CASED CLOSED: Kyle Rittenhouse Attacker Admits Kyle Didn’t Shoot Until Gun Was Pointed At Him [WATCH]
By: Clayton Keirns
![CASED CLOSED: Kyle Rittenhouse Attacker Admits Kyle Didn’t Shoot Until Gun Was Pointed At Him [WATCH]](http://thenewstalkers.com/group_discuss/image/discuss_image/14507/xxxlarge/_v=63f541636617169 "CASED CLOSED: Kyle Rittenhouse Attacker Admits Kyle Didn’t Shoot Until Gun Was Pointed At Him [WATCH]")
What a non surprise! Case closed indeed. Freedom is coming soon.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The left has repeatedly slandered Kyle Rittenhouse as a “murderer” despite evidence that he was simply acting in self defense last summer during the ANTIFA riots. Now, Kyle’s attacker Gage Grosskreutz just gave the defense a rock solid admission that should lead to this case being easily dismissed.
“With your arms up in the air, he never fired, right?” asked the defense attorney.
“Correct,” Grosskreutz responded.
“It wasn’t until you pointed your gun at him, advanced on him, with your gun and your hands pointed at him, that he fired?”, Kyle’s attorney pressed.
“Correct,” Grosskreutz responded again.
Watch the shocking exchange below:
In response, the prosecution attorney face-palmed in disbelief, knowing that their case has completely imploded:
This is still a developing story. Stay tuned for more…
Tags
Who is online
61 visitors
I love the prosecutors reaction.. just hanging his head dejectedly.
Travesty this case was ever brought.
Exactly…It was as woke a case as there ever was. The DA had to have known this upfront and withheld it. He should be sanctioned.
Didn't the prosecution question their damn witness ahead of time? You know simple questions like "Did you aim your weapon at him first"?
What a bunch of dumbasses. People need to lose their jobs over this on the prosecution side.
As for the left; they can now howl at wind for a few days. I am surprised the judge didn't call the prosecution to the bench and give them a "Are you fucking serious?!"
No kidding!!!
cool. turn him loose.
Official acquittal first…
he'll be a lot safer in prison.
What does that mean?
an interesting question [deleted]
I have no idea why Rittenhouse would be safer in prison. Please elaborate.
have xx explain it to you.
Explain it yourself! It’s your comment after all
I’m curious too.
"he'll be a lot safer in prison."
with all his fellow republicans/alleged conservatives
Score so far Rittenhouse 3, Antifa 0. Rittenhouse should move to a better State he could get Elected to Congress, he could sit near the squad maybe they'll get violent and give Rittenhouse a chance to do what he does best.
So you're admitting that this young conservative Rittenhouse kills innocent people?
The squad getting violent?
WTF?
Whether the murder case was winnable or not, the prosecutors had to charge Rittenhouse. He is not law enforcement, he was an unauthorized vigilante who brought a gun to a protest march, and used it. He is not an innocent victim. The specific circumstances of the shootings may not support a conviction, but he is guilty of taking the law into his own hands.
Hopefully he has a long life ahead of him and he can change from his bad ways as a boy.
Fallacy 1
Fallacy 2
Fallacy 3
Excused for pointing out false information. I'm going to have to remember that next time I get the notice.
Nah, he's a fine little republican thug/killer in training. He won't change his ways.
So what were all of those far leftist extremists doing at a supposedly peaceful protest with weapons- including handguns? Why aren't you asking them that? Who invited them?
Or are you claiming the right to peacefully assemble is only guaranteed to those on the left?
The prosecution screwed the pooch; and they know it. They deserve to lose their jobs for bringing charges when they knew damn well the evidence supported Rittenhouse. The prosecutor literally face palming is classic as their witness states he started the entire incident (what moron pulls a gun and points it at someone- but then claims "I had no intention of using it"); his career should be face palmed as well.
Now a bunch of far left extremists will get their undies in a bunch when Rittenhouse is acquitted and released. Want to lay odds they will conduct another protest similar to the one that caused this incident; and that many of the participants will be the same people as last time?
They better not take such events to smaller city small town America if they dare to resume their looting and riots.
Well, we can guarantee the two leftists thug/killer in training he rightfully took out won't be in attendance.
What would you do about it?
Me? Nothing. On the other hand there are others who are armed who would stop such nonsense cold in rural and small town America. Had Antifa showed up where I live there would have been 100 men out there protecting the community not just one.
So they would just kill innocent protesters at random? Plus this little turd wasn't protecting anything.
That clearly did not happen there and would not here. There were two peaceful BLM events here. Had Antifa showed up to one and started breaking things it would have been open season on them and the community would have supported running them back to Portland in any manner needed. As to what really happened in Kenosha:
No one here would kill innocent nonviolent orderly peaceful protesters. Absolutely zero rioting, arson, looting would be tolerated though even if it takes deadly force to prevent/stop it.
Rittenhouse was repeatedly chased and attacked and all that he did was done in self defense.
If you ever need an example of why the MSM is trash, look at these headlines for Grosskreutz's testimony:
Grossgrkrutz was caught lying multiple times and torpedoed the prosecution's case so badly the prosecutor was left holding his head in his hands after he admitted he was moving towards Rittenhouse with his gun pointed at him when Rittenhouse shot him.
Yet if you read the headlines, you'd think he helped the prosecution. And now if he is, as expected, acquitted, liberals will be shocked and outraged, because of the perception the media fed them.
the only thing i have seen in my life that has gone down faster than this prosecutors case ( even with self sabotaging witnesses) , is a hooker on the docks during fleet week .
That's not funny at all and I noticed on the other thread about this that you just continue to make up shit as you go
Rittenhouse is a killer and no one will ever convince those with any sense, otherwise.
Seems the law doesn't agree with you. Nor the witnesses/alleged victims.
sure glad that ones in the iggy bin .
Rittenhouse is a killer and no one will ever convince those with any lack of sense, otherwise
Fixed it for you. Now it's more factual.
You would need to know/provide a fact to prove otherwise.
I submit 8 as proof that those with a lack of sense just don't get it.
See 8.2.1
Somebody has to keep it straight or they'll have us believe the court of public idiots.
We know who the failure is - he still keeps claiming he won. You know, trumpturd.
WTF are you talking about?
[deleted]
Yes, a justified use of deadly force in self-defense.
Nope, he's just a little thug republican killer in training - not self defense.
This little republican in training is no victim - he's a thug killer.
“…he's a thug killer. “
THAT’s what everybody has been trying to tell you.
Thanks for acknowledging that Rittenhouse is a little republican thug killer.
Rittenhouse is a republican in training/alleged conservative - killer thug.
I wouldn't expect the people glorifying this killer Rittenhouse to understand.
i think witness testimony and video evidence proves at least 2 of them were thugs ......beyond any reasonable doubt .
Sure is. He took out two of them in one night,
Good shooting, Rittenhouse
I’d like to know how such a basic question got this far - there’s nothing left but malice.
Drone video at Rittenhouse murder trial shows first shooting (msn.com)
it was reported today that jurors were being photograghed and videoed, the court and sherriffs ordered them deleted , wonder what the reason for that would be to get their likenesses out there?
Exactly, right?
To intimidate the jury into a guilty verdict or else antifa is in their near future…
Reported by who?
It would be nice if you provided a fact.
What do you care? You wouldn't read the links anyway...
Why would I bother to read fact free links?
[deleted]
[Deleted]
i take it since she is on ignore that she demanded a link she will
A. not look at
B. refute the source .
C. deny anything was wrong in doing so before the jury was handed the case for deliberation .
Anywho
Officers delete footage taken of jurors in Kyle Rittenhouse trial (msn.com)
I see you are still making shit up as you go along.
yup
and thats why spoiled little brats that throw temper tantrums and accusing people of making shit up because it doesnt fit their narrative only to be proven later the stuff supposedly made up to be correct get thrown in the iggy bin ,. it saves everyone a considereble amount of time . in such case i ask someone to hand the person a cactus .
i would do so myself , but i dont want cooties ....
Now if i were that judge ? i would be offering any remaining member of that jury ( i believe there are 18 left ) that if they did NOT have a permit to carry , that if they wanted one , they could come to him and he would sign off on them having one .
watch the little pinheads explode then .
It's interesting, but not surprising, how people who have not heard all of the testimony, or viewed all of the evidence, pretend they can foretell the result of a trial that is still in progress. A trial where the outcome, despite the sensationalist headline of the seed, is still very much OPEN. In fact, the quoted bit of testimony has been misconstrued by the seeder and not analyzed in its full context. That, of course, is occasioned solely by political bias.
people will generally know once a prosecutor presents their case and the witnesses they decide to call if they will lean guilty or not guilty , having watched this trial , the prosecution has failed to make the case stated in opening arguments , and has more so presented the defenses case for them .
to my mind , this prosecutor did a very piss poor job of making his case , he basically squatted on a cactus while wearing spurs .
Whose fault is that ? his own .
... and will generally be wrong more often than not.
Unless you've been present in the courtroom every minute of every day since the original jury panel was brought into the courtroom to begin the jury selection process (voir dire), then, respectfully, no, you have not.
The only truthful answer to the question "what do you think the verdict is going to be" is "I don't know". When the jury delivers its verdict, then we will have the answer. And not a moment sooner.
You think the media won't tell us if it was gong bad for Rittenhouse....LOL!
And to that i say HORSE FUCKING SHIT!
MY answer would be , IF i were on the jury , with what i have seen presented so far ... and the conclusion i would have reached , which is exactly what i have done so far . can some surprise still happen ? yes , by some unfathomab;le reason , ritterhouse could take the stand even though he doesnt have to and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory , stupider shit has happened .
dont like it to fucking bad . thanks for playing now step aside . your opiion has been regisrtered and rejected with due cause .
You think some reporter's opinion would have any bearing on the jury's decision or the outcome of the case? (Sorry, I don't use texting acronyms. I leave that for teenagers.)
I just saw a segment about his trial on the news.
They are making him look like an innocent baby.
I think the kid has mental problems.
Talk about HORSE FUCKING SHIT. Your opinion is irrelevant, and your comment is the height of stupidity. You're not on the jury, and if you were, your responsibility is to not make a decision until ALL the evidence is in, the closing arguments have been presented, and the judge instructs you in the law. You're just another ******* on the internet, like so many, expressing an uneducated opinion. If you want to know what ******* stands for look at which orifice the HORSE SHIT you're spewing is coming from.
I watched part of the other trial about the killing of the jogger.
They came to a weird law that actually went to the supreme court.
Something about how co-defendants cannot accuse one another of crimes. Or something.
i would say it looks similar to where your opinions come from councelor . fact is it doesnt always work the way you think it should .
nothing says any juror can not decide , once the prosecution rests , if said prosecutor met their objective , . in this case the prosecution met the defenses objective . the defense from my stand point as irrelevent as you say it is is the defense simply has to now tweek what the prosecution and its witnesses has already presented and a not guilty verdict would be forthcoming , like it or not .
be very glad i am NOT on that jury , because my first words in the deliberation room to the other selected jurors would be the prosecution failed to make their case and not guilty so dont try and get a compromise verdict .
Since you have no knowledge of the totality of the evidence, your horseshit opinion is based on bias alone. Which is exactly what we don't want from a juror in America.
It is expected that Rittenhouse will take the stand, mainly because his defense lawyer said in his opening statement that he would. If they were to change that now it might not play well with the jury.
well they did prove that rosenbaum had mental issues even if the jury was only told he was released the day he died , but not what he was released about, doesnt matter really since his GF testified he was bipolar and wasnt able to take his meds because he couldnt get them filled because of the riots .. i take it he solved his own mental issues with his actions .
Sorry but that is kinda sick.
He still didn't deserve to die.
That's insane.
It's perfectly " truthful" to offer an opinion on a future outcome. If someone asks you who you believe will win the Super Bowl, you aren't lying if you say "I think the Bucs will win".
how do you stop somebody from committing suicide by cop or by proxy if you have never met them before?
rosembaum according to testimony was hyper agressive , hyper belligerant , had verbally threatened to kill, made feigning actions to goad people to shoot him .
others testified they did not see him as threat at the time because his actions towards them did not warrent that distinction .and thoise he was with restrained him
what changed ? he took those actions the one next step in the confrontation and attempted contact .
In a case of self defense , which is what the defense claims and the prosecution has so graciously proven , and i do believe , rosembaum is the victim of his own stupidity of thinking he could do what he did , and the end result of someone defending themselves from assault that would cause serious injury or death ended with his demise .
Im willing to bet rosembaum got exactly what he wanted , to die , since his suicide attempt , what he was being held for and released that day failed to do .
“…is going to be" is "I don't know". “
You must carry an awful lot of extra clothes around with you - there’s no trust to be placed in those AccuWeather idiots.
and with that statement you have the same problem the prosecutor had and could not do and proved the opposite ., proving ritterhouse was a vigilante, your opinion which is all you have and no evidence does not make him one .
the case and witnesses presented by the prosecution have pretty much shown in each instance , ritterhouse was not the so called vigilante , but those that went after him , self defense is not vigilanteism , it is called self defense and justifiable homicide , now each of the persons that died , or even all those that were shot , DID , try to take the law into their own hands without authority which is the definition of vigilante , they were just stupid enough to try to do so and suffered the consequences of their own foolish actions , where as ritterhouses actions were justified for each case he faced from all 3 assailants . so they have NO excuse for their actions that they chose to embark on themselves because it WAS their choice in how to react , they chose poorly . .
and that can change , things change daily , in this case he has no reason to take the stand since the prosecutions case was a bust and didnt prove what was set out to be proven by them . he is better off just letting it stand as the prosecution has already laid out .... poorly.
the prosecution did such a fine job at presenting the defenses case , ritterhouse can decide he can add nothing more to it and change his mind .
that is your opinion and you are welcome to it , and like assholes everyone has one , some just stink to high heaven [deleted] .
as for being an asshole , yeah that be me , i was born one , i just grew bigger .
as for the "totality of the evidence " the prosecution rested , they wont be presenting anymore "evidence " they shot their wad and didnt prove their case . based on that , which is all i really need , them proving their case or not . an informed opinion can be made without the so called bias your accusing ., it is after all the prosecutions job to prove their allegations , again they didnt .
Tucker nails it in his opening comments on the topic!
[Deleted]
Kinda sick?
A total complete lack of knowledge - [Deleted]
[removed]
He may not have deserved death but it seems by his actions that he wanted it. Similar to a suicide by cop scenario here.
I often get called a liar by some for simply expressing something that is my opinion or the opinion of one I agree with.
I just read that the judge threw out one of the charges after the prosecution rested at lunch time , the charge of breaking curfew , one of the slam dunk ones they COULD pin on him .