ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (01/15 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Recording of Emergency ACSOL meeting about new SORNA regulations



WI: Rittenhouse attorney wants to show victim was a person convicted of a sex offense

Source: 7/6/21

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Kyle Rittenhouse’s attorney wants a judge to allow him to argue that one of the men his client fatally shot during a Wisconsin protest was a person convicted of a sex offense, saying it supports a defense theory that he attacked Rittenhouse and intended to take his gun because he couldn’t legally possess one.

Mark Richards maintained in court filings Thursday that Joseph Rosenbaum was convicted of having sex with a minor in Arizona in 2002 and was prohibited from possessing firearms. Rosenbaum started the altercation with Rittenhouse in hopes of making off with his assault-style rifle, which only bolsters Rittenhouse’s self-defense argument, Richards wrote.

Kimberley Motley, an attorney representing Rosenbaum’s estate, rejected Richards’ theory but declined to comment further since the case against Rittenhouse remains open.

“We believe strongly that Mr. Rittenhouse was the aggressor and his actions were not lawful,” she said in a phone interview Tuesday.

Richards also filed a motion to dismiss a charge that Rittenhouse couldn’t possess a gun because he was too young under Wisconsin law, arguing that statutes prohibit minors from possessing short-barreled shotguns and rifles, and Rittenhouse’s assault-style rifle doesn’t meet that definition.

Rittenhouse, who is white, traveled to Kenosha from his home in Antioch, Illinois, on Aug. 25 to answer a call from local militia to protect businesses from protesters. The demonstrations began after a white Kenosha police officer shot Jacob Blake, who is Black, during a domestic disturbance, leaving Blake paralyzed from the waist down.

The protests turned chaotic that night. According to prosecutors, Rittenhouse opened fire on Rosenbaum, Anthony Huber and Gaige Grosskreutz. He killed Rosenbaum and Huber. Grosskreutz was hit but survived.

Rittenhouse was 17 years old at the time. Now 18, he maintains he fired in self-defense but prosecutors have charged him with a litany of counts, including reckless homicide, recklessly endangering safety, attempted first-degree intentional homicide and being a minor in possession of a dangerous weapon.

Black Lives Matter supports have painted him as a trigger-happy white supremacist. Conservatives have made him into a symbol for gun rights, generating $2 million for his bail. His trial is scheduled to begin Nov. 1.

Prosecutors filed motions last week asking a judge to allow a video from July 2020 which they said shows Rittenhouse striking a teenage girl in the back on Kenosha’s waterfront. They also want to argue that Rittenhouse is affiliated with the Proud Boys, a far-right extremist group.

Photos taken in January show Rittenhouse drinking in a Mount Pleasant bar and gesturing with what appeared to be a white power symbol. Prosecutors said in their motions they have learned the people Rittenhouse was with included the leader of the Proud Boys’ Wisconsin chapter and several of its high-ranking members.

Richards filed another motion on Thursday arguing evidence related to the altercation between Rittenhouse and the teenage girl is irrelevant.

He also argued that there’s no indication Rittenhouse knew any of the Proud Boys before that night in the bar or that he has associated with the group. What’s more, nothing supports the argument that race was a factor in the shootings, Richards said.

Huber and Grosskreutz were part of a “mob” that was chasing Rittenhouse, Richards wrote in the motion. Huber hit Rittenhouse with a skateboard and tried to grab his gun, and Grosskreutz pointed a pistol at him, Richards wrote.

Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder has scheduled a hearing on the motions for Sept. 17.

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The next conclusion will be that anyone labeled a “sex offender” can be shot at any time because they might be planning a crime!

Didn’t some county prosecutor actually go forward in permitting just that defense?

I could have sworn I read it somewhere.

Judges permit defenses, not prosecutors.

Ah, thanks for correcting me on that lil’ technicality. haha
I’m wondering where I read up on some prosecutor using that defense. (that the victim is a person convicted of a sex offense and, therefore, the perpetrator should get a lesser sentence because at least the perp was doing some service for at least one potential sex victim who “could have” fallen victim to a sex offense.)

Last edited 6 months ago by AC

Ugh. Despicable. This man gives defense attorneys a bad name.

Evidently, even the laziest, most unreliable attorneys will defend with their all and zeal, if the defense is against a person charged with a sex offese (against a ‘child’).

I think Court TV is going to broadcast this trial.

It would only be better if Nancy Grace was givin’ real time analysis of the two teams and the judge with a telestrator to show movement in the courtroom with visual aids too, but I digress.

I stopped reading the article where it mentioned he is white, and Blake is black.
I absolutely loathe race baiting journalism.

It always is now days more then ever

Funny little side limb: didn’t people convicted of sex offenses used to include black men who were convicted for having sex with white women?

Talking about race makes you uncomfortable, huh? hmmmm……

No it doesn’t. My point is I don’t care what color a person’s skin is, and the media shouldn’t care either. I’m sick of reading headlines that say “black man shot by white man”, or “white cop beats black man”. Why should it matter? Its all about race baiting and the media trying to stir up dissension.
I don’t care what a person’s skin color is. Be decent to me and I’ll be decent to you. Be an a-hole to me and I’ll be an a-hole to you.

Unfortunately, race is all too many people care about of late. It is the baseline by which they judge others. Does ignoring the color of one’s skin make you uncomfortable? Hmmmm…

This is a very slanted article after stating the proposed theory. Felons cannot own a firearm and that was one of the theories Rosenbaum chased and tried to grab Rittenhouse’s gun. I wouldn’t buy that theory, but Rosenbaum was the aggressor.

The author left out how all this began as well as is incorrect about why Rittenhouse’s action on that day. Rittenhouse was working in Kenosha that day and after work, his friend recruited him to help protect a car dealership. Rosenbaum started a fire in a big metal trash can near a gas station and Rittenhouse put it out with a fire extinguisher. Then Rosenbaum was chased after Rittenhouse.

It’s terrible writing and should have just left it at the theory. It sucks the title of sex offender is being blasted, but it’s also factual to the theory. Everything after the theory being presented is garbage as it doesn’t have pertinent coverage of the whole situation.

I concur and have donated to Rittenhouse’s defense. That kid is a hero and the people he shot were cockroaches.

What a disgusting thing to say. Our movement doesn’t need people like you, goodbye.

C, your statement is amazingly hypocritical if you or a loved one are a registrant!

You have been politically brainwashed to make a hateful statement of condemnation of the victim of a murderer.

Now consider that there are millions of people who would feel satisfaction in reading that you and other of us registrants were murdered by politically-motivated killers who consider us registrants “cockroaches”.

Are you going to change your attitude and join us in our united fight against prejudice, hatred, and violence against us?

Or are you going to continue being a troll that encourages violence that will affect us?

Just say it, murder is illegal except when a person forced to register is killed. This is the logic that occurs when fear and hate become extreme of people forced to register. Hate to have this lawyer defend registrants.

Their contention is the guy was a sex offender who was prohibited from obtaining a firearm through legal means, and so he decided to attack a rifle-carrying man on the street to get one? This is their legal defense and how they explain that their client was only defending himself?


Does the attorney expect anyone to believe this? To believe that the sex offender had no less risky methods of illegally obtaining a firearm?

The man has a history of committing personal attack. Blake was shot by a cop and while Blake Shelton as under indictment and warrant. His attorney cut a deal without SO Registration. Something not available to all ex post participants of registration. Obviously this violates the spirit behind equal protection clauses. So the man that started police action and subsequent all out riot, caught a break and didn’t become a registrant \ slave. Nevertheless he suffered paralysis to his lower half. It was the rioting that brought Rittenhouse to the gun party. The press acts as if he was the only person packing iron, but infact gun fire was occurring, looting and arson. A fargin madhouse, all packed into one case by lightspeed media that has mostly moved on. One moron begets a hundred more in an hours time, in two hours, its a thousand. Be it social media or anti social media?

These two teams are looking like kids arguing on the playground for the last seat on a swing set with the playground monitor trying to decide who gets it. Hamilton Burger and Perry Mason are rolling in their character graves.

Charge Rittenhouse with “a minor in possession of a dangerous weapon”… anything can be a dangerous weapon you dumbass, even a skateboard made into one, or a hammer, a pocket knife, a moving vehicle, etc. Don’t have to kill someone for the quickly created weapon to be dangerous, just hurt or maim is enough if the attorney is bright enough to spin it that way.

Trying to Justify murdering an unarmed man because he’s a sex offender is gonna be the new norm.
Anyone can just say he made sexual advances and then came at me i was so scared i shot him.

This will be a very interesting trial to watch, and I’ll do my best to bypass media daily translations and instead watch it live. Rittenhouse has the right to a rigorous defense.

In the context of this article, if Rittenhouse was acting in self defense because Rosenbaum was on the hit list, maybe Rosenbaum was acting in self defense and trying to disarm a dangerous Rittenhouse who wanted to kill Rosenbaum because of his being on the hit list. Registrant or not, Rosenbaum had a self defense right to disarm a dangerous man for the sake of public safety when there is an unlawful immediate threat to life or of great bodily injury to anyone.

I’ll wait for the trial for the facts.

Didn’t just mention he was a convicted felon…. but, worst of all, a registered “sex offender”!! A obvious suggestion that Rosenbaum was “less than human” and killing him was less of a crime and more like an acceptable public service. 😒
Am I wrong?

Last edited 6 months ago by David⚜️

This is just a defense tactic to potentially induce a jury to emotional bias. The defense is not intended as a defense, but merely as a vehicle to insert the fact that Rosenbaum was an SO. As David pointed out, it would have been enough that he was a convicted felon and not permitted to possess a firearm. The actual felony has no relevance and should be disallowed as prejudicial.

It is an absurd defense in any case. But you can’t blame the attorney for giving it a try. Probing absurd but legal tactics is what both defense attorneys and prosecutors do for a living, and also preserves the issue on appeal. Hopefully the judge will see through this particular sham defense.


This is Stretch-Armstrong level of a defense stretch. Of all the ways to obtain a gun when you legally can’t, wrestling it out of the hands of an individual during a riot has to rank as the bottom of the bottom. The judge is going to dismiss this hard.

Anyone who watched the videos available online knows that Rittenhouse was attacked by all three men he shot. Rosenbaum’s previous sex offense has nothing to do with his attack on Rittenhouse and shouldn’t be used against him. The video alone shows he attacked Rittenhouse and should be enough.

I’ll add that other videos of Rosenbaum demonstrate he was extremely confrontational with other people and looking for a fight. He got one and lost in spectacular fashion.

I dont want to be unkind, or anything, but, have you ever seen a more punchable face than that? If this little jerk gets sent to the slammer, like he should, he is in for a really bad time.

Really? You like punching teenage boys in the face? What else, I wonder?
The “little jerk” was attacked by a mob of punks who were torching businesses that feed people’s families and he rightfully defended himself. In a normal world he’d have been lauded as a hero. Instead, he is a political prisoner to appease the woke mob, a group, I’ve a feeling, you’re a member. When the mob comes for you, you better hope there’s a Kyle Rittenhouse to stand between you and them.

Oh please. ******************
We need less Kyle Rittenhouses in this society and a complete repeal of the 2nd amendment. I hope they throw the book at him. He deserves nothing less.

Remember this hero would possibly relish shooting any one of us to attain hero status…. my opinion
My surprise is that the victims s.o. background wasn’t written about earlier.
The man who was shot by the cop had his “sexual violence” issues brought up in the news early on.

**********, This kid brought a rifle to the scene to obviously try and make a statement. and, as a true idiot, shot people instead of exiting the scene. I was in the 1968 anti-Vietnam demonstration action in Chicago. No guns. Not even the cops. And you say what else? *************************************

Using sex offense as an excuse to promote and facilitate crime…. one which is more egregious than many of the non-violent, unforceful, non-contact sex crimes out there….

****smacks head****

For a far more illuminating and accurate account of Joseph Rosenbaum (the victim) and the circumstances leading to his death, I strongly urge you all to please read the following article:

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x