He will have his own lawsuits against him to deal with too, because, well, this is America. Standards and threshholds of proof less in a civil case, difference in evidence rules, etc. etc. One could argue that he has no assets so that will keep the wolves off his arse because "why bother." But that is an area where all this talk in forums and the media about his "Sandmanning" the media works against him. They want to get in line to sue him thinking if Rittenhouse is going to end out with a kabillion like Sandman then even if their claim is worthless he will settle out for some piddling amount that is still sweet. Mind you, as you know, I said nothing about whether his claims against the media or "victims" claims against him have any legal merit. That feeding frenzy will pick up speed regardless because, again, this is America, and it is what we do.
Can't these people file a wrongful death suit in civil court? That's what happened to OJ right? I'm pretty sure if they get a judgement, which they probably will because just like OJ, the jury is allowed to view more evidence, and that judgement is like a lien on future assets. At least it was with OJ. $35M. I don't think he's paid it yet. Safe bet. In a way I feel sorry for the kid, but at the same time he never should have been there imo. Especially with a friggin' assault rifle. When we were that age all we wanted to do was get f'd up and see who score the most pretty girls. The media on both sides.... bad juju. I'm telling ya, they are pouring gas on a fire. I don't say this lightly because this is not something to joke about, but I really get the vibe that there is going to be much more, and perhaps even uglier, civil unrest. I can't think of a solution. Cable news is gonna cable news, and social media is gonna social media. The snowball is getting bigger and its scary really because I truly believe 90% of us are all on the same sheet of music. It's the sensationalism that worries me. I'm tellin' ya, human nature doesn't change and history is littered with violent upheavals. What's new to the mix however is our connected world and anyone with a degree of celebrity, on either side, commands a certain degree of power. Do we really need this: I dunno. Best one can do is take care of themselves and their families I guess. One thing's for sure, you can bet Putin is laughing at it all, and in his mind at least, it's a knowing laugh.
OJ has a pension, several actually and they are pretty much untouchable. A young person doesn't have that sort of protected income so yeah Kyle is going to be in lawsuits in both directions. But the overwhelming video evidence still stands and self-defense is self-defense even in a civil lawsuit. Having been emphatically acquitted of criminal charges does carry a lot of weight. The multiple parties who have slandered or libeled Kyle probably amount to damages far in excess of liability he may face in 3 or 4 civil suits due to the sheer weight of that video and audio evidence. He is going to be in the business of litigating for quite some time. A historic parallel is Annie Oakley who was slandered in newspapers across the country. She travelled all across America with a mobile legal team suing each and every outlet who had printed total crap and it took years. She ended up fabulously wealthy for the time.
Yes, of course. Lots of angles to work. Some of the families of the shootees, at least Huber's, have already files suit against the City of Kenosha this past summer on the argument that their actions toward "the vigilantes" amounted to an implied "deputizing" of them so the City is liable. Ok, you guys in the back, hold the laughter down. The thought of either the city having money or Rittenhouse possibly coming into money from lawsuits against media (their thinking, not mine) is like blood in the water for them. It's like Chris Christie suddenly getting a free ticket to the buffet lunch, you know there is going to be action ahead.
Lets not forget the hurdle for a verdict is much lower in a civil case than in a criminal case. That is why OJ lost the civil case even though he won the criminal case. People think getting acquitted in a trial means you are free and clear in a civil suit but that is not the case. Civil suits have different causes of action and standards/requirements for a jury decision. If Ritti was reckless in entereing the crowd with a loaded weapon he could be held liable in a civil suit even though he was acquitted in a criminal suit.
That's one reason why OJ won at the criminal trial but lost the civil suit. Lower thresholds of proof in the civil suit. But many argue- and certainly I am one of them- that the evidence in the OJ trial was massively overwhelming- but the jury wanted to even the score for the Rodney King beating and related flap-regardless of what the evidence was. I don't know what more evidence would have been needed. Oh, I see, Ron Goldman's blood was positively found in OJ's Bronco. Coincidence? Yeh. Okay. I don't want to replay that. My point is just that if prior trials don't go the way jurors wanted (as with OJ's jurors allegedly pissed about Rodney King outcome) they are sometimes loaded for bear in the next trial that comes along where they think they can even a score. Rittenhouse would/will have to navigate that if he gets sued. Maybe it would be a major factor, maybe not at all. Don't know. In an ideal world you can ferret that out on jury selection. But we don't live in an ideal world.
Right wingers love mythology. Take for instance the narrative Nick Sandmann got $200 million or something crazy like that. In real life he got a nuisance fee. Probably enough to pay for his college, which is nice, but he ain’t living large.
Look at those crazy rioters… in Europe. Setting fires and causing destruction… over pandemic restrictions for the unvaccinated.