Kyle Rittenhouse Trial Essay Sample

The charges that were brought upon Kyle Rittenhouse were “first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, first-degree attempted intentional homicide, and two counts of first-degree reckless endangerment.” Judge Bruce Schroeder dropped the gun possession charge due to poor wording in Wisconsin gun laws, permitting the AR-15 to be legal. After days of deliberation, on November 19th, 2021, Kyle Rittenhouse was acquitted from all charges as the grand jury’s final verdict voted not guilty. The cross-examination of Gaige Grosskreutz by the defense team is what led the grand jury to come to a consensus of a not guilty verdict. 

Those in favor of the grand jury’s final verdict say this is a win for the second amendment. Those opposing the grand jury’s final verdict say Rittenhouse walked away scot-free because of judge Schroeder’s biases. Judging this case from a moral sense, a minor should not be walking around with a loaded rifle in a hostile setting. I say this considering Rittenhouse crossed state lines to “look” for trouble and was a minor with an illegally attained AR-15 on August 25th, 2020. I do have to look at this case from the eyes of the law to see if laws were violated and if Rittenhouse’s actions were self-defense. As I informed myself about the trial and watched key testimonies on YouTube, I understood why the grand jury’s final verdict was not guilty. However, I oppose Judge Schroeder’s ruling of dropping the gun charge.

The defense team made a clear case that Rittenhouse shot Joseph Rosenbaum, Anthony Huber, and Gaige Grosskreutz in self-defense. Key witness, Gaige Grosskreutz, testified that Rittenhouse did not shoot him until he aimed his firearm and advanced on him. It was at this point in the trial where he states “Correct.” This is one of the leading testimonies that lead the grand jury to vote not guilty. If I was a juror on this case; hearing this testimony, I would have acquitted Rittenhouse on 5 out of the 6 felony charges.

I would have voted guilty on the gun charge that was dropped by Judge Schroeder. In Wisconsin, it is legal for anyone at the age of 18 and older to own a firearm. The AR-15 that Rittenhouse possessed met the Wisconsin gun barrel requirements; deemed legal to carry. At the time of the incident, Rittenhouse was seventeen and he illegally obtained the AR-15 through Dominick Black. Rittenhouse testified that he knew he was not legally allowed to buy the AR-15; therefore, he requested Black to purchase the AR-15 for him. The AR-15 was legal to carry; that does not mean that seventeen-year-old Rittenhouse was allowed to carry the rifle. In Wisconsin, the only way that anyone under the age of eighteen is allowed to use a firearm or assault rifle is under the supervision of an adult, and the purpose for the firearm or assault rifle is to target practice with adult supervision. Under section 948.60, it states, “Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a class A misdemeanor.” The next subsection states, “This section does not apply to any person under the 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a dangerous weapon when the dangerous weapon is being used in target practice under the supervision of an adult.” Rittenhouse was not under adult supervision, therefore violating that statute. Dominick Black’s gun charge should not have been dropped either considering Wisconsin Legislature. It states, “Any person who intentionally sells, loans or gives a dangerous weapon to a person under the 18 years of age is guilty of a Class I felony.”

Kyle Rittenhouse and Dominick Black should have been guilty on the gun charges. I was astonished to see Judge Schroeder drop these charges. The prosecution was not able to charge Rittenhouse with the gun charge. However, according to the defense the poor wording and if “read correctly”, the 941.28 statute dismisses these charges. This statute states the AR-15 meets the legal requirements to be openly carried. It does not state that anyone under 18 years of age is allowed to open carry. This would be the only charge I would vote Rittenhouse guilty on. 

It is safe to say that this was an emotional and political case simply due to the current relationship between the people and law enforcement and gun laws. 2020 has had a great number of peaceful protests and riots throughout the United States. The tragic death of Jacob Blake on August 23, 2020, is what caused the protests in Kenosha for the following days. Blake was shot seven times in the back by a white police officer in Kenosha, Wisconsin in front of his three kids. The police officer who shot Blake was not charged. Of course, this is emotionally upsetting and caused an uproar considering the previous deaths that occurred at the hands of law enforcement. Two days later Kyle Rittenhouse shot three protesters. Which then caused more civil unrest in an already hurting Kenosha. 

The political climate was in disarray; the United States was divided during the Kenosha events. With the trial taking its course, those who opposed Rittenhouse and his actions were thinking with their emotions and believed that the three men who were shot by Rittenhouse deserved justice. They believed that Rittenhouse did not have the right to own the AR-15 he possessed. Those who supported Rittenhouse claim that he has the right to keep and bear arms and shoot in self-defense. Of course, every native-born citizen has the right to do so legally. 

What can be said is that the law looks at if laws were violated and to what extent. Those who are guilty will do their time; those who are not guilty will walk free. With the Kyle Rittenhouse trial and verdict, the grand jury decided that Kyle Rittenhouse was not guilty given the evidence that was presented to them. As I said earlier in this paper, I would have acquitted Kyle Rittenhouse on 5 out of the 6 charges due to acting in self-defense. I would have voted guilty on the dropped gun charge, due to him illegally obtaining an AR-15 as a minor.