This message was self-deleted by its author

[Hiawatha Pete]

This message was self-deleted by its author (Hiawatha Pete) on Thu Jun 16, 2022, 08:45 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[Ocelot II]

1. Probably not.

For one thing, despite that definition of terrorism, we don't have a federal statute that specifically makes domestic terrorism a crime even if the underlying conduct was criminal. https://www.voanews.com/a/usa_why-domestic-terrorism-not-specifically-designated-crime-us/6201836.html

[WhiteTara]

4. Can the victims families sue civilly?

[Hiawatha Pete]

16. Maybe the families of the victims can set up a go-fund me (like the Rittenhouse supporters did)

[Colgate 64]

18. They not only can but probably will.

The real question is if Junior Vigilante is collectible or if they can find someone else who is.

[pinkstarburst]

28. On what grounds?

The entire event was instigated by the first person shot--Rosenbaum, a homeless ex-con child predator who had just been released from the hospital for a suicide attempt, and who attacked Rittenhouse after repeatedly stalking him, and who had spent all night attacking other people at the riot and trying to start fires.

After Rosenbaum attacked Rittenhouse and Rittenhouse shot him in self-defense, the situation was muddled. If you are Huber or Gaige Grosskreutz, you might very well believe there is now an active shooter and you are acting to keep others safe. But this is not not actually the case.

If you are Rittenhouse, you have just been stalked and assaulted by Rosenbaum, and acted in self-defense, and now Huber is running you and attacking you, bashing your head in with a skateboard. Grosskreutz is pointing a gun at your head. So now from your point of view, you are acting to defend yourself.

The first shooting was a result of Rosenbaum being mentally unbalanced and looking to start trouble. The last two shootings were a tragedy because no one could tell the intentions of the other person.

I don't see where the families have any grounds for a lawsuit, unfortunately.

[madville]

40. Sure, but they risk being responsible for his legal fees

If they lose, that could easily be hundreds of thousands if not easily over a million dollars depending how long it drags out.

[Hiawatha Pete]

15. Guess the only way to find out for sure would be to test it in court

Separate issue: Maybe the families of the victims can set up a go-fund me (like the Rittenhouse supporters did) for their civil suit - whatever charges they decide to pursue.

[Scottie Mom]

2. More likely charge, if charged federally, is violation of civil rights IMO.

There have been state court defendants acquitted on murder charges who later were tried in federal court for violation of civil rights and found guilty.

What Is a Hate or Bias Crime?

The definition of hate and bias crime laws varies from state to state. But, in general, it is a crime committed against an individual because of the victim's actual or perceived:

race
color
ethnicity
religion
ancestry or national origin
gender
disability, or
sexual orientation.

Some hate crime legislation also protects people based on homelessness, gender identity or expression, or political affiliation.

https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/hate-crimes-laws-and-penalties.htm

IMO, it could be a tough charge to win on "hate crime" as a violation of civil rights, but maybe it's time to bring one re Rittenhouse and thus, again IMO, his Proud Boys Association and his White Power signs possibly could be used against him to prove up a hate crime.

Something needs to be done or, IMO, it's open season on liberals who protest -- whatever color, creed and/or sexual orientation he/she or they may be.

JMHO

[Devil Child]

6. All involved are white

Where is evidence that Rittenhouse(white) shot Rosenbaum(white), Huber(White), or Grosskreutz(white) because of their race, color, ethnicity, ancestry, gender, disability, or sexual orientation.

So I agree, seems like a tough charge to justify and win in court.

[Scottie Mom]

22. Political beliefs are considered in some states.

Yeah, it's tough, but Free Speech is protected and maybe it's a place to start?

[Hiawatha Pete]

7. I tend to agree with your assertion "More likely charge...is violation of civil rights..."

However, If a state level 'not-guilty' verdict for murder does not preclude a federal 'guilty' verdict for civil rights violations, then it's hard to understand why the same would not hold true for federal level terrorism charges.

(Unless the US does indeed not have sufficiently robust legislation against domestic terrorism as some here have mentioned)

[WhiteTara]

8. the only possible place would be under

political affiliation. But that would probably be weak.

[Devil Child]

10. Political affiliation is not a protected class re: civil rights violation

So yes, I agree. Very weak.

[WhiteTara]

11. thanks.

[Scottie Mom]

23. Political affiliation is possibly the basis for a charge of federal hate crime.

Read from the link posted.

[Zeitghost]

3. No

You can't get more than 4 words in before it falls apart. The violence committed by Rittenhouse was found to be lawful and was not intended to intimidate or coerce a government.

[Hiawatha Pete]

5. That said he was found not guilty at the state level...

Also, the intimidation does not have to apply to govt but can apply to people as well: "to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives".

There is also this, which I added to my post above: While it might be OK for minors in WI to possess a long-gun for the purpose of hunting wildlife, to my knowledge there was no open season for deer in the middle of Kenosha in the middle of the night.

-because he was underage, he enlisted a straw man to buy a gun. He then stored that gun gun in Kenosha, at the house of a friend’s stepfather. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/01/14/kyle-rittenhouse-proud-boys-bar/

-he had a selfie taken with Proudboys, an extremist group known for violence & intimidation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/01/14/kyle-rittenhouse-proud-boys-bar/

As Scottie Mom mentioned above, there is precedent for people being found not guilty of murder at state level but later being found guilty of violating a person's civil rights at the federal level (Mississippi Burning comes to mind).

If a state level 'not-guilty' verdict for murder does not preclude a federal 'guilty' verdict for civil rights violations, then it's hard to understand why the same would not hold true for federal level terrorism charges.

(Unless the US does indeed not have sufficiently robust legislation against domestic terrorism as some here have mentioned)

[Zeitghost]

9. Double Jeopardy isn't the issue

Rittenhouse did not commit terrorism. Even if his actions had been found to be unlawful, it still isn't terrorism.

[Hiawatha Pete]

13. "Even if his actions had been found to be unlawful, it still isn't terrorism"

Last edited Sat Nov 20, 2021, 02:08 PM - Edit history (1)

However the statement by Mr Huber's parents seems to suggest the exact opposite:

"Today's verdict means there is no accountability for the person who murdered our son," Huber's parents said. "It sends the unacceptable message that armed civilians can show up in any town, incite violence, and then use the danger they have created to justify shooting people in the street."

Guess the only way to find out for sure whether or not Mr Rittenhouse' actions constituted terrorism would be to test it in court.

Maybe the families of the victims can set up a go-fund me (like the Rittenhouse supporters did) for their civil suit - whatever charges they decide to pursue.

[Ocelot II]

17. Don't get civil and criminal charges confused.

There is no civil cause of action for "terrorism." Possible claims could be based on the torts of wrongful death, battery and negligence. You can't sue someone for terrorism as such.

[Zeitghost]

21. You're reaching and you know it

This isn't terrorism.

As for a civil suit, not likely. The pictures of Huber bashing a downed Rittenhouse over the head with a skateboard won't play well. His past of strangling and suffocating women will establish a pattern of violent behavior.

Rosenbaum, the psychotic child rapist has an even worse case.

Grosskreutz destroyed any chance he had by admitting under oath that Rittenhouse did not raise and fire his rifle until he drew and pointed his Glock while advancing towards him.

[Devil Child]

26. I will politely add the illegally concealed Glock

Also, Grosskreutz's violent criminal record which includes: domestic violence, burglary, weapons violation, DUI, prowling.

[Ocelot II]

29. Doesn't matter what their history was; did Rittenhouse know about it?

Of course not; he shot guys who just as easily could have been people with spotless records. And even if he had known what bad things Grosskreutz or Huber might have done in their lives, it wasn't up to some teenaged dingbat with a gun to decide they weren't worthy of living.

[Hiawatha Pete]

33. +1000

[Devil Child]

37. Rittehouse certainly knew about the illegally concealed glock when it was drawn on him

Even more so when Grosskreutz feigned surrender, then attempted to draw on him again before he was shot by Rittenhouse. Prowling charge is very appropriate for discussion as Grosskretuz is on film earlier in the night following Rittenhouse and his group filming them with his cellphone.

I bring up criminal history for discussion of civil suit and how defense will be able to shred their histories and establish state of mind for the participants.

You introduce a straw-man of Rittenhouse knowing their histories and arguing from there. Rittenhouse didn't know their histories, but in the moment he was experiencing how their histories shaped their decisions and behavior. All of those shot had histories of violence and escalating explosive behavior.

[Zeitghost]

42. If we were discussing a criminal case

You would be correct. In a civil case their violent criminal record can be used to establish a pattern of behavior.


What are the odds that at a liberal, anti police violence protest attended by mostly peace loving people that the only three shot had violent criminal pasts and were shown to be engaging in more violence when shot?

All three were there to cause trouble by trying to blend in with an otherwise peaceful crowd. We should be mad as hell that these violent men with a history of abusing women and children use our just cause to commit more violence.

[Sogo]

27. Do you have a reference you could cite for those

accusations against Huber and Rosenbaum?

[Zeitghost]

34. Yes

https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/2021/03/12/kenosha-shooting/

[Devil Child]

38. Rosenbaum was a child rapist

COUNT ONE: (PUBLIC SEXUAL INDECENCY TO A MINOR UNDER FIFTEEN, A CLASS FIVE FELONY)
On or about the month of February, 2002 through the 27th day of March, 2002, JOSEPH DON ROSENBAUM committed public sexual indecency to a minor by intentionally or knowingly committing an act of sexual contact by masturbating, while (name removed) a minor under fifteen years of age was present.

COUNT TWO: (SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR UNDER FIFTEEN, A CLASS TWO FELONY, A DANGEROUS CRIME AGAINST CHILDREN)
On or about the 27th day of March, 2002, JOSEPH DON ROSENBAUM committed sexual conduct with a minor, by intentionally or knowingly engaging in an act of sexual intercourse with (second victim), a minor under the age of fifteen years, by penetrating the victim’s anus with his penis.

COUNT THREE: (FURNISHING OBSCENE OR HARMFUL ITEMS TO MINORS, A CLASS FOUR FELONY)
On or about the 27th day of March, 2002, JOSEPH DON ROSENBAUM, with knowledge of the character of the item involved, recklessly furnished, presented, provided, made available, gave, lent, showed, advertised, distributed an item harmful to minors, to (second victim), a minor under eighteen years of age, to Wit: photographs of nude women including their genitals.

COUNT FOUR: (PUBLIC SEXUAL INDECENCY TO A MINOR UNDER FIFTEEN, A CLASS FIVE Felony)
On or about the 27th day at March, 2002, JOSEPH DON ROSENBAUM committed public sexual indecency to a minor by intentionally or knowingly committing an act of sexual contact by masturbating, while (second victim), a minor under fifteen years of age was present.

COUNT FIVE: (SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR UNDER FIFTEEN, A CLASS TWO FELONY, A DANGEROUS CRIME AGAINST CHILDREN)
On or about the 27th day of March, 2002, JOSEPH DON ROSENBAUM committed sexual conduct with a minor, by intentionally or knowingly engaging in an act of sexual intercourse with (third victim), a minor under the age of fifteen years, by penetrating the victim’s anus with his penis.

COUNT SIX: (SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR UNDER FIFTEEN, A CLASS TWO FELONY, A DANGEROUS CRIME AGAINST CHILDREN)
On or about the 27th day of March, 2002, JOSEPH DON ROSENBAUM committed sexual conduct with a minor, by intentionally or knowingly engaging in an act of oral sexual contact with (fourth victim), a minor under the age of fifteen years, by inserting his penis into the victim’s mouth.

COUNT SEVEN: (SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR UNDER FIFTEEN, A CLASS TWO FELONY, A DANGEROUS CRIME AGAINST CHILDREN)
On or about the 27th day of March, 2002, JOSEPH DON ROSENBAUM committed sexual conduct with a minor, by intentionally or knowingly engaging in an act of oral sexual contact with (fourth victim), a minor under the age of fifteen years, by placing his mouth on the victim’s penis.

COUNT EIGHT: (MOLESTATION OF CHILD, A CLASS TWO FELONY, A DANGEROUS CRIME AGAINST CHILDREN)
On or about the 27th day of March, 2002, JOSEPH DON ROSENBAUM committed molestation of a child by intentionally or knowingly engaging in sexual contact with (fourth victim), a child under the age of fifteen years, involving the genitals, by touching the victim’s penis with his hand.

COUNT NINE: (MOLESTATION OF CHILD, A CLASS TWO FELONY, A DANGEROUS CRIME AGAINST CHILDREN)
On or about the 27th day of March, 2002, JOSEPH DON ROSENBAUM committed molestation of a child, by intentionally or knowingly engaging in sexual contact with (fourth victim), a child under the age of fifteen years, involving the genitals, by causing the victim to touch his penis.

COUNT TEN: (MOLESTATION OF CHILD, A CLASS TWO FELONY, A DANGEROUS CRIME AGAINST CHILDREN)
On or about the month of March, 2002, JOSEPH DON ROSENBAUM committed molestation of a child, by intentionally or knowingly engaging in sexual contact with (fifth victim), a child under fifteen years of age, involving the genitals, by touching the victim’s penis with his finger.

COUNT ELEVEN: (INDECENT EXPOSURE TO A MINOR UNDER FIFTEEN, A CLASS SIX FELONY)
On or about the month of March, 2002, JOSEPH DON ROSENBAUM indecently exposed his genitals to (fifth victim), a minor under the age of fifteen years, by showing the victim his penis.

[Devil Child]

48. Huber

4/30/2012
Kenosha Police 2012-3906

Domestic Battery
Domestic Disorder Conduct

8/7/2012
Kenosha Police N135455

Consume Possess Alcohol Unauthorized Person

8/20/2012
Kenosha Police N136026 and N1316027

Disorderly Conduct and Vandalism

12/6/2012
Kenosha Police 2012-10622

Second Degree Reckless Endangering Safety – Felony
Strangulation and Suffocation – Felony
False Imprisonment – Felony
Domestic Battery – Use of a Weapon

4/5/2015
Kenosha Sheriff 2015-2314

Possess Drug Paraphernalia

12/26/2017
Kenosha Sheriff 2017-12504

Domestic Battery Repeater – Felony
Domestic Disorderly Conduct Repeater – Felony
Resist Officer Repeater

[George II]

30. Rittenhouse didn't go to Kenosha with a list of "priors" for everyone demonstrating. He shot...

...them without knowing anything about their background.

[Hiawatha Pete]

32. +1000

[Zeitghost]

35. You are right

That matters in a criminal case. Civil case is much more open and their history of violence can be used to establish a pattern of behavior.

[Devil Child]

39. Bingo, that point seems to be lost on many n/t

[DiamondShark]

64. With the past being admissible...

Can the Plaintiff then play the video of Rittenhouse earlier claiming to want to shoot the protesters?

[Hiawatha Pete]

31. Well here in Canada, the Proudboys are indeed a Federally-designated terrorist organization

Proud Boys Canada dissolves itself, months after designation as terrorist entity
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/03/proud-boys-canada-dissolves-itself-months-after-designation-as-terrorist-entity

So no, not reaching at all. I am asking if any comparable U.S. laws (if they exist) would be applicable, considering Kyle's selfie-mates:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=&w=691

[Zeitghost]

36. Taking a selfie in a bar

Does not make you a terrorist. Your actions and intentions make you a terrorist and the actions and intentions of Kyle Rittenhouse do not equate to terrorism, they aren't even illegal. So yes, reaching is the appropriate term.

[Hiawatha Pete]

44. Too bad you can't tell the difference asking a question and "reaching"

Regardless I'm glad I live in Canada. Where Proudboys are indeed a Federally-designated terrorist organization, a decision based on their history of violent actions.

And where there's no such thing as open carry.

Have a nice day.

[Devil Child]

50. This isn't Canada n/t

[Hiawatha Pete]

52. And yet everyone (in both countries) has the right to free speech regardless of citizenship n/t

[Hiawatha Pete]

53. There is no way the shooter could have known about the (completely irrelevant)history of his victims

Your defense of a known violent abuser of women who later shot two people dead is noted.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-video-kenosha-shooter-punch-girl-a9702206.html

[Hiawatha Pete]

57. And I didn't know about the alleged history of Rittenhouse' victims either until this thread.

So nice try.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

12. I doubt it would work, especially since the Feds...

... have never declared "open carry" laws in various states to be terrorist acts, although I personally think it's an act of terrorism for anyone to do that.

[Ocelot II]

19. See above. There is no civil cause of action for terrorism, so it doesn't matter

whether the federal statute defining it applies. Anyhow, that's a federal statute and the tort claims would be brought in state court (there might be federal diversity jurisdiction because Rittenhouse was a resident of Illinois and the victims were residents of WI but even there the federal court would have to apply state tort law because there is no federal common law of torts). Short answer is that terrorism is irrelevant to a civil case.

[Hiawatha Pete]

25. Sorry if I wasn't clear,yes state/federal terrorism charges are a separate issue from the civil suit

I was talking about the two different issues in the same response, perhaps keeping them in separate replies would have made it clearer:

1) feds could investigate whether terrorism charges applicable/warranted
2) familiy of victims could consider a go fund me

[Buckeye_Democrat]

20. If they want to try, then they should go for it.

I suspect the outcome will be another "moral victory" for the deplorable people, though, emboldening them even more.

Better gun control is needed, but there's even people on DU who strongly oppose it.

I'd be pleased if openly carrying a gun into a riot was made illegal, to be honest. Or would the supposed wildlife hunters be opposed to that too?!

[Zeitghost]

45. This

Laws need to be changed.

[Zeitghost]

47. We frown against

Bringing obviously bad charges that don't fit the actions of the accused in this country. No USDA is going to bring charges that will get tossed immediately. Their professional government attorneys, not political hacks.

[SYFROYH]

24. I doubt it.

[madville]

41. Doubt the feds will try any of that

It will just look politically motivated at this point and the case would be weak. The DOJ rarely prosecutes cases it doubts it can win.

[treestar]

43. He'd still use self defense

and why does it have to be terrorism? There are plenty of other charges that might apply.

[Hiawatha Pete]

55. Because in Canada Proudboys are indeed a terrorist organization. Don't know what the US law is in

that regard. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/01/14/kyle-rittenhouse-proud-boys-bar/

[treestar]

58. "terrorist organization"

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1189

https://www.state.gov/terrorist-designations-and-state-sponsors-of-terrorism/

Looks like they have to be foreign - still can't find any list of designated domestic - I'll keep looking.

[Devil Child]

59. It will be a long and fruitless search.

Proud Boys are not a designated terrorist organization in the US.

[treestar]

61. Do you know where to find the domestic designations list?

Google is not being my friend. All I could get was wikipedia, which I figured would be deemed not good enough.

3 Terrorist organizations
3.1 Alpha 66 and Omega 7
3.2 Animal Liberation Front
3.3 Army of God
3.4 Aryan Nations
3.5 Atomwaffen Division
3.6 The Covenant, The Sword, and the Arm of the Lord
3.7 Earth Liberation Front
3.8 Jewish Defense League
3.9 Ku Klux Klan
3.10 May 19 Communist Organization
3.11 The Order
3.12 Phineas Priesthood
3.13 Symbionese Liberation Army
3.14 United Freedom Front
3.15 Weathermen
4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_terrorism_in_the_United_States

Though it would be possible to put them in the process for designation.

[Devil Child]

62. I wish I could but no such designation exists

FBI and law enforcement agencies have a listing of domestic terrorist threats including the ones in your wiki listing. But there is no "deisgnated terrorist organization" definer like exists for "foreign terrorist organization."

Domestic Terrorism: Definitions, Terminology, and Methodology
As required by the National Defense Authorization Act, the FBI and Department of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, have developed standard definitions of terminology related to domestic terrorism and uniform methodologies for tracking domestic terrorism incidents.

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fbi-dhs-domestic-terrorism-definitions-terminology-methodology.pdf/view

Strategic Intelligence Assessment and Data on Domestic Terrorism
As required by the National Defense Authorization Act, the FBI and Department of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, have produced this strategic intelligence assessment on domestic terrorism, which includes a discussion of activities, certain data on domestic terrorism matters, and recommendations.

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fbi-dhs-domestic-terrorism-strategic-report.pdf/view

Domestic Terrorism
Most Wanted

https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/dt

Foreign Terrorist Organizations
Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) are foreign organizations that are designated by the Secretary of State in accordance with section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended. FTO designations play a critical role in our fight against terrorism and are an effective means of curtailing support for terrorist activities and pressuring groups to get out of the terrorism business.

https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/

Homeland Security
Domestic Terrorism News Feed

https://www.dhs.gov/taxonomy/term/9080/all/feed

White House
FACT SHEET: National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/06/15/fact-sheet-national-strategy-for-countering-domestic-terrorism/

[treestar]

65. Oh, OK so they just aren't "designated"

But those main ones are known.

The article in wikipedia counts the Lincoln assassination as terrorism. I suppose you could say it was motivated to scare people to do things their way.

[Steelrolled]

54. What interest would the federal government have in this case?

A group of idiots, all white, looking for trouble, got into a street fight, guns were involved, and some of them were killed. The state tried to make a case out of it, and failed.

[Hiawatha Pete]

56. So right wing vigilante violence OK in the US. Got it.

Yes, they did exercise very poor judgement in trying to tackle Rittenhouse, however no provocation at all was required for that jackass in VA to plow his car into a crowd of people. Ms Heyer's political beliefs alone is what earned her a death sentence at the hands of a violent thug.

Think I'll keep my tourist dollars here in Canada, where we have laws against violence & intimidation, laws preventing open carry -laws that the majority of us agree with. Too bad. I was planning a trip across the Northern US including WI this spring now that the border has re-opened.

[treestar]

60. no you're just obsessed with calling something "terrorism"

and if it can't be called "terrorism" you're saying it's OK. There are a lot of things not OK that are not "terrorism." I thought it was just the US, but it seems Canada is infected too. It's fascinating. Why do you think it's "OK" if it cannot be described with the most extreme word?

A lot of murders are not "terrorism." But that does not make murder OK.

[Hiawatha Pete]

63. Nope. I'm not saying that at all and you don't get to put words in my mouth.

I'm saying that maybe to prevent escalation of r/w violence & intimidation gov't should seek the strongest possible charge that may be applicable.

And according to your own US state law, murder is not one of them.

Lets suppose you're right & terrorism charges should not apply in this case.

So what does that leave as a deterrence against future violence? Civil suit? Maybe no more laws that permit open carry?

Regardless, I have no desire to spend my tourist dollars in country whose legal system says it's ok for anyone to act as judge, jury & executioner on a whim. My money, my choice.

And btw most Canadians are happy that we do not have open-carry nonsense.
And yes the majority of Canadians are also happy that groups engaging in violence & intimidation like the PB's are listed as terrorist organizations: https://www.npr.org/2021/05/02/992846086/proud-boys-named-terrorist-entity-in-canada

In the meantime, the rest of the industrialized world wishes you good luck.

[treestar]

66. check out your post title

you did indeed say it.

Murder has penalties - are you saying there is no deterrent effect of those penalties?

[Hiawatha Pete]

67. No,I'm saying a jury in state of WI already decided that murder charges do not apply in this case

I'm done arguing with you.

Enjoy the loss of tourist dollars from every other civilized nation where vigilante violence is NOT normal.

[Meowmee]

68. I am not sure

But there is already a civil suit brought by one of the victims families.