get a fire extinguisher running past rosenbaum to put out a fire and then being chased by joseph rosenbaum and on top of that if there is any other video that shows kyle rittenhouse initially instigating an issue with rosenbaum which i do not believe this video will actually show that clearly that doesn't matter under wisconsin law which we've gone over before but i will highlight this portion of the self-defense law to make this abundantly clear to you so for some reason the media keeps asserting that kyle rittenhouse is not protected by the castle doctrine and yeah while this is true the castle doctrine doesn't apply here they're alleging that kyle rittenhouse provoked the attack either through legal or illegal conduct now specifically in this case it is through illegal conduct and due to the fact that a lot of people are legal laymans they assume that if you do something illegal and that creates a situation where you're attacked under no circumstances can you claim self-defense later if you fight back however that is not the case under wisconsin law if you go to their self-defense statute go to section NUMBER_TOKENa and NUMBER_TOKENb which i will read for you it makes it clear what the circumstance is even if you're initially in the wrong you are able to still claim self-defense and tell me if they sound familiar NUMBER_TOKENa a person who engages in lawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke the attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such an attack except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm in such a case the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means of escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant so what section a clearly means is that if you're committing a crime and that crime instigates a situation where somebody attacks you you do not have the same exact self-defense protections as a normal person in the state of wisconsin in this scenario in order for you to be able to use for second cause death or serious bodily harm you must first exhaust all the reasonable options of escape kyle rittenhouse was trying to escape from joseph rosenbaum just before the shooting it is indisputable apparently according to the defense drone footage will show that once kyle rittenhouse was at that point in the car dealership he had no way to run any further this is totally within the definition of wisconsin state statute so even if they show kyle rittenhouse allegedly provoking some kind of an incident with joseph rosenbaum which i don't believe he still tried to flee the location which is him exhausting his options to escape when things got dicey he didn't just provoke him and then shoot him that's not what happened and rosenbaum is not within his rights at all
NO_SEGMENT_TOKEN