For the past two weeks the steps in front of the grand courthouse in the small Wisconsin city of Kenosha have been a focal point for supporters of Kyle Rittenhouse as well as supporters of the two men he killed and the third who he injured.
And as the verdicts came in there were cheers and jeers.
This trial wasn’t about what did or didn’t happen.
Mr Rittenhouse did kill 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum who was unarmed. He did kill Anthony Huber, 26, and armed with a skateboard. And he did wound Gaige Grosskreutz, 26, and armed with a pistol.
There wasn’t a debate about the central facts. No, this was about interpretations of right and wrong; it was about a central tenet of the US constitution – the second amendment: the right to keep and bear arms. And it was about the meaning of “self-defence”.
Advertisement
Image: Rittenhouse listens as his attorneys speak to the judge during his trial
That night in August last year Kenosha was a city in flames.
The shooting by police of a black man called Jacob Blake had brought a summer of nationwide racial unrest to this usually quiet place on the shores of Lake Michigan.
More on United States
Related Topics:
Kyle Rittenhouse wasn’t from the city. But he knew it well; his father and best friend lived in Kenosha and, he told the court over the two weeks of bitter legal argument, he went there to protect businesses and offer medical help.
Image: Rittenhouse with attorney Mark Richards, as he takes the stand
Mr Rittenhouse, 17 at the time, was a volunteer lifeguard. He knew first aid. But he also knew how to handle a weapon; at least enough, in his eyes, to defend the city.
The images of him walking around the town just before midnight on a hot night last August were beamed around the world.
He was one of many armed civilians. Were they vigilantes; a militia force bent on racial confrontation? “Chaos tourists” as the prosecution said.
Or were they concerned citizens protecting a community from looters; armed for self-defence as is their right in Wisconsin under the US constitution?
Was Mr Rittenhouse’s argument of “self-defence” really valid? As the prosecution argued: “When the defendant provokes the incident he loses the right to self defence. You cannot claim self-defence to a danger you create.”
Did he provoke it? Did he create the danger?
“Yes” said the prosecution: he brought a semi-automatic rifle to a protest. He was threatening others. Those he shot were, it was argued, trying to disarm an “active shooter”.
“No” said the defence: he was being chased and beaten when he opened fire.
Was Mr Rittenhouse’s response proportionate?
In the days after the shooting, as America simmered in racial unrest, he was described as a “domestic terrorist” by congresswoman Ayanna Pressley.
Joe Biden, not then elected president, had used an image of Mr Rittenhouse as part of a campaign video denouncing white supremacy.
But, then-president Donald Trump used the podium in the White House to support Mr Rittenhouse. He was only defending himself, Mr Trump had said.
Kyle Rittenhouse had quickly become a pin-up for the conservative right across America and a target for the left.
It has been a trial that’s touched on so many divisive issues: race, gun laws, disinformation, politics.
It has exposed such different judgements of right and wrong.
It is liberal against conservative and it is American against American. It is a troubling snapshot of these divided states.
Image: Rittenhouse getting emotional during his testimony
President Biden said after the verdict that it “will leave many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included, (but) we must acknowledge that the jury has spoken”.
Juries are made up of ordinary people; in this case, seven women and five men. They were asked to judge, for a nation, when it’s reasonable and acceptable to kill someone.
They heard the prosecution’s argument that Mr Rittenhouse was the agitator; he was the threat; he was the danger.
Yet, they concluded that those assertions could not be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Their verdict will set legal precedents and it will embolden people who want to “open carry” and potentially use weapons in the 31 states where that is permitted.
The events of that night in August 2020 happened because of a culture America allows to exist. The nation has enabled a dangerous division.
Donald Trump has waded into the debate surrounding Sydney Sweeney’s jeans ad.
The American Eagle ad, which features the 27-year-old actress, who starred in the HBO series Euphoria and White Lotus, has the tagline “Sydney Sweeney has great jeans”.
It has sparked a debate in the US over race and Western beauty standards.
Image: One of the Sydney Sweeney jeans ads. Pic: AP
In a Truth Social post, the US president described it as the “hottest ad out there”.
Hailing Sweeney as a “registered Republican”, he said the jeans are “flying off the shelves”, adding: “Go get ’em Sydney!”
Most of the criticism of the ad has centred on videos using the word “genes” instead of “jeans”, with one in which Sweeney says: “Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair colour, personality and even eye colour. My jeans are blue.”
Critics argued the play on words potentially promotes eugenics, a discredited theory that believed humanity could be improved through the selective breeding of certain traits.
But others have defended the ad, saying the critics are reading too much into its message.
The video appeared on American Eagle’s Facebook page and other social media channels, but is not part of the ad campaign.
In a statement on Instagram on Friday, American Eagle Outfitters said the campaign “is and always was about the jeans. Her jeans. Her story. We’ll continue to celebrate how everyone wears their AE jeans with confidence, their way. Great jeans look good on everyone.”
Stocks in American Eagle Outfitters jumped by 23.3% after Mr Trump’s intervention.
They say all publicity is good publicity, and Sydney Sweeney’s American Eagle ad is certainly notching up the column inches, especially now Donald Trump has intervened.
The US president must have been breathlessly excited when he found out Sweeney was a registered Republican because he wrote a Truth Social post in support of her before deleting it twice and reposting three times to correct various spelling and grammatical errors.
He clearly could not wait to get involved in the discourse.
“Sydney Sweeney, a registered Republican, has the HOTTEST ad out there,” he wrote. “Go get ’em Sydney!”
In any other era, the president weighing in so heavily on one side of a pop culture issue would’ve been unusual.
But the current president knows people are talking about the ad around their dinner tables and at parties right now. By injecting himself into the discussion, they will now be talking about him too.
In his Truth Social post, which he reposted three times to fix various typos, Mr Trump compared the ad with “woke” ones “on the other side of the ledger” – as he criticised other companies, as well as hitting out at Taylor Swift.
“The tide has seriously turned – Being WOKE is for losers, being Republican is what you want to be,” he wrote.
Sky News has contacted Sweeney’s agent for comment.
Soulja Boy has been arrested and charged with possession of a firearm during a traffic stop.
The rapper, whose real name is DeAndre Cortez Way, was a passenger in the car that was stopped in the Fairfax area of Los Angeles early on Sunday morning, the LAPD said.
“A passenger was detained and police arrested DeAndre Cortez Way for being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm,” the statement added.
Possessing a firearm as a convicted felon is a felony.
The 35-year-old was booked into jail in the LAPD’s Wilshire Division shortly after 6am. It is not clear if he has since been released.
Police did not provide information on what prompted the traffic stop and who else was in the vehicle with Way.
Soulja Boy is yet to publicly comment on the incident.
Soulja Boy is best known for his 2007 hit Crank That, which topped the Billboard Hot 100 for seven weeks and landed him a nomination for best rap song at the Grammys.
The rapper was arrested and charged with a felony in 2014 for carrying a loaded gun during a traffic stop in LA.
In April this year, the Chicago hip-hop artist was ordered to pay more than $4m (£3m) in damages to his former assistant after being found liable for sexually assault, as well as physically and emotionally abusing them.
Police in Tennessee have discovered 14 improvised explosive devices in a man’s home as they were arresting him, the local sheriff’s office said.
Officers were executing a warrant in the home of Kevin Wade O’Neal in Old Fort, about 45 miles (70km) east of Chattanooga, after he had threatened to kill public officials and law enforcement personnel in Polk County.
After arresting the 54-year-old, officers noticed “something smouldering” in the bedroom where he was found.
Image: Kevin Wade O’Neal. Pic: Polk County Sheriff’s Office
On closer inspection, they discovered an improvised explosive device and evacuated the house until bomb squad officers arrived at the scene.
Fourteen devices were found inside the property – none of which detonated.
Image: Improvised explosive devices were found in Kevin Wade O’Neal’s home. Pic: Polk County Sheriff’s Office
Image: Kevin Wade O’Neal’s home in Old Fort, Tennessee. Pic: Polk County Sheriff’s Office
O’Neal was charged with 11 counts of attempted first-degree murder, corresponding to nine officers and two other people inside the property when the suspect tried to detonate the devices.
He also faces 14 counts of prohibited weapons and one count of possession of explosive components.