I think that an eye witness closest to the shooting as it took place has come forward publicly on this. There is also video out in the public domain now that supports a self defense scenario for the kid too I think.
At this time, we don't know if he was legally in possession of the firearm or if it was legally purchased. The shooter is said to be 17 and so a minor in terms of buying a gun of any kind. I don't know what the Wisconsin gun laws are regarding open carry of a long gun or what the law there is on self defense either.
Like so many things, first reports are, at best, always inaccurate in derail. An investigation by the police and a hearing with a Grand Jury will have to take place. Remember the rush to judgement on the Zimmerman-Martin case and the Ferguson MO investigation. Things are often not what they seem to be at first glance.
This could be either way . . .at this point, we just do not know.
Originally Posted by ICU 812
Since he is from Illinois and the "crime" was committed in Wisconsin, I'm not sure which laws apply for which offenses. The shooting is obviously for Wisconsin to prosecute but the possession...I'd have to go with Illinois. Wisconsin gun allows someone as young as 13 to possess a gun but they have to be 18 to guy a gun. I would that this is the only crime that Rittenhouse is clearly guilty of but he's legal by Wisconsin gun laws if that is what they follow here. I guess it will come down to did he buy it or was it given to him.
It does show you how far we have fallen when a regular person can't just read the law on the books and know 90% of the time if a crime was committed. We have so many Soros lawyers in government jobs filing charges when a crime was not committed.