Abigail Ramirez is a freshman journalism major at MU. She is an opinion columnist who writes political and social commentary for The Maneater.
Aug. 25, 2020, 17-year-old Illinoisan Kyle Rittenhouse crossed state lines into Kenosha, Wisconsin, to protest against a Black Lives Matter rally where he planned to protect property and act as a medic (though he was a minor and had no proper medical education). By the end of the night, he had fatally shot two men and severely injured another with his AR-15.
In his seventh day in court, Rittenhouse took the stand and defended his case, claiming he “didn’t want to have to kill anybody” that night in Kenosha. However, can America truly believe this young man knowingly crossed state lines with an AR-15 with any intent of peaceful counter-protest?
Echoing the discriminatory crede of Trumpism on the streets of Kenosha, Rittenhouse had every intention of causing harm that night and should be tried and prosecuted to the greatest extent for his actions. Any less would reveal and preserve the racial corruption of the American court system at the most fundamental level.
When determining the weight of his actions, it is important to consider the political and social atmosphere of that night. Aug. 25 was the second night of anti-police brutality protests in Kenosha, and Wisconsinites from all over the state were rallying together to stand up for their beliefs. In response, a right-wing extremist group sent out a call for “patriots willing to take up arms and defend [our] City tonight from the evil thugs,” to which Rittenhouse responded.
In this vernacular lies echoes of Trumpism, which became practically synonymous with white supremacy during the months of civil unrest in the wake of George Floyd’s death. More often than not, anti-protestors, such as the Proud Boys, ardently supported Trump and gained traction from his inability to condemn right-wing extremism. Having knowledge of such groups’ acts of violence, whether that be in Minneapolis or Charlottesville years before, Rittenhouse would have had to be incredibly naive to think this armed group would not escalate the protest into violence.
While the atmosphere did become more aggressive that night, Rittenhouse undoubtedly escalated his own circumstances in the moments of his crimes. In his testimony, he claimed that his first victim, Joseph Rosenbaum, threatened his life twice before charging him. To scare him away, Rittenhouse pointed his assault rifle at him, which ultimately did not work.
Also, in the words of lead prosecutor Thomas Binger, Rittenhouse must have “[understood] that when you point your AR-15 at someone, it may make them feel like you are going to kill them.” Rosenbaum could have had the same defense as his murderer and unfortunately was not given a second chance.
He went on to kill another man and injure another, both of whom had weapons that in no way were a threat to him with an AR-15 in hand. The lone survivor of Rittenhouse’s shots, Gaige Grosskreutz, told the court that he was only trying to disarm the 17-year old, not kill him.
That night — Rittenhouse’s story — was the perfect storm of arrogance, ignorance and naivety.
As of Nov. 1, 2021, the now-18-year old is standing trial for five different charges, including first-degree reckless homicide, first-degree recklessly endangering safety, first-degree intentional homicide, attempted first-degree intentional homicide and possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18.
No matter how he pleads, it is undeniable that he is guilty of at least first-degree reckless homicide, which could give him a sentence up to 60 years in prison.
However, just in the last three days of the trial, Rittenhouse has done a grand job of making himself seem like the victim of this case. While giving his testimony on the stand, Rittenhouse broke down crying, pleading with the judge, prosecutor and jury that he was just trying to “stop the people who were attacking [him].” Unsurprisingly, his tactic worked on Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroder.
The chances of Rittenhouse reaping the full consequences of his actions are unlikely. In the University of Michigan’s 2017 study, “Race and Wrongful Convictions in the United States,” researchers found that white defendants accused of murdering others have a 36% chance to be exonerated for their actions. Also, while white Americans make up 83% of Wisconsin’s population, they only make up 52% of the prison population.
After asking valid, clear questions that would illuminate Rittenhouse’s real character on the stand, Schroder publicly yelled at Binger for trying to provoke a mistrial. In the early days of the trial, he announced that those the 17-year-old shot could not be referred to as “victims,” but could be called “looters” and “rioters.”
Knowing this, it is not outlandish to assume Rittenhouse may have a chance of gaining leniency in his sentence, if he has a sentence at all.
The worst truth in all of this is that such ideas would never be imaginable if the defendant were a person of color. In Wisconsin, Black Americans make up 6% of the population, but 38% of the prison population. They are also incarcerated five times more often than white Americans.
Even so, letting Rittenhouse go free when there is visual evidence of his crimes would parallel hundreds of cases in which perpetrators who harmed Black individuals were set free despite being objectively guity. For example, the Louisville police officers who unjustly murdered Breonna Taylor in cold blood, despite clear evidence of their wrongdoing, were set free to resume their normal lives. Also, although George Zimmerman murdered Trayvon Martin in cold blood for acting “suspicious” — a claim police advised him not to pursue — the jury still found him not guilty — a decision in which his mother’s plea for her son had a great effect.
At this moment, the three white men who murdered Ahmaud Arbery while jogging, a 25-year-old Black man living in a South Georgia community stand trial, and yet the Rittenhouse case — one in which a white man killed two white men and injured another — is getting more media and news coverage.
The sad reality of this whole case is that a Black person would have no hope in a case this extreme, and that has been the truth since the birth of the nation. Rittenhouse gaining sympathy from the public for crying during his testimony, the judge’s irritation toward Binger’s questions in the early days of the trial, the bail money he got after that night in Kenosha — it’s all a reminder of the deep-seeded racial injustice in America. When white defendants or their loved ones victimize themselves in court, people are more likely than not to believe and sympathize with them. However, when the tables are turned and a person of color is on the stand, no such mercy is given.
If the judge acquits him and he is able to go free without being tried again, it’s just another drop in the bucket of inequity.
Black Lives Matter is a social movement and group in America, the UK and Canada that seeks to eradicate white supremacy and gain justice for violence inflicted in Black communities. They work to combat and counteract violence against Black people, as well as create safe spaces for Black creativity, innovation and liberation. https://blacklives.help/view/tbzQRwmyzuOBZ47UArCP?gclid=CjwKCAiAm7OMBhAQEiwArvGi3IIyIAMHx6s1pyXjvRctCTXHfGpd93G-o4dBnQpMPqY3HdxqA_xRRxoCh54QAvD_BwE
Edited by Cayli Yanagida | cyanagida@themaneater.com