Rittenhouse trial - first week recap

Prosecution had a rough week. Maybe never should have brought charges

Let's start with who was shot:

• Joseph Rosenbaum is a mentally ill man who has violent tendencies. He had an active restraining order against him for threats and attacks of an ex-girlfriend. Witnesses have testified that on the night in question he was threatening people (including threatening the life of Rittenhouse), that he was provoking fights, liberally using the term nigger at a black lives matter rally, and that he had been setting things on fire. These are just the things the State witnesses have testified to.
• Anthony Huber was a guy whom the State says was actively pursuing Rittenhouse because he (Huber) thought Rittenhouse was an "active shooter". He physically assaulted Rittenhouse with his skateboard and attempted to take his gun. While Huber may or may not have been thinking he was doing the right thing, he ultimately is the aggressor in this situation and attacked Rittenhouse. The state of mind of the aggressor is irrelevant. The only question is if Rittenhouse believed he was under a physical threat and that he needed to protect himself.
• Gaige Grosskreutz was the third man who was shot. He pulled out a pistol and aimed it at Rittenhouse. Enough said there. He is still alive and will testify.

So the state starts out with a tough case. Hard to create any sympathy for Rosenbaum. He was by all accounts an asswipe from start to finish. He was clearly the aggressor and the State's attempts to show otherwise are failing completely.  The fact that he was mentally ill was ruled inadmissible by the court, but a mistake by the prosecution (asking about medications he was on) opened to the door to his mental health issues. 

One might be able to muster some sympathy for Huber if you buy the idea that he believe that Rittenhouse was an active shooter who needed to be disarmed. But that is a dubious claim based on the events of the night (just take a look at the picture posted from that night - does the dropkicker look like he is the one being attacked). Generally active shooters are not seen fleeing from their position or lying on their back being drop kicked. They are actually shooting people (thus the term acting).  But either way, sympathy has no legal bearing on this. The only question was whether or not Huber was the aggressor and whether or not his actions could be conceived as a threat to a 17 year old boy who had already been threatened, chased, and then beaten with a skateboard.

Grosskreutz has not testified as of yet. They say he will testify Monday. What he has to say will be interesting to say the least. The main question will be why he went and drew a pistol on a person lying on the ground being beaten with a skateboard?