The buzz surrounding the Kyle Rittenhouse trial centers around his emotional breakdown on the stand. So many see that as crocodile tears--that, in effect, he was faking it. They compare his reaction to that of Brett Kavanaugh, who shed comparable tears while under attack at his Supreme Court confirmation hearing in the U.S. Senate.
I disagree. The two are not the same, although the effects of the two might be: to make both look like unwitting victims, overwhelmed with false accusations.
Go back and consider the order in which the tears flowed. Kavanaugh's so-called emotional outburst took place after the first break in the questioning. The conjured crying happened after he'd been briefed and, apparently, told to go back in there with obnoxious, ferocious intent to show his supporters he was tough enough to withstand the attacks (ironically, but one can be so angry as to cry, which is a rather feminine response to an attack reflecting feminism, so there's that).
Rittenhouse's tears came up on him before his lawyers had a chance to roust him off the stand and let him catch his breath. Consider, also, the ages of the accused: Kavanaugh in his early 50s, Rittenhouse only 18.
Both were understandably scared, but Rittenhouse had, and has, a right to be far more scared than Kavanaugh. Should the latter have not survived muster, at least he still had a job, and rather prestigious one at that--an appellate judge. Life would have gone on pretty much as before.
Not Rittenhouse. He has years in jail ahead of him if convicted. He has his freedom for most of his adult life at stake. He has no basketball coaching of daughters to fall back on. After refusal, Kavanaugh still could have gone to the local 7-11 to get milk for his kids; Rittenhouse won't be able to think about that until, possibly, 2060 or so. Big, big difference.
We caught Rittenhouse at the moment when it all came crashing down upon him--the killings, the possibility of prison and the end of life as he knew it, the possible futility of maintaining his story about it since it had been captured on film. You don't fight your way out of trouble at age 18 very easily; you just don't have the savvy. It's not quite the same as hanging around in bars, bragging your fanny off about what you did.
So Rittenhouse's tears seem more genuine. Do I feel sorry for him? Not in the least. He did what he did. Two people are dead at his hand on an evening that he should have been home in Illinois with his video games, and he has to live with that. The problem is that the laws of Wisconsin might allow him to get away with it. That his lawyers let him expose his pathetic self on the stand may be deft or it may be a major mistake; 12 people have the unenviable duty to decide that.
As of this writing, the gun possession charge has been dropped, but that was the most minor of the offenses. That might mean that Kenosha County's prosecutors have a weakened case; it might mean that in the big picture, that charge is universally accepted as rather pointless, not worth the court's time.
That doesn't mitigate the nonsense he and his mother are trying to foment, though--namely, that he was trying to defend himself. That ignores, and willfully so, the fundamental question I haven't heard anybody utter from the very beginning of his sordid business: What in blue blazes was he even doing in Kenosha, Wisconsin, with a loaded automatic rifle that he'd gotten from someone else?
He didn't live there. He wasn't responsible for the defense of the city. He wasn't a police officer. He wasn't a member of the National, or even someone else's, Guard. It wasn't even in his state. If things were that serious, why didn't dozens, even hundreds, of other minors from Illinois have their moms drive them north and comprise a citizen's army of protection of businesses they never patronized?
The results of all this could be very frightening indeed. They could encourage vigilantism if Rittenhouse is freed from any remaining charges. They could result in people of color bringing also weapons with them to future protests in anticipation of that same vigilantism. Nothing good can come of that.
Consider, also, that the subject of the Kenosha protests, Jacob Blake, actually was committing criminal behavior when shot by a police officer last June--childnapping. "He's got my kid. He's got the keys." said a woman when a police officer approached, wrote the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel back in September, three months after the incident. A George Floyd-type myth of relative innocence had been created, more victimization of people of color by police established, and it skewed all reactions to this point.
The reports about the children in the car were accurate. Police attempted to taser him before opening fire. We were left with the belief that the police officer overreacted when he shot Blake seven times and paralyzed him, with inherent racism hanging over it all. Now, we are left wondering whether it was ever the issue, and if not, why we didn't know those vital details months ago, and concluding that though something looked the same as an earlier transgression, it was merely someone doing his regrettable duty.
Now, I may not be sufficiently 'woke' about this, but I can't imagine a more compelling job by police than to protect kids from harm. That's what was happening. It may have looked the same as George Floyd, but in actuality, it wasn't at all. George Floyd was helplessly lying on his stomach on the street, handcuffed securely; there's no reason that officer needed to kneel on his neck for a single second. Jacob Blake was foolishly reaching for a knife.
It also means that the ability to remain relatively cool-headed and wait for details has nearly been eclipsed with finger-pointing and jumping to conclusions in a racially tense atmosphere. It still, though, doesn't sufficiently explain why Kyle Rittenhouse found it necessary to bring a loaded automatic weapon to a town he was not familiar with, in a state in which he did not reside, to illicitly create order when it was clearly impossible to do so by attaching himself, however loosely, to some extralegal, racist, vigilante group that talks big but couldn't do it, either. Either way, he's just a kid who made rash decisions to enter a world far too big for him.
A desire to fulfill 'law and order' has come full circle for Rittenhouse. The jury will now discuss whether the law can be utilized to protect him or condemn him. The judge has given the jury room to convict Rittenhouse on lesser charges than first-degree murder; it increases the chance that he will serve prison time.
The combination of this decision with a Supreme Court ruling, now pending, as to whether people should be allowed to walk around with weapons regardless of the situation--Wisconsin allows open carry--may accelerate a gun-toting culture beyond anyone's ability to subdue it. Meanwhile, Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers has called out 500 members of the National Guard to stand by to support local law enforcement. Once again, cooler heads need to prevail. Once again, it's becoming more doubtful that they will.
Be well. Be careful. Get a booster, as I did last week. With some luck, I'll see you down the road.
Mister Mark
No comments:
Post a Comment