Austin Lewis
Studied Criminology, Sociology, Statistics (Graduated 2009)Nov 17

Why does Binger find it's so egregious that Rittenhouse was out after
"alleged" curfew, that "most reasonable people obeyed", when he doesn't
hold the rioters to the same standard?
To dispassionate people who paid attention to the trial, Binger’s
performance was mediocre to bad. His closing statement was filled with
outright lies, hypocritical standards, and the pretense that lighting a
dumpster on fire and rolling it toward a GAS STATION, or overturning a
porta-potty and a construction trailer, is somehow a small thing.

Binger is happy to apply the ‘hur dur you didn’t obey curfew’ standard
to Rittenhouse, as well as claiming ‘he brought a gun to a fistfight.’
Neither standard was applied to anyone else (the only person who
attacked Rittenhouse unarmed, which does NOT mean not a threat, was
Rosenbaum, and ALL were breaking curfew).

Binger outright lied about matters of law. You are under NO requirement
to let someone injure you, grievously or otherwise, before you use a
firearm to defend yourself. If you can reasonably articulate a fear that
a person was going to do you serious bodily harm, you can legally shoot
them.

Binger outright lied about the nature of the mob repeatedly, basically
saying that Rittenhouse should have taken his rifle off and put it on
the ground rather than defend himself from Rosenbaum. Literally every
shred of evidence points to Rosenbaum being, at best, a violent person,
and at worst an unstable and violent person. We’ll never know, but I
suspect that dropping a rifle in front of that person is going to end
with him using it on you, whether there’s a basis or not.

Something that Binger really focused on was the fact that Rittenhouse
‘pointed a laser’ at the crowd, provoking the attack against him.

That’s interesting, because if you look at pictures of the rifle, both
before and during the riot, there is no laser present.

Frankly, I think Binger is a wildly dishonest person (thus why he has a
job in the government). From everything I’ve seen, there is no basis to
say that Rittenhouse didn’t act in self-defense, and the argument made
by the prosecution is basically to lie about what the law says and when
someone should ‘fear for their life.’

11.7K viewsView 519 upvotesView 1 share