Judge Rules Kyle Rittenhouse’s Victims Can’t Be Called Victims At Trial—They Can Be Called ‘Rioters,’ ‘Looters’ and ‘Arsonists’ Though

At this point, it’s easy to feel like Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse is going to walk away scot-free after killing two people and injuring a third with an AK-47 he couldn’t legally carry. White America simply loves him too much to truly hold him accountable for his actions.

Source: Anadolu Agency / Getty

On Monday, Wisconsin Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder—the same judge who basically gave Rittenhouse a free white privilege pass after he violated the conditions of his bail—ruled that during the 18-year-old’s murder trial, prosecutors may not refer to Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber, who were killed, and Gaige Grosskreutz, who survived, as “victims” because the term is “loaded.” Schroeder also ruled, however, that the three VICTIMS could be referred to as “rioters,” “looters” and “arsonists,” because, apparently, he doesn’t think those terms are loaded at all.

The Washington Post reported that Schroeder advised Rittenhouse’s defense team against using pejorative terms to describe the teen’s VICTIMS, but he said the aforementioned terms that make them sound like criminals could be used in closing arguments if evidence shows the men participated in burning and looting during civil unrest over the shooting of Jacob Blake. In fact, Schroeder said blatantly that Mark Richards, one of Rittenhouse’s attorneys, could “demonize them if he wants if he thinks it will win points with the jury.”

Bruh, WHAT???

The very definition of White privilege in the American Justice system:

The prosecution in the Kyle Rittenhouse case is not allowed to use the word victims

But the defence is allowed to call them arsonists, looters and rioters… pic.twitter.com/alLoL3hyAA

— TheSadTruth💙 (@ReportsDaNews) October 27, 2021

Seriously, how white and MAGA-friendly does a defendant have to be for a judge to feel like he doesn’t even need to fake impartiality anymore?

Mind you, in all the reports that have been done on Rittenhouse and his VICTIMS, none of them have indicated that the people who were shot were engaged in rioting. It’s almost as if some people feel anyone who was present for the demonstrations against police violence must have also been guilty of acts of violence. It’s also much easier to call someone a “rioter” or “looter” when they aren’t alive to defend themselves.

But whatever, maybe defense attorneys have been sitting on some kind of evidence that hasn’t been available to the media. But what about Grosskteutz, the lone survivor of Rittenhouse’s “alleged” rampage who hasn’t been charged with any crimes related to rioting the night he was shot?

Apparently, all three of the VICTIMS don’t need to be proven rioters for them to be referred to as such as a collective.

“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,” Schroeder said.

But when it comes to the other word, the judge is far more conservative in allowing its usage.

“The word ‘victim’ is a loaded, loaded word,” he said. “ ‘Alleged victim’ is a cousin to it.”

Yeeeah, nah—it doesn’t at all look like this judge is going out of his way to set a white killer free.

Not. At. All.