WATCH: Cops Refuse to Arrest Teen who Turns himself in after Killing Two People


Perhaps Kyle Rittenhouse thought he would be protected by the same cops who gave him and his armed companions bottles of water while ordering protesters to get off the streets or get arrested Tuesday night in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

And perhaps he was right considering Kenosha police made no effort to arrest him even though he tried to turn himself in by walking up to them with his arms raised. The 17-year-old was not arrested until earlier today in Antioch, Illinois, which is about a 35-minute drive from Kenosha.

The aspiring cop is being charged with first degree intentional homicide, according to the New York Times. He shot two people to death and injured a third.

With a rifle strapped around his body, Rittenhouse was hanging out with a group of armed men described as a “militia” of “vigilantes,” by Kenosha County Sheriff David Beth.

The men said they were “protecting” businesses from damage by protesters who have been demonstrating for three nights since the police shooting of Jacob Blake, torching several businesses. Rittenhouse even did an interview with the Daily Caller before the shooting, explaining his motivations.

But they ended up getting into arguments and tensions escalated. Witnesses say Rittenhouse shot a man in the head and ran away with several people chasing him. He then turned around and fires, killing the second man and leaving the third man with a bullet would to the arm.

He then tried to turn himself but cops drove right past him.

Earlier in the evening, the cops were expressing their gratitude towards the men with guns, including Rittenhouse.

“We appreciate you guys,” the cops said through a loudspeaker to the armed men after handing them water.

Sheriff Beth said his deputies would have handed out water to anybody who asks but the video shows they were doing it while ordering protesters off the street in violation of the curfew while giving the armed men a pass in a blatant example of selective enforcement.

And the sheriff still has not explained how a man who just shot two people to death could end up in another state after attempting to surrender.

Meanwhile, Jacob Blake, the 29-year-old man shot in the back seven times by Kenosha police, has been told he is paralyzed from the shooting.

And Kenosha police have not yet released the name of the cop who shot him after he broke up a fight between two women.

UPDATE: Kyle Rittenhouse admired police, according to the Chicago Tribune.

His Facebook page, which was deactivated Wednesday morning after his bond court appearance, pays repeated homage to law enforcement, including a picture of him holding a long-arm rifle and framed with the “Blue Lives Matter” logo. Several posts also honored officers who died in the line of duty, while another shows him wearing a T-shirt with the logo for a popular police apparel manufacturer and Crocs emblazoned with the American flag.

The young man also has a yearslong affiliation with local police cadet programs, with photographs on social media showing him in full uniform complete with a badge, arm patch and trooper-style campaign hat. The Grayslake, Lindenhurst, Hainesville Public Safety Cadet program had pictures of Rittenhouse participating in its activities on social media before its Facebook page also was taken down Wednesday.

The cop who killed Blake has been identified as Rusten Sheskey, a seven-year veteran of the Kenosha Police Department, according to WDIO.

Police also said that a knife was found on the driver side floorboard of Blake’s car.


  1. this kid better learn how to fight, otherwise he’ll get put in a dress when he walks the yard!

    • reply toexcept for one problem! we don’t know if the first murder was self defense! as for the second MURDER, the crowd around him was alerted to his first murder and where trying to detain him!

    • reply toWhile it is true we do not know if the accused initiated contact with the deceased as that is not in any of the videos I’ve seen. However, given what we have seen, the kid was running away from the deceased, which virtually negates any previous action by the accused with regard to who initiated force earlier.

      Usually you cannot justify deadly force against an unarmed attacker, especially when you have not been even touched by the attacker. In this case the argument would be that the decease was chasing the accused and was throwing objects, as the accused was running away. At that point the deceased becomes the aggressor and the accused the defender.

      The defender can use deadly force if there is a disperity of force. As an example, a 89 year old can use deadly force against a 20 year old who punches him, justifiably. In this case, I think any reasonable person at age 17 of modest physique would be justified in using deadly force against an unarmed aggressor who is 36(close to prime physical fitness).

      “as for the second MURDER, the crowd around him was alerted to his first murder and where trying to detain him!”

      When you perform a citizens arrest, you are still bound by the “use of force continuum”. They did not notify him that they were performing a citizens arrest, they attacked him with deadly weapons. Case closed.

    • reply toof coarse you left out the part that the kid is not old enough to be carrying a gun in public. with two deaths and a third injured, there will be other felony charges not yet mentioned. as for telling him he is under citizens arrest that is not always required, like in this case.
      you can try to copsuck harder with someone else, it wont work with me!

    • reply to“of coarse you left out the part that the kid is not old enough to be carrying a gun in public. “

      Yes, because it is irrelevant when it comes to self defense. It is a misdemeanor offense(and victimless crime) that does not warrant being attacked and assaulted by another person. Do you suggest murder charges to be filed against all minors who defend themselves, with guns, in homes from intruders who intend to rape and kill?

      When someone is driving with a suspended license, but gets hit by a drunk driver who ran a red light, the drunk driver is not clear of fault.

      Even a felony concealed carry violation does not exclude a person from the right to defend themselves. The case law supports this common sense approach.

      “you can try to copsuck harder with someone else, it wont work with me!”

      He’s not a cop. He’s a naive 17 year old.

    • reply tothat some law degree you got there…. try going back to law school and get it right next time copsucker!

    • reply toConsidering he apparently knows the law better than you do, could you perhaps show your own law degree to prove he’s wrong? No? Well I guess his points stand.

      Got anything else?

  2. Sheriff Beth said his deputies would have handed out water to anybody who asks but the video shows they were doing it while ordering protesters off the street in violation of the curfew while giving the armed men a pass in a blatant example of selective enforcement.

    ahh the good old “selective enforcement”. if we don’t like you or your group, we WILL selectively enforce the law! if your one of our’s then you get a pass!

    SO….. if protesters show with guns, will they get get the “selective (free pass) enforcement” or get shot, arrested, killed for exercising there 2nd and 1st amendment rights???
    the blue lies mafia has already demonstrated there answer several times over! copsuckers “good”. protesters “bad”! VIDEO’S DON’T LIE!

    • Do you realize that the police are literally watching people burn cities to the ground and aren’t stopping them? Not only that but police allowed CHAZ to be a thing while they were patrolling in…guess what….military gear and AR15s…and the police let that happen for an entire month. All the while they were handing out AR15s to 15 year old kids who clearly demonstrated they didn’t even know how to remove the magazine, let alone safely operate a firearm. But NOBODY is up in arms about that. People applauded CHAZ when there were like 3 people dead within a week from shootings. You’re an idiot if you think protestors haven’t been given the fattest pass. You’re literally allowed to burn down entire cities, what more of a fucking pass do you want??

    • reply toyour trying to compare a one time thing to systematic tyranny. NEWS FLASH! these two are not the same! but if you would like to have a CHAZ popup in every major city, i sure we can make it happen!

  3. Did they have reasonable suspicion? I think no. If they stopped to detain him, would the complaint then have been that they did not get to the injured fast enough?

    Further analysis of the various videos show self defense.

    • The presumption in self defense law is that anyone who violently attacks a person visibly armed with a gun obviously thinks they’ll win an ensuing fight, which in turn leads to the conclusion that the attacker must be armed too, they just haven’t drawn their weapon yet.

      This justifies armed self defense against an apparently unarmed person.

  4. Oh Carlos this is a terrible article. Kyle was being attacked both times he shot and Blake isn’t dead.

  5. Wow, so many pro-vigilante people around here today. He showed up with an AR15 because he wanted to use it. Same with his mom (who should also be in jail for being an accessory to 1st degree murder).

    Also, did the curfew rules have exceptions for armed vigilantes? Were they allowed to break that oh-so-important curfew? It would seem that the cops selectively enforced that rule as well.

    This incident is rife with examples of double-standards that are as bright as a supernova!

    Can’t wait to see how you all deal when a black dude with a long gun shoots up a Confederate monument rally. I’m sure you’ll defend him just the same. Right??

    • I don’t think the word vigilante applies here.

      “a member of a volunteer committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily”

      I did not see any examples of people summarily arresting, detaining, and punishing anyone there.

      “Also, did the curfew rules have exceptions for armed vigilantes? Were they allowed to break that oh-so-important curfew? It would seem that the cops selectively enforced that rule as well.”

      Prosecutorial discretion heavily influences police enforcement/discretion. You’d be hard pressed to find a jury that will prosecute people defending private property from vandals and arsonists. They were from what I can see, not there to stop people from breaking the curfew.

      It is hard to justify strictly equal enforcement of the law when there are so many laws on the books. “Three Felonies a Day” comes to mind. The law is not enforced to it’s fullest extent and I am thankful for that. I would hate to be arrested or detained every time I go 3 miles over the speed limit, step off the sidewalk into the roadway, or forget to put on my seat belt for 2 seconds. Similarly, I doubt you would advocate arresting and charging with assault everyone who tackles a jumper(suicide) or children that play fight.

      Research “Disparity of Force and Self-Defense”

      “Can’t wait to see how you all deal when a black dude with a long gun shoots up a Confederate monument rally. I’m sure you’ll defend him just the same. Right??”

      What does the color of skin have to do with this? Especially considering both subjects here are white skinned.

    • Well none of these people were black, so idk what you’re talking about. Plus, if there was a black man there and he was viciously attacked for no reason, then yes I’d support him defending himself. YOU’RE the only one thats pulling the race card. Also, way to compare a statue rally to a literal riot lmao. So disingenuous it’s not even funny.

    • L:ets see…you should sell tickets to your shows, reading minds, from the past in fact. Cant you do better than that. Why not just say the 17yearold made the idiots that were rioting, causing havoc, burning, and breaking property(not their own property of course). He made them come there and burn down the two other businesses in that area. You also don’t show the full video to keep it in context, but these puppets don’t want that anyway. So the rioters had injured one of their own, the police were nearby and the 17year old was helping the rioter with some injuries when he noticed that the police were gone and the animals were closing in. Since the rioters only fight 5 on 1, cause they just little girlie men, the 17year old boy backed up and kept going until you see the video..well some of it. it’s been edited for the puppets liking.
      Im not a fan of the cops, that’s no secret, but I am even less a fan of these rioters. They are lucky they keep this chicken shit in submissive portland or other cities owned by the left. Try that shit in Fresno, CA, it will be a much much different outcome. This whole town is a militia. There would be no riots, a lot of ass-kickings would take place, then we would those sorry asses back to submissive portland.
      I do have one idea about cops shooting people, this is pretty progressive but…how about next time, and there will be a next time, the next time someone with a history of home invasions, or selling drugs, or whatever history you want, how about that person, listen to the cops. This is a new approach that apparently some people fail to remember until they done fucked up to much and get shot. Don’t fight back, hmmmm…dodon’t fight at all………hmmm Yeah I haven’t seen the video of someone totally complying with the police just getting beat and shot. I have lived it, yes right here in Clovis, CA, had mine and my cousins’ ass kicked and hogtied, and tased. Years ago. But we were fucking up at the time and got our dose of brutality. but we don’t cry about it like bitches and were not black fanfare.
      anyways.. let’s watch more videos of rioters getting beat down. hell yes.
      and by the way, please anyone that wants to riot, come to Freno. Every day, attitude adjustment and ass-whoopings given away for free at noon.

  6. Carlos you need to do better research before posting. You have set PINAC way back with this one. Young man was attacked and lawfully defended himself it appears. End qualified immunity but for gods sake BLM is a marxist organization and if empowered will end the Bill of Rights…you cannot exercise your rights while infringing on mine and thats what these rioters are doing..really dissappointed in you. 3rd CAG USMC 70-71 with the yards and in defence of the knut

    • This. It’s not good optics to be openly opposed to some human rights while protecting others. Nobody in history has ever been against all human rights for everyone, it’s that selective support that gets people and regimes labeled as being human rights abusers.

      With human rights it’s very much all or nothing, and insisting that the victim of no less than three violent crimes is somehow the bad guy for choosing not to die that night is disingenuous at best.

      The first guy that was shot was aggressively attacking him as he retreated, and was a much larger man. That’s a justified shooting right there, because when you attack someone you know has a gun and try to back them into a corner, you demonstrate a personal belief that you will win a deadly force fight.

      The boy then noticed a crowd gathering, and heard people exhorting the crowd to attack him. So he attempted to retreat, and the crowd, rapidly turning into a mob, followed him. That was an aggressive act.

      One of the members of the crowd decided to attack a boy armed with a gun, who had already killed someone that night – in fact, the second attacker believed he was stopping a murderer/potential mass shooter, but was mistaken. That justified him in making a citizen’s arrest, but he didn’t attempt one. Instead, the second attacker went directly to deadly force in lieu of an arrest by attempting to strike the boy in the head with a blunt weapon. Again, this is a grown man attacking a boy who is attempting to retreat peacefully. But since he’s been knocked down at that point and the deadly force attack continues, he is justified in shooting.

      And then the third guy attacked. A felon in illegal possession of a firearm, who fired multiple shots at the boy who was STILL trying to retreat peacefully. You’ll notice that the people baying for the kid’s blood don’t like to mention the third attacker, but he got shot too. If the kid was unjustified in shooting anyone that night, why is it that they don’t mention the third person the kid shot?

      After that, the kid tried to surrender to police, but the police weren’t enforcing any laws that night, so they didn’t arrest him. The fact that a politically-motivated prosecutor ordered his arrest later on, and filed charges that disallow a self defense plea must be purely coincidental, right?

      The murder charges against the kid are just as bogus as the resisting arrest and trespassing charges against you, Carlos, all those years ago at that train station.

      Rittenhouse is just as much a kid as Trayvon Martin was – same age and all. But notice how many people are demanding Rittenhouse be punished for self defense, who vehemently defend Martin on the same basis? There’s only two differences between the two boys – both 17. The first is that Martin was the aggressor in a deadly force attack while Rittenhouse was the defender in three deadly force attacks.

      The second difference is that Rittenhouse is white and Martin was black. Makes me wonder about the motivation here, it really does.

Comments are closed.