Kyle Rittenhouse, previous owner of a Smith & Wesson M&P15

[Maybenaut]

I've been stupid busy the last couple days, but as the resident Wisconsin criminal lawyer here, I want to point out that actually (and it gives me absolutely no pleasure to say this) Lin Wood is in the right with the letters to the court regarding the bond money. Assuming bond is not forfeited (including some amount used to pay court costs and/or restitution in the event Rittenhouse is convicted), Wisconsin law requires that bond money be returned to the person or persons who posted it. So yeah, Lin Wood's organization should get their money back. And if you think about it, it would be perverse in the extreme if it were to be otherwise and Rittenhouse stood to be enriched to the tune of $2 million whenever the case concluded.

In fact, although I never did this while I was in private practice, it is quite common for defense lawyers to file letters with the court - countersigned by the client of course - requesting that a specific amount of the client's bond be returned to the lawyer and not to whomever posted it, as a way for the lawyer to obtain some security for a retainer that has not been paid in full. Again, not something I ever did, but not at all an uncommon occurrence.

Could the Court require Lin Wood to return it to the people who donated it?

[fierceredpanda]

I've been stupid busy the last couple days, but as the resident Wisconsin criminal lawyer here, I want to point out that actually (and it gives me absolutely no pleasure to say this) Lin Wood is in the right with the letters to the court regarding the bond money. Assuming bond is not forfeited (including some amount used to pay court costs and/or restitution in the event Rittenhouse is convicted), Wisconsin law requires that bond money be returned to the person or persons who posted it. So yeah, Lin Wood's organization should get their money back. And if you think about it, it would be perverse in the extreme if it were to be otherwise and Rittenhouse stood to be enriched to the tune of $2 million whenever the case concluded.

In fact, although I never did this while I was in private practice, it is quite common for defense lawyers to file letters with the court - countersigned by the client of course - requesting that a specific amount of the client's bond be returned to the lawyer and not to whomever posted it, as a way for the lawyer to obtain some security for a retainer that has not been paid in full. Again, not something I ever did, but not at all an uncommon occurrence.

Could the Court require Lin Wood to return it to the people who donated it?

Wisconsin law does not provide any mechanism for doing so, and even if it did, I don't see how such a requirement could possibly be enforced. When bail is given, the clerk of courts for the county where the case is proceeding will take basic information from whoever posted the bond (name, address, phone number, etc.). They don't have the information of the donors to the foundation, so there's not really any way the court could order return of monies to person or persons unknown. And it would be a complete shitshow if Rittenhouse is ultimately convicted and they had to give it back to the donors, because you still get your bond back if the defendant is convicted, but costs and restitution are deducted from it first before it is returned. So how is Wood supposed to decide which donors get their money back and which ones paid to cover the court costs and/or restitution? It's the same with my clients whose family raises a five-figure bond collectively. One person ultimately sends the check to the clerk of courts, but the court has no way of knowing who raised what and ordering that they be repaid if the bond is discharged at the end of the case. The family has to work that out among themselves. Maybe such a scenario would be grounds for a civil lawsuit, but that would probably be a jurisdictional clusterfuck in this case (what jurisdiction is proper to sue the Fightback Foundation?), and most donors probably gave such a small amount that the costs of litigation would make the whole exercise pointless.

Also let's not forget that bail funds exist for less ignoble causes. A podcast I listen to spent most of last year telling listeners who wanted to support them with monthly Patreon donations to donate to a bail fund instead. Literally no one who donates to such funds expects (or should expect) to get that money back. The whole point is that you're going to be out that money permanently, and in the event that the bail fund gets it back, they should use it to bail another person out, and on and on in perpetuity. In this case, does that mean that Lin Wood's foundation potentially stands to gain $2 million? Yeah. Do I think donors thought about that very much before clicking the "donate" button? I do not.

[neonzx]

So Ricky Schroder gets his $50k back, too?

[Maybenaut]

In this case, does that mean that Lin Wood's foundation potentially stands to gain $2 million? Yeah. Do I think donors thought about that very much before clicking the "donate" button? I do not.

There’s the grift. It’s brilliant. Two million dollars and he didn’t have to do anything other than generate outrage.

[fierceredpanda]

In this case, does that mean that Lin Wood's foundation potentially stands to gain $2 million? Yeah. Do I think donors thought about that very much before clicking the "donate" button? I do not.

There’s the grift. It’s brilliant. Two million dollars and he didn’t have to do anything other than generate outrage.

And that's different from a metric boatload of other 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) groups...how?

Don't get me wrong: It would be extremely interesting if someone wanted to peek at the Fightback Foundation's Form 990s when all is said and done. I just can't get too worked up about it, because it isn't exactly shocking to me that there are nonprofits raking in cash hand over fist by doing nothing other than generating outrage amongst a particular audience such that said audience starts clicking the "donate" button until their wallets explode.

[Maybenaut]

It’s not different.

[andersweinstein]

I've been stupid busy the last couple days, but as the resident Wisconsin criminal lawyer here, I want to point out that actually (and it gives me absolutely no pleasure to say this) Lin Wood is in the right with the letters to the court regarding the bond money. Assuming bond is not forfeited (including some amount used to pay court costs and/or restitution in the event Rittenhouse is convicted), Wisconsin law requires that bond money be returned to the person or persons who posted it. So yeah, Lin Wood's organization should get their money back. And if you think about it, it would be perverse in the extreme if it were to be otherwise and Rittenhouse stood to be enriched to the tune of $2 million whenever the case concluded.

In fact, although I never did this while I was in private practice, it is quite common for defense lawyers to file letters with the court - countersigned by the client of course - requesting that a specific amount of the client's bond be returned to the lawyer and not to whomever posted it, as a way for the lawyer to obtain some security for a retainer that has not been paid in full. Again, not something I ever did, but not at all an uncommon occurrence.

Reportedly Lin Wood wired the money from the #FightBack entity to Pierce's firm Peirce Bainbridge to facilitate payment. Then *Pierce* paid the bond with a cashier's check from his firm Pierce Bainbridge. It does not sound like Pierce identified himself in any way as an agent of FightBack. Reportedly he listed his home address on the bail paperwork.

So I see that FightBack has a legitimate claim to the money. But can a letter such as Wood sent override the legal requirement to return the funds to whoever paid them, namely Pierce Bainbridge? If Pierce fails to return it to FightBack, then FightBack got screwed over by trusting their agent Pierce. So wouldn't they have to sue Pierce to get the funds? It seems odd to me to expect the office returning bail funds to in effect adjudicate a high dollar dispute between Pierce and FightBack if Pierce fails to acquiesce.

Details from this piece:

https://www.kenoshanews.com/news/local/ ... 743bc.html

[andersweinstein]

So I see that Fight Back has a legitimate claim to the money. But can a letter such as Wood sent override the legal requirement to return the funds to whoever paid them, namely Pierce Bainbridge?

"Clerk of Courts Rebecca Matoska-Mentink said her office would return the bond to the poster — in this case Pierce — unless there is a court order to the contrary."

https://www.kenoshanews.com/news/local/ ... e01ec.html

I gather Wood's lawyer's letter was a pre-emptive strike to try to head off Fight Back getting screwed over by Pierce. Maybe "warning shot" is a better metaphor, since I doubt they expected it to succeed.

Pierce himself charmingly claimed the Rittenhouses still owe him money.

[raison de arizona]

I gather Wood's lawyer's letter was a pre-emptive strike to try to head off Fight Back getting screwed over by Pierce. Pierce himself charmingly claimed the Rittenhouses still owe him money.

IIRC, Lin claims that most of the $470k in legal fees went to Pierce. FWIW. I could be wrong about that though, although I'm certain that Lin claims the legal fees didn't go to him.

[Gregg]

I honestly don't see how the family or the vigilante have any claim at all to this money. It was never their money, it was donated to various expenses and if I had to decide this, I'd have to have explained to me why I shouldn't give it to Pierce.

And despair that I can't do something useful with it instead.

[andersweinstein]

I honestly don't see how the family or the vigilante have any claim at all to this money. It was never their money, it was donated to various expenses and if I had to decide this, I'd have to have explained to me why I shouldn't give it to Pierce.

And despair that I can't do something useful with it instead.

I haven't heard of the family or vigilante claiming personal rights to the money. The currently constituted defense fund has been implying that the bail money ought to get to them, to continue fund expenses for Rittenhouse's defense. I guess this is sort of a moral claim -- that's what the donors thought they were contributing for. I don't know that it has any legal force.

I would think in a legitimately constituted defense fund, returned bail money would indeed continue to be used for defense, perhaps to pay off lawyers, fund appeals etc. But this money was donated to Linn Wood's #FightBack foundation. I would guess the fine print at donation time allows Fight Back to shift it to other causes they support.

[raison de arizona]

I honestly don't see how the family or the vigilante have any claim at all to this money. It was never their money, it was donated to various expenses and if I had to decide this, I'd have to have explained to me why I shouldn't give it to Pierce.

And despair that I can't do something useful with it instead.

I haven't heard of the family or vigilante claiming personal rights to the money. The currently constituted defense fund has been implying that the bail money ought to get to them, to continue fund expenses for Rittenhouse's defense. I guess this is sort of a moral claim -- that's what the donors thought they were contributing for. I don't know that it has any legal force.

I would think in a legitimately constituted defense fund, returned bail money would indeed continue to be used for defense, perhaps to pay off lawyers, fund appeals etc. But this money was donated to Linn Wood's #FightBack foundation. I would guess the fine print at donation time allows Fight Back to shift it to other causes they support.

Anders, just to be clear, "the currently constituted defense fund" is... Kyle's mom.

Contributions to FreeKyleUSA and Milo Fund LLC are not tax deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.
The Milo Fund LLC was organized by Wendy Rittenhouse to receive and disburse donations to pay for Kyle's defense.

https://freekyleusa.com/

[andersweinstein]

Anders, just to be clear, "the currently constituted defense fund" is... Kyle's mom.

Contributions to FreeKyleUSA and Milo Fund LLC are not tax deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.
The Milo Fund LLC was organized by Wendy Rittenhouse to receive and disburse donations to pay for Kyle's defense.

https://freekyleusa.com/

Ah. I knew Wendy Rittenhouse was involved in managing the fund, but did not know all of that.

So is there any constraint on how Milo Fund LLC can use the donated funds?

[Luke]

Well, this is a pretty big deal. For some reason, the US Audit Telegram channel had a four-hour voice chat with Kyle and others. Didn't have time to listen to it yet but sounds like they talk about Kyle and the fraudits. Who was the genius that suggested Kyle do a public event?

AFA VOICECHAT WITH KYLE RITTENHOUSE, DAVID HANCOCK, KELLYE SORELLE!

The good, the bad, and the ugly of the Arizona Audit

US Audit Watch, [01.10.21 20:06]
[Forwarded from America First Audit Channel]
[ Photo ]
VOICECHAT TONIGHT WITH DAVID HANCOCK AND KYLE RITTENHOUSE.

We will be getting into the case as much as the legalities permit. We believe in letting every side of the the story be told. We will only be discussing factual information.

This is not a smear campaign. We just want to know Kyle’s side of the story.

Please join. We will be discussing many things pertaining to the Arizona Audit and people involved

CLICK TO JOIN (https://t.me/AmericaFirstAuditsChat?voicechat)

► Show Spoiler

Elena, [01.10.21 20:21]
[In reply to US Audit Watch]
Yay! So happy to see this brave young man looking happy, healthy & smiling like the free man he is & should continue to be! There’s absolutely no doubt that this Patriotic American was defending himself that night. Thankfully by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ placing his loving & protective hands around Kyle, he is here with us today to tell the truth of what happened during that dreadful & tragic experience. There’s no doubt in my mind that those animals chased him down & had every intention to do him deadly harm. The best part is, we have video evidence to prove, validate & confirm that he was defending himself. Stay strong Kyle “We the ppl” are with you all the way!

US Audit Watch, [01.10.21 20:23]
[Forwarded from America First Audit Channel]
VOICE CHAT NOW WITH DAVID HANCOCK AND KYLE RITTENHOUSE!

Also have Trump Attorney Kellye SoRelle

https://t.me/AmericaFirstAuditsChat?voicechat

Jimmy F, [02.10.21 00:32]
[In reply to ARIZQNA]
I support Kyle and am glad hes free!!

ARIZQNA, [02.10.21 00:32]
[In reply to Jimmy F]
Me, too. It was good to hear his voice.

US Audit Watch, [02.10.21 12:48]
[Forwarded from US Audit Watch]
[ Photo ]
Truth is a bitter pill to swallow.

There where connections made last night on the America First Audit Channel between Kyle Rittenhouse fundraising, Jan 6th fundraising, and Arizona audit fundraising.

Follow the money.

Where did it go?
What do we have to show for it?
Why is this a pattern?

Trust but verify.



TIME TO WAKE UP, PATRIOTS

US Audit Watch Channel: @AuditWatch
US Audit Watch Chat: @AuditWatchChat

#AuditWatch #AZAuditWatch

ARIZQNA, [02.10.21 13:00]
[In reply to Jen K]
I won't trust either one until I can verify what they're saying. That said, they used Kyle as their cash cow. Where is all the money people donated to Kyle?

Jen K, [02.10.21 13:26]
[In reply to ARIZQNA]
Lin shared what Fightback did with the funds. If you don't follow him, that's your fault. He is not a bad person. Look at his work.

Julie S, [02.10.21 16:57]
[In reply to US Audit Watch]
I'm attempting to listen to this whole recording but will need to break it up due to time constraints but I will just say that I think everyone needs to be very discerning in believing things that anyone is saying right now. A couple of things I noticed on this one, so far.
1. Dave mentioned at one point that one of his employees who was working at Lin's place was texting him about what was going on and he quickly mentioned something about an email he saw. If that was an email sent from Lin's server, then Dave's worker was getting into things he shouldn't have. Just because they are administrators of the server and email doesn't mean they have to or should be digging down into individual emails. Very bad form if that happened.
2. I'm not sure why it was so bad that some of the folks who were concerned about election fraud got together at Lin's (unless it was for nefarious reasons). I guess it might make Doug looked biased as he was taking on the audit responsibility?? Not many companies were willing to do that work.
3. Connecting David Clement to this before he came on the scene in January because he grew up in SC and Tracy "Beanz" Diaz lives there is a big stretch. Tracy grew up in the NY area, I believe, and hasn't lived in SC for too long and David moved out of SC years ago!
I don't think Lin is sqeaky clean by any means - in fact, I get a weird vibe from him and stopped following him on Telegram but some of the stuff being said on this recording gives me that same weird vibe.

US Audit Watch, [02.10.21 18:43]
[Forwarded from America First Audit Channel]
[ Photo ]
FREE KYLE USA

If you would like to donate to Kyle Rittenhouse this is the actual link that goes towards his legal funds and family.

Kyle is coming up for trial and needs all the prayers he can get.

Kyle’s case is going to be a milestone for our 2nd amendment rights. It is extremely important that he gets justice.

https://support.freekyleusa.com/rhf?id=iB5Rd2aKAja

Dusty M, [02.10.21 18:59]
[In reply to US Audit Watch]
I am leaving this channel Hancock is lying. Will not give to Kyle as long as Hancock is involved. Lin is fighting for America. Where are you and what are you doing for America ?

David Hancock, [02.10.21 20:44]
[In reply to US Audit Watch]
Only one thing to do. Ask Lin why he won’t allow an independent audit of Fightback - narrow in scope?

That’s it man. That is all that has been asked for. Wendy just wants an audit.

It doesn’t get much easier. Yet - you call me a liar. Come on….

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

I hope, but not expecting my hope to be fulfilled, that Kyle is getting paid for risking his defense. He doesn't realize he was invited to garner viewers.

[raison de arizona]

Trying to skim through this four hours to hear Kyle, it's vaguely interesting so far. Reportedly, John Pierce (who had never tried a defense case before) was charging $1,275/hr and racked up $114,000 in the first four days. Wendy Rittenhouse is described as "not sophisticated" and bamboozled by "Harvard lawyers."

[Gregg]

Trying to skim through this four hours to hear Kyle, it's vaguely interesting so far. Reportedly, John Pierce (who had never tried a defense case before) was charging $1,275/hr and racked up $114,000 in the first four days. Wendy Rittenhouse is described as "not sophisticated" and bamboozled by "Harvard lawyers."

It must be embarrassing to get bamboozled buy Ted Cruz.

[andersweinstein]

Well, this is a pretty big deal. For some reason, the US Audit Telegram channel had a four-hour voice chat with Kyle and others. Didn't have time to listen to it yet but sounds like they talk about Kyle and the fraudits. Who was the genius that suggested Kyle do a public event?

Rittenhouse himself only drops in to say "hi" and "thank you" near the beginning, I think.

First hour and 10 minutes or so has Hancock on the Pierce and Wood fundraising shenanigans for KR. Found this interesting. It does lay out the family's case for the bail money. A few details as I remember them:

- Says Wendy Rittenhouse raised about$1M on her own before FightBack started bail fundraising and trusted it to Wood expecting him to be a "good steward of the money". Never got accounting from FightBack about use of these or any other funds.
- Claims FightBack raised money from her data and donor lists without permission.
- At some point a glitch on FightBack web site made it unable to distinguish between donations for Rittenhouse and donations for election fraud. They dealt with it by just applying a 70-30 split to all donations (70% for KR) even retroactively to before the glitch.
- Instructions on bail funds were to wire it to Wendy Rittenhouse's trust account at Peirce Bainbridge for the benefit of Kyle Rittenhouse.
- Peirce offered to return it to Wendy on condition she waive any liability for him and any right to audit the trust account.
- It was never expected to go back to FightBack before Wood's recent claim. Were it not for these disputes it could have been used as collateral for legal fees.

There's also some stuff about Lin Wood's crazy interactions with Hancock that led Hancock to break with him, if you're interested.

[andersweinstein]

Well, this is a pretty big deal. For some reason, the US Audit Telegram channel had a four-hour voice chat with Kyle and others. Didn't have time to listen to it yet but sounds like they talk about Kyle and the fraudits. Who was the genius that suggested Kyle do a public event?

Also noticed just before the end, about 3:58:00, Hancock mentions the FBI surveillance video Binger surprised the defense with by mentioning at the evidence motion hearing. Hancock claims that Binger distorted what it shows and that it is actually exculpatory. In his telling it confirms the defense case that Rosenbaum ran ahead to take up a position behind a car to ambush Rittenhouse (along with Ziminksi) after Rittenhouse passed his hiding place.

I doubt very much an aerial video without sound will show unambiguously what happened. But I would expect it to be entirely consistent with the defense case. It also fits with the eyewitness testimony in the criminal complaint of reporter Richie McGinnis, who followed Rittenhouse as he walked down Sheridan Rd -- his account in the criminal complaint also represents Rosenbaum as the initiator of the confrontation.

[Frater I*I]

It must be embarrassing to get bamboozled buy Ted Cruz.

Just ask a majority of the population of Texas....


I'll come in again...

[Luke]

Hey thanks Anders, didn't listen to it but saw the comments about Kyle "sounding so good" and they used his name hugely in the promo. Sounds like there's a lot of info it it about Kyle and the audits, these people love the sound of their voices

[andersweinstein]

Hey thanks Anders, didn't listen to it but saw the comments about Kyle "sounding so good" and they used his name hugely in the promo. Sounds like there's a lot of info it it about Kyle and the audits, these people love the sound of their voices

I was amused that Hancock knocks the grifters for using Kyle as "arm candy" to show off when raising money for other causes. He's not much more in promoting this interview.

BTW I listened at 2x speed to get through the damn thing and skipped through the middle once it turned to election audit stuff.

[Gregg]

Hey thanks Anders, didn't listen to it but saw the comments about Kyle "sounding so good" and they used his name hugely in the promo. Sounds like there's a lot of info it it about Kyle and the audits, these people love the sound of their voices

I was amused that Hancock knocks the grifters for using Kyle as "arm candy" to show off when raising money for other causes. He's not much more in promoting this interview.

BTW I listened at 2x speed to get through the damn thing and skipped through the middle once it turned to election audit stuff.

Did it sound more like it belonged in the universe where people talk like the chipmunks?

[raison de arizona]

Kyle Rittenhouse petitions judge for a self-defense expert to testify on his behalf

Kyle Rittenhouse will be back in a Kenosha County courtroom Tuesday morning seeking permission to call an expert witness on self-defense when his murder trial begins next month.

Rittenhouse’s defense attorneys say their expert, John R. Black, will give jurors a frame-by-frame breakdown of the shootings and offer an explanation for Rittenhouse’s actions amid the chaotic scene.

Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder, however, has signaled he could limit Black’s testimony or even ban it altogether. At a pretrial hearing last month, Schroeder said Black would not be allowed to explain the law to jurors because that is solely the judge’s responsibility.

Acknowledging Black may be able to provide expertise on Rittenhouse’s gun handling or reaction times, Schroeder set a pretrial hearing for Tuesday to discuss the testimony. Black, who has testified in several police use-of-force cases, is slated to appear by video conference, according to court records.

“When it comes to use of force, I am the expert,” Schroeder said. “I’m the only one who is going to be defining what is reasonable under the law, what constitutes self-defense. I’m not going to have competition in the courtroom.”

Self-defense cases are always arduous undertakings, largely because the defense assumes the burden of proving the accused’s actions were justified. That task could be even more difficult for Rittenhouse’s attorneys after prosecutors disclosed last month that the FBI has images showing Rittenhouse was the one who initially followed Rosenbaum.

As the two reached the car lot where the shooting occurred, Rittenhouse said something to Rosenbaum, who then turned around and started to chase Rittenhouse, prosecutors said. The recording was captured by an infrared camera attached to an FBI fixed wing aircraft that was monitoring the city during the unrest.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct- ... story.html

[noblepa]

Contributions to FreeKyleUSA and Milo Fund LLC are not tax deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.
The Milo Fund LLC was organized by Wendy Rittenhouse to receive and disburse donations to pay for Kyle's defense.

Does that mean that those funds are taxable income to Ms. RIttenhouse?