Skip To Content

    The Men Kyle Rittenhouse Killed Cannot Be Called "Victims" In Court, And People Are Calling This The Ultimate Show Of Privilege

    "[Rittenhouse's attorney] can demonize them if he wants," the judge said.

    This is Kyle Rittenhouse, the then-17-year-old who armed himself with an AR-15 and traveled from Illinois to Wisconsin to join a group of people who took it upon themselves to patrol(?) the streets of Kenosha during protests sparked by the paralyzation of Jacob Blake, a Black man shot in the back by a white police officer.

    Pool New / Reuters

    During that night — Aug. 25, 2020 — Rittenhouse shot and killed Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber, and shot and injured Gaige Grosskreutz. Now, Rittenhouse faces homicide charges for both deaths, an attempted homicide charge in the case of Grosskreutz, and a charge for being a minor with a weapon — and he has pleaded "not guilty" to all charges.

    Anadolu Agency / Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

    Ahead of the trial, judge Bruce Schroeder recently ruled that the men Rittenhouse killed are not allowed to be referred to as "victims" in court, because "The word ‘victim’ is a loaded, loaded word," the judge said.

    Pool New / Reuters

    Furthermore, the two men killed can be called "looters" and "rioters" during closing arguments if the evidence suggests they took part in criminal acts. Though it's important to note that Grosskreutz, the lone survivor of Rittenhouse's, has not been charged with any crimes from the night of the protests.

    “If more than one of them were engaged in arson, rioting, looting, I’m not going to tell the defense you can’t call them that,” Judge Schroeder said. "[Rittenhouse's attorney] can demonize them if he wants, if he thinks it will win points with the jury.”

    As you can imagine, Kyle Rittenhouse's name immediately started trending on Twitter once the news dropped, and though there's certainly a faction of people who agree with his team's anticipated self-defense argument, many others were furious.

    Kyle Rittenhouse shot his victims. No matter what words Judge Schroeder bans from his Wisconsin courtroom.

    Twitter: @B52Malmet / Via Twitter: @B52Malmet

    The range of emotion was wide-reaching. Some were trying to do the math and add up how someone can be charged with homicide if they have no victims:

    Still confused how Kyle Rittenhouse can be on trial for homicide while apparently having no victims of said homicides.

    Twitter: @SHEsus__Christ / Via Twitter: @SHEsus__Christ

    Or, even if we play a game of "ifs" and decide to classify Rittenhouse's victims as rioters, how does this justify a random 17-year-old committing murder?

    There is zero evidence that Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum were “rioters,” “looters” or “arsonists.” And even if they were, Kyle Rittenhouse had no right to shoot and kill them. None.

    Twitter: @reneeygraham / Via Twitter: @reneeygraham

    However, the largest conversation taking place appears to surround privilege in the eyes of the law — who gets to be a victim, and who doesn't.

    Comparisons between Trayvon Martin and Rittenhouse were drawn:

    @sapha30184238 @ajplus Trayvon Martin was wearing a hoodie and doing nothing wrong and got killed. His death is justified because he looked "suspicious". Kyle Rittenhouse was holding an AR-15 and killed two people. His actions are justified because he's just a little boy protecting his community.

    Twitter: @soupiest_soup / Via Twitter: @soupiest_soup

    And overall, Twitter users who were outraged by this news are calling this moment an example of white privilege in the US justice system.

    Twitter: @Caramel_Angel7 / Via Twitter: @Caramel_Angel7

    What are your thoughts about the case? Let us know in the comments.