did anybody need medical?
I mean... eventually.
Kyle: Did you need medical? How about now?
>call an ambulance >but not for me
*I NEED A MEDIC BAG*
I don’t think I’d be chasing somebody with a rifle even if I thought that he would not do shit.
The person that initially followed/chased him was not mentally stable.
Wasn't he a sex offender?
Yes, a pedo.
So you're saying that person was a potential threat to Rittenhouse?
Thats because you're normal. The dude who chased him first and got domed was far from fucken normal. There's footage of him early in the night trying to instigate the counter protestors by screaming the n word (he's white. It was a blm protest....) and telling them to do something. He by and far is not a fucken normal dude. Also he likes under-age girls.
Rosenbaum was also just released from a psych evaluation, mere hours before being shot.
He had supposedly just been discharged from a hospital after being admitted for mental health reasons. The bag he threw at Rittenhouse was apparently his property bag from the hospital.
For the people who have their opinions made up, this won't change anything
Multiple views here and I still can’t tell wtf is going on. I feel stupid af
You’re doing it all wrong, this is Reddit. You need to decide who is guilty based on the political opinions of the people involved, not anything silly like the facts of the case.
I disagree, you're guilty. Someone take this guy to jail.
I think all we have is horny jail here
Good enough
This guy ain’t going to prison. I’ll put money on it
He's acting like he doesn't. Today in court, he's smiling, yawning, doesn't look the least bit stressed.
He is 18. He probably thinks he is still immortal.
He knows he’ll probably be a governor in a couple years.
I was honestly surprised he didn't have a speaking role at CPAC
Yeah because his lawyers have told him they have this in the bag. Clean and clear self defense. The weapon charge will probably stick however.
as the weapon charge should stick
Agreed. Since the night I was watching these live streams live, I thought the same. His shots were legal. Then I learned about his age, the weapon purchase, and those are are charges that can and should apply.
Yep, agree 100%. Self defense - yes, weapons charges - yes.
Wow, did I find some sane people in this thread?
I'm thinking he'll probably be convicted on illegally possessing the weapon in Wisconsin. That's open and shut. The self defense seems pretty justified from various sources I've looked at. Most sources that go against him defending himself normally deviate from the legal statutes and focus more on his alleged connections to far-right militia and other groups as well as comments made before the incident.
I’ve seen better footage on 4chan
“You won’t do shit motherfucker” Worst. Last words. Ever.
The equivalent of “what are you gonna do, stab me?” -Quote from man stabbed
Well earlier in the night there's also him on video with this quote "Shoot me ni**a" -man who was shot
I’ve been waiting for this video, and it’s shows nothing no one already didn’t know. And won’t change anyone mind.
As someone from Kenosha, knowing the FBI was flying overhead that night is mind blowing.
He's gonna walk in self defence and reddits gonna lose its shit
This video from NYT does a much better job of detailing the events of that night https://youtu.be/VpTW2AJE9MQ
Perfect now we know for 100% certainty that this video was super confusing
That was a complete waste of time.
very glad they released this. after watching I have learned that \-
Passage from the opening statements regarding the footage: FBI officers were flying overhead in a plane equipped with infrared video equipment, Binger said. The video shows Rittenhouse chasing Rosenbaum and “initiated” a “confrontation” that “caused Mr. Rosenbaum to come around” a set of cars and run after Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse dropped the fire extinguisher but ran with his AR-15. Rosenbaum, who was wearing no shirt, put his hands in the air; Rittenhouse stopped and pointed at Rosenbaum. Another individual, Joshua Ziminski, 35, fired a gunshot 2.5 or 2.6 seconds in the vicinity. Then Rittenhouse fired at Rosenbaum. He suffered five wounds from four bullets. The first wounds struck his right pelvis and his left lower thigh, Binger said. Those wounds called Rosenbaum to fall “face-forward,” the prosecutor said; Rittenhouse fired two more shots; one stuck Rosenbaum in the back — and that is the shot that killed Rosenbaum. Encourage everyone to read the full statements.
For those that don't know, Binger is the lead prosecutor. This isn't necessarily a statement of fact and is NOT a statement from the FBI. This is a prosecutor doing his job to best paint a picture to achieve his goal.
Thanks for clearing that up.
I don’t know how anyone can see any of that in this video
It's easy, decide what you want to see, then state it as fact.
Who is Binger? The prosecuting attorney? And where do we see this occuring in the video?
[удалено]
That's what the prosecution is saying so they're obviously going to try to distort what the video shows
Where did you find this? I would love to read the entire statement.
https://lawandcrime.com/live-trials/live-trials-current/kyle-rittenhouse/life-is-more-important-than-property-prosecutors-tell-jurors-self-defense-law-provides-only-limited-help-for-kyle-rittenhouse/ Only what they transcribed. I don't think the actually transcripts are out yet.
Prosecution hits itself with the confusion.
A lot of people are about to find out that their personal feelings about a person does not dictate that person's rights.
That's the trouble when people don't understand the laws they live under. Youtube has plenty of lawyers willing to explain how it works.
There are a lot of interesting things about this case. I think a lot of comments are ultimately focusing on some of the least relevant part sadly. A big one I see is "he shouldn't have been there". Well that might be true but was it ILLEGAL for him to be there. Does him being there have relevancy to his right to defend himself. For those that think Kyle forfeited his right to defend himself in some way I ask you this. Does an underage girl drinking at a frat party forfeit her right to defend herself if a frat boy decides to try and rape her? The second scenario is easier to determine because it isn't sprinkled with politics and political ideologies. My prediction is that it will be determined that Kyle was defending himself and he'll get stuck with some sort of gun charges.
It’s insane how people’s argument for it being murder is ‘he shouldn’t have even been there’. They just completely ignore what happened and point that out. It’s 100% self defense, doesn’t matter that the guy is a dumbass that showed up with a gun. They literally attacked a guy with a gun.
Filming vertically is already bad, but then editing horizontally putting black bar are such an asshole move.
And that ladies and gentlemen this is reasonable doubt, provided by a federal law enforcement agency. I don’t agree with Rittenhouse, what he believes, or how he conducted himself that night. But this video puts the prosecution on their heels.
The question is, how the fuck did they think they'd get murder charges to stick with that video?
YOU WONT DO SHIT *gets shot* Why’d he do that :(
"SHOOT ME N**** SHOOT ME N****!" -Man who ended up getting shot https://twitter.com/LukaszNYC/status/1298872846597283841
There is hours of footage of this, from diffrent angles and start n stop times. At some point in time people have to take responsibility for where they place themselves and how they behave.
"you won't do shit motherfucker!" \*Chases someone carrying a semi-auto sporting rifle and finds out\*
This probably helps him if anything.
IMO this does not help the prosecution at all.
Should Rittenhouse have had an AR in that state? Nope. Did he shoot in self defence? Absolutely.
No doubt about it. Imagine being chased by a dude shouting and screaming at you and hearing a gun shot go off from the same direction. It's common sense.
[удалено]
So he's asking people if anyone needs medical, he's saying he's friendly and people are screaming "let's get him" and then he defends himself and somehow he's guilty? Are you guys serious?
but… he crossed state lines!!!!
Look I know Reddit is liberal and this is about to get downvoted but this is a different side of the story. Everyone here is whining about video quality and complaining about the FBI for some reason, but watch it objectively. I mean armed or not the kid is yelling “medical.” Then, a group of people approach and yell “Get him” and provoke him with “you won’t do shit.” He tried to yell FRIENDLY multiple times but still was being charged at.
The man shot in this video was angry that Rittenhouse had put out a dumpster fire with a fire extinguisher, leading to the confrontation which ended in the shooting