OPINION | This article contains opinion. AnalyzingAmerica is licensed to publish this content.
The state of Oklahoma appears to be taking matters into its own hands following the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse who was found not guilty of murder on the grounds of self-defense.
Many Americans believe Rittenhouse was a victim of deliberate and willful lies by the media who smeared him as a ‘white supremacist” as well as a defendant against “malicious prosecution.”
A Republican state senator from Oklahoma has introduced legislation named after Kyle Rittenhouse to protect Americans from this happening in the future. It’s called “Kyle’s Law.”
State Senator Nathan Dahm, who is also running for the U.S. Senate, filed the legislation marked Senate Bill 1120.
This law seeks to compensate defendants of “malicious prosecution” if they are charged with murder but later found to be not guilty due to justifiable homicide.
“Kyle Rittenhouse should never have been charged. The video evidence from early on showed it was lawful self-defense,” Dahm said.
“It is our duty to protect the rights of the people we represent, and the right to self-defense is paramount. This bill will ensure that what happened to Kyle Rittenhouse cannot happen to the people of Oklahoma,” he added.
Dahm’s office explained, “Under Dahm’s legislation, if a person is charged with murder but is found not guilty due to justifiable homicide, the state would have to reimburse the defendant for all reasonable costs, including loss of wages, legal fees incurred, and other expenses involved in their defense.”
“When a homicide is determined to be justified and the accused establishes that they had sustained injury due to malicious prosecution, then that person will be awarded ‘fair and just compensation.'”
The statement continues, “SB 1120 further states that in order to support a claim of malicious prosecution, the claimant must establish that the prosecution was instituted or instigated by the prosecutor and was without probable cause; that the prosecution had legally and finally been terminated in favor of the claimant; and that as a result of the criminal prosecution, the claimant sustained injury.”
“Malice may be established if the motive for the prosecution was something other than a desire to bring an offender to justice, or that it was one with ill will or hatred, or willfully done in a wanton or oppressive manner and in conscious disregard of the claimant’s rights.”
“Under the legislation, a prosecutor may be held personally liable to a claimant if malicious prosecution is established,” it concluded.
Watch the clip: