So far, the only thing of which Rittenhouse is clearly guilty is carrying a gun underage. Wisconsin is an open-carry state but the minimum age to carry is 18.
The first-degree murder charges are going to be difficult to prosecute because certain elements of the crime do not seem to be present.
However, other charges, including non-negligent manslaughter and negligent manslaughter could still be on the table.
If Rittenhouse gets off with just the weapons charge, it will because prosecutors think there is a strong likelihood that Rittenhouse first in self-defense.
But there are two reasons why the authorities will be working very hard to make some kind of charge stick and neither one of them have anything to do with race.
First and foremost, just letting Rittenhouse walk could inspire others. As we've already seen, the mixture of firearms and activism isn't the exclusive province of the right.
Second, the legal standard for the justifiable use of deadly force is very high, which is as it should be. There has to be an imminent threat of grievous bodily injury or death (yes, this is also true in stand-your-ground states). That may have been present in the second shooting but there are legitimate questions about the first.
Politicians in Kenosha and Madison are well aware that more civil unrest is likely if Rittenhouse is determined to have acted in self-defense. I think that's one of the big reasons why police were quick to charge Rittenhouse with premeditated murder.
The thesis of this article is deeply flawed. Kyle Rittenhouse is no Brock Turner and Kenosha isn't in Santa Clara County, California. Saying it's so doesn't make it so.
The Kyle Rittenhouse case also has no relation to Tamir Rice. Like it or not, the reason none of the police were charged is that it could not be proven they did anything wrong. Unlike the kangaroo court of public opinion, real investigators and prosecutors have to work with the actual evidence and real laws.