What is amusing to me is that Schroeder was actually the type of judge that the left has been screaming for, for decades. They have wanted judges who don’t let police and prosecutors trample on defendants’ rights, as has happened for so long.
Just not for this defendant, apparently.
Just not for this defendant, apparently.
December 15, 2025 at 12:12 AM
What is amusing to me is that Schroeder was actually the type of judge that the left has been screaming for, for decades. They have wanted judges who don’t let police and prosecutors trample on defendants’ rights, as has happened for so long.
Just not for this defendant, apparently.
Just not for this defendant, apparently.
The other thing to note is that the defendant did not choose the jurors, he randomly selected the six alternates. Permitting the defendant to pull the numbers themselves randomly from a blind tumbler is a custom that Judge Schroeder had used in his courtroom for twenty years.
December 14, 2025 at 6:16 PM
The other thing to note is that the defendant did not choose the jurors, he randomly selected the six alternates. Permitting the defendant to pull the numbers themselves randomly from a blind tumbler is a custom that Judge Schroeder had used in his courtroom for twenty years.
Defendants typically enjoy more protection against potential prejudice than complainants or witnesses, for obvious reasons. Use of the term 'victim' pre-adjudication, particularly where the defendant was relying on self-defense, would have been potentially prejudicial. It is not uncommon either.
December 14, 2025 at 6:14 PM
Defendants typically enjoy more protection against potential prejudice than complainants or witnesses, for obvious reasons. Use of the term 'victim' pre-adjudication, particularly where the defendant was relying on self-defense, would have been potentially prejudicial. It is not uncommon either.
The judge was a disgrace because he had Lee Greenwood’s “God Bless the USA” as his ringtone?
What is the world coming to? 🙄
What is the world coming to? 🙄
December 14, 2025 at 4:19 PM
The judge was a disgrace because he had Lee Greenwood’s “God Bless the USA” as his ringtone?
What is the world coming to? 🙄
What is the world coming to? 🙄
The cops torched the businesses and beat up the furniture store owner? That’s your claim?
December 14, 2025 at 10:14 AM
The cops torched the businesses and beat up the furniture store owner? That’s your claim?
So what you are claiming is that there was no damage at all in Kenosha? 😆 You’re a fucking bullshitter.
The shootings were on video, witnessed and he admitted to them. The only thing for the jury to do was to give their judgment on whether the shootings were lawful self-defense or murder.
The shootings were on video, witnessed and he admitted to them. The only thing for the jury to do was to give their judgment on whether the shootings were lawful self-defense or murder.
December 14, 2025 at 10:13 AM
So what you are claiming is that there was no damage at all in Kenosha? 😆 You’re a fucking bullshitter.
The shootings were on video, witnessed and he admitted to them. The only thing for the jury to do was to give their judgment on whether the shootings were lawful self-defense or murder.
The shootings were on video, witnessed and he admitted to them. The only thing for the jury to do was to give their judgment on whether the shootings were lawful self-defense or murder.
You have no idea who the jurors were. None have ever identified themselves nor spoken publicly at length about the trial or their verdicts. The facts are that the crime of murder was judged not to have been committed, hence the guy walked out of court a free man. Cope.
December 14, 2025 at 10:09 AM
You have no idea who the jurors were. None have ever identified themselves nor spoken publicly at length about the trial or their verdicts. The facts are that the crime of murder was judged not to have been committed, hence the guy walked out of court a free man. Cope.
The images are photoshopped? You are delusional. You can google any news source you want about the 2020 Kenosha unrest and you will find such images. Where is the evidence that he gloated about murdering protesters the night before?
December 14, 2025 at 12:35 AM
The images are photoshopped? You are delusional. You can google any news source you want about the 2020 Kenosha unrest and you will find such images. Where is the evidence that he gloated about murdering protesters the night before?
The facts and the law dictated whether the crime of murder had been committed, or whether the defendant‘s belief such force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself, was reasonable. That is all the jury had to agree with to find him not guilty. And they did. 🤷🏻♂️
December 14, 2025 at 12:30 AM
The facts and the law dictated whether the crime of murder had been committed, or whether the defendant‘s belief such force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself, was reasonable. That is all the jury had to agree with to find him not guilty. And they did. 🤷🏻♂️
Those were the reported estimates. Justified is why neither Rittenhouse nor the officer who shot Jacob Blake were ever convicted of a crime. Cope harder.
December 14, 2025 at 12:26 AM
Those were the reported estimates. Justified is why neither Rittenhouse nor the officer who shot Jacob Blake were ever convicted of a crime. Cope harder.
Were the circumstances the same?
December 13, 2025 at 8:34 PM
Were the circumstances the same?
It was the third night of rioting which caused $51m in damage to Kenosha. There was no evidence at all to support this notion that he was "hunting". That is just emotive nonsense. His belief the force used, being necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself, was reasonable.
December 13, 2025 at 8:32 PM
It was the third night of rioting which caused $51m in damage to Kenosha. There was no evidence at all to support this notion that he was "hunting". That is just emotive nonsense. His belief the force used, being necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself, was reasonable.
It wasn't Rittenhouse who had torched the place or assaulted business owners. nypost.com/2020/08/26/e...
December 13, 2025 at 10:07 AM
It wasn't Rittenhouse who had torched the place or assaulted business owners. nypost.com/2020/08/26/e...
Were the circumstances the same?
December 12, 2025 at 11:19 PM
Were the circumstances the same?
With respect (and I mean that genuinely as you have been a civil and courteous poster), carrying a gun for protection is not an automatic indicator that you intend to murder someone. Precaution should not be confused with premeditation.
December 12, 2025 at 8:45 PM
With respect (and I mean that genuinely as you have been a civil and courteous poster), carrying a gun for protection is not an automatic indicator that you intend to murder someone. Precaution should not be confused with premeditation.
Why did he bring one? Because it was the third night of violent rioting at which business owners had already been assaulted and their livelihoods torched. There were a lot of people, including leftist protesters, armed with rifles and other firearms for their own protection.
December 12, 2025 at 8:43 PM
Why did he bring one? Because it was the third night of violent rioting at which business owners had already been assaulted and their livelihoods torched. There were a lot of people, including leftist protesters, armed with rifles and other firearms for their own protection.
Which country would consider it unreasonable to shoot a violent rioter who ambushed and then grabbed the firearm of somebody they had earlier threatened that they would kill?
December 12, 2025 at 8:18 PM
Which country would consider it unreasonable to shoot a violent rioter who ambushed and then grabbed the firearm of somebody they had earlier threatened that they would kill?
He stood in front of a jury who gave their judgment on whether his conduct fell within the boundaries of self-defense, as defined by state law, or was unlawful murder. He only had to reasonably believe that the force used was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.
December 12, 2025 at 8:08 PM
He stood in front of a jury who gave their judgment on whether his conduct fell within the boundaries of self-defense, as defined by state law, or was unlawful murder. He only had to reasonably believe that the force used was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.
“I’m sorry that I didn’t let those guys kill me”
?
?
December 12, 2025 at 12:29 AM
“I’m sorry that I didn’t let those guys kill me”
?
?
When did that happen then? He shot Rosenbaum after Rosenbaum chased him across the lot at 63rd street, and then shot Huber and Grosskreutz whilst lay in the street during his attempt to run along Sheridan Road to reach the police who were stationed at the corner of 60th. 🤔
December 12, 2025 at 12:26 AM
When did that happen then? He shot Rosenbaum after Rosenbaum chased him across the lot at 63rd street, and then shot Huber and Grosskreutz whilst lay in the street during his attempt to run along Sheridan Road to reach the police who were stationed at the corner of 60th. 🤔
PS - he went to a riot and tried to protect a used car business owned by two Indian brothers from being utterly destroyed by violent rioters. Maybe you and I have different ideas of what constitutes "fascist values".
December 11, 2025 at 6:44 PM
PS - he went to a riot and tried to protect a used car business owned by two Indian brothers from being utterly destroyed by violent rioters. Maybe you and I have different ideas of what constitutes "fascist values".
It was self-defense if his belief the force used, being necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself, was reasonable. That isn't an opinion, it is just a fact, and it is really the only pertinent fact.
December 11, 2025 at 6:40 PM
It was self-defense if his belief the force used, being necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself, was reasonable. That isn't an opinion, it is just a fact, and it is really the only pertinent fact.
Because a lawful use of force in self-defense is not the crime of murder.
December 11, 2025 at 10:18 AM
Because a lawful use of force in self-defense is not the crime of murder.
The way Wisconsin law works, with the state having to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt once the matter is raised, there was never any realistic prospect of a criminal conviction. The videos and witness testimonies were almost exclusively all in his favor. 🤷🏻♂️
December 11, 2025 at 8:45 AM
The way Wisconsin law works, with the state having to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt once the matter is raised, there was never any realistic prospect of a criminal conviction. The videos and witness testimonies were almost exclusively all in his favor. 🤷🏻♂️