This article assumes what in fact was always in doubt. Rittenhouse claimed self-defense. His prosecutors claimed it was murder.

Rittenhouse's supporters do not think murder is okay. They think self-defense is okay.

Why do his supporters think it is self-defense?

1. One of the dead--Huber-- was pounding Kyle's head with a skateboard. The risk of life-altering brain damage is very real. If someone was pounding my head with a heavy wooden and metal object, I would feel justified in shooting.

2. Another man--Gaige Grosskreutz--testified in open court that Kyle did not shoot him until after Grosskreutz pointed a gun at him.

Do you really mean to tell me that if someone pointed a gun at you that you would stand there and let him shoot you?

3. Joseph Rosenbaum was, according to courtroom testimony, behaving in a *very* aggressive manner, throwing rocks and trying to start fires. He had chased Kyle down and lunged for his gun. A man named Balch testified in open court that Rosenberg had said, “If I catch any of you guys alone tonight I’m going to f—- kill you!” Kyle was within earshot. Rittenhouse did not shoot Rosenberg until he lunged for the gun.

Should Kyle Rittenhouse been in Kenosha? Arguably not. But he was 17 at the time and his father lived there. Being in the city where your father lives is not all that outrageous.

Also, the police in Kenosha were outnumbered and overwhelmed. Rioters had burned 90 buildings--45 of which were totally destroyed. Since many insurance policies do not cover damage from civil unrest, small business owners stood to lose everything.

If your home or business was surrounded by rioters setting fire to buildings and the police were overwhelmed, would you really have told someone like Kyle Rittehouse to go home?

On another topic, I find it disturbing that so many people were so eager to send a 17-year-old to prison for decades, if not life, without considering exculpatory evidence.

A standard tenet of liberalism has always been that the accused is entitled to the benefit of the doubt. There is plenty of room for doubt in this case.

Recall, too, that a failure to give Rittenhouse the benefit of the doubt will help create a way of thinking that will, in the long run, do considerable harm to other defendants, many of whom are low-income males of color.