Chris Cuomo Joins in on Attack Against Rittenhouse as 'Chump,' While Ranting Against State Self-Defense Law

|
Posted: Nov 20, 2021 8:00 AM
Chris Cuomo Joins in on Attack Against Rittenhouse as 'Chump,' While Ranting Against State Self-Defense Law

Source: Photo by Evan Agostini/Invision/AP, File

During the Friday night edition of "Cuomo Prime Time," host Chris Cuomo took his anger out on not just Kyle Rittenhouse, who a jury had found "not guilty" that same day, but the state law on self-defense which enabled the jury to find him not guilty. As NewsBusters' Nicholas Fondacaro highlighted, Cuomo had a lot of lousy takes. What should be particularly concerning, though, is his utter disregard for state laws on self-defense.

Cuomo just kept going after the Wisconsin law regarding self-defense, which, by the way, is a state Cuomo does not have a connection to, since he lives in New York:

This prosecution did not prove the defendant provoked this specific situation with these three men. It didn't. And therefore, under this law, Rittenhouse had no duty to retreat, which is huge. When you take that out of self-defense, you are creating an incredibly low bar and making it way too easy to kill.

No duty to retreat -- and by the way, to be fair to the facts here, he did retreat. He was running away, okay? He had no duty to exhaust all non-lethal means, no duty to fight them off, to kick, to try anything else. He had no duty under the law to do that. If the jury thought it was reasonable for him -- another aspect of the law that you haven't been told enough about -- it's not what they would do. It's not what the reasonable person would do.

Cuomo then went on to refer to Rittenhouse as "a chump," as if that has any effect on the young man's rights or affected the state law he used as his defense. 

This law requires them to think, was it reasonable for the defendant, an overwhelmed 17-year-old. And that's how he obviously came off on the stand. This law is a shooter's dream. The jury can't ask what a reasonable person would do or what they would do? You have to be in his shoes? Even if they think he's a chump? If it was reasonable for him to think they were about to really hurt him or try to kill him, the law justifies it. And that kid on that stand painted the right picture for that jury.

The law also says that the prosecutor has to disprove the defendant's need for self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. That's a higher burden -- it's the highest we have -- and much higher than other state statutes. This law saved Rittenhouse as much or more as his weapon did.

The jury is not the bad guy. Race is not the bad guy. Politics is not the bad guy. This statute is. And there are many like it, a growing number actually. It's right akin to stand your ground.

Oh no, the dreaded stand your ground laws. 

Cuomo even got an interview with Rittenhouse's defense attorney, Mark Richards, as he continued to beclown himself. 

He at least did offer insight into why it is he is no fan of the Wisconsin state law, considering his level of confusion about the amount of danger Rittenhouse actually was in.

Cuomo offered that "it's hard to believe that somebody chasing you is going to beat you to death." When Richards "why else was [Rosenbaum] chasing [Rittenhouse]?," Cuomo went back to hating on the law.  "Probably to get him and beat him up, hurt him," Cuomo began to offer. "But again, my problem is with the law here. Look, we don't know what he was going to do -- now we do. Because now we know that none of the people involved here ever killed anybody before or known for that kind of violence."

Rosenbaum may not have been charged with such murder, but he was accused of and charged with multiple counts of child rape. He ultimately took a plea deal. The court had also been asked to revoke his probation. He was out on bond over a  domestic abuse battery accusation.

One user offered a particularly thoughtful take about how misrepresentations from CNN and its low ratings. 

CNN has consistently performed poorly in the ratings.