Kyle Rittenhouse Trial

[Dill]

(11-12-2021, 01:53 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It wasn't one person, it would take a minimum of two to include the guy who fired the hand gun.  But don't take my word for it, it's on video.  Stop it, you sound silly.    

Please do forgive me for declaring my points "settled".  Since no one has even attempted to refute them with facts I made the unspeakable mistake of considering them closed.  But, as you raise a doubt, please feel free to refute any of my fact based assertions with fact based counter points.  

Yes, I am easily offended, so I do appreciate your taking that into consideration.  But, as you continue to argue points not related to this case, or anything but me specifically, I will now consider our conversation over.  Thank you for your time, if nothing else.

LOL No one declares points settled because no one is questioning them. You were declaring yours settled BECAUSE people continued to question/refute them, as I am doing now.  And you are still doing it, as the last bolded shows. You get to digress on media responses to BLM and Michigan protests; I am "meandering off topic" if I respond.

And someone HAS attempted to refute your mob claim with facts. That's what the links to video showing ONE person chasing R were about. Why do you keep saying that holding to your face the video evidence that counters your interpretation is not an attempt to "refute your points with facts"? (The appropriate quip response would be "because it's not," with no explanation.) You cannot dodge that by claiming the video is not related to the case or that I'm engaging in a "semantic argument" because I don't think one guy is a "mob." 
 
Even two is hardly a "mob," but  I don't grant your claim the guy who fired the handgun was pursuing R. He was walking parallel to the street. Rittenhouse crosses the parking lot 30 yards in front of him, running. The handgun shooter isn't pursuing anyone. He's just there, like those "trailers" R runs past. That's  a "fact based counter point."