Officer fired after it was revealed he donated $25 to Kyle Rittenhouse’s legal defense fund


NORFOLK, VA– On Tuesday, April 20th, officials announced that a Norfolk Police Lieutenant has been fired from the force after it was revealed that he donated to a legal defense fund set up for Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse.

According to reports, Lt. William Kelly anonymously gave $25 to a fundraiser for Rittenhouse back in September 2020, using his city email address. In the message that accompanied the donation, Kelly wrote:

“You’ve done nothing wrong. Every rank and file police officer supports you. Don’t be discouraged by actions of the political class of law enforcement leadership.”

Rittenhouse, who is 17-years-old, is accused of killing two individuals who confronted him during a riot in Kenosha, Wisconsin in August 2020.

Rittenhouse stands firm that he was attacked and feared for his life when the activists came at him on the street and that he shot at them in self-defense.

After an internal investigation found that Kelly acted in violation if city and departmental policies by sending the donation and a personal note, he was fired from the force.

Kelly was formerly the number two official in the Norfolk Police Department’s internal affairs division.

Reportedly, the firing came 24-hours after it was revealed that a Utah paramedic, who contributed 10 dollars to the same fund is now the victim of a media terror campaign.

A journalist from ABC4, Salt Lake City’s ABC-affiliate began terrorizing the paramedic after he took advantage of a data breach at a Christian website and published the names of private citizens who contributed to the Rittenhouse’s fund.

The journalist, Jason Nguyen tweeted:

“@wvcfd conducting an investigation after a paramedic is caught donating $10 to the defense fund of Kyle Rittenhouse using his government email. @abc4utah”

Nguyen named the paramedic and with cameras in tow, showed up at his house in a way that revealed all kinds of details that gave away the location of his private residence. He also tried to get the paramedic fired by telling is employer about what happened.

The city responded by releasing a statement that said it is “conducting an investigation into the matter.” The statement read:

“We can confirm that (NAME REDACTED) is an employee of the West Valley City Fire Department. We have become aware of a donation made using his government email account. We are conducting an investigation into this matter, however, such a donation would be representative of personal actions and not those of West Valley City.”

In a statement confirming the dismissal of Kelly, City Manager Chip Filer said:

“I have reviewed the results of the internal investigation involving Lt. William Kelly. Chief Larry Boone and I have concluded Lt. Kelly’s actions are in violation of City and departmental policies. His egregious comments erode the trust between the Norfolk Police Department and those they are sworn to serve. The City of Norfolk has a standard of behavior for all employees, and we will hold staff accountable.”

Others joined in on the disapproval, with Norfolk Mayor Kenneth Cooper Alexander saying:

“This alleged statement and action by a member of Norfolk’s Police Department is alarming and by all means not consistent with the values of our city or the standards set for our employees.”

Reportedly, Lt. Kelly is afforded the right to appeal the decision in accordance with the City of Norfolk grievance procedure and applicable law. 

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

Prosecution demands Rittenhouse be re-arrested and his personal address be made public

February 6th, 2021

KENOSHA, WI – The assistant district attorney prosecuting the case involving Kyle Rittenhouse has recently demanded that not only Rittenhouse have his new address publicly available, but also that he be rearrested for reportedly not updating his address in a timely fashion while out on bond.

As many are likely familiar with this case, Rittenhouse is facing a series of charges, including first-degree murder, for the shooting deaths of two individuals and wounding a third during the riots in Kenosha, Wisconsin on August 25th.

Back in August of 2020, we at Law Enforcement Today brought a detailed breakdown of the then-known case evidence along with speculation on how the case could be interpreted through an examination of the charges and laws relevant to those charges, which can be read here.

But in the latest update regarding this case, Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger asked the courts on February 4th to have Rittenhouse rearrested, increase his bond amount by an additional $200K, and have his address properly updated and publicly available for anyone to find online.

In response to these demands brought forward by the prosecution, defense attorney Mark Richards stated that his client has been the subject of numerous death threats and that having his newest address available to the public would present a danger to Rittenhouse.

To compromise on the matter, Richards would instead prefer to offer the courts Rittenhouse’s updated address – so long as the address remains sealed from public access.

ADA Binger brought forth claims that when Rittenhouse failed to update his address within 48 hours of moving, that the failure to do so was a violation of Rittenhouse’s terms of pre-trial release after having posted bond.

This isn’t the first bond-related debacle to have ensued following Rittenhouse’s release from jail, as back in January the prosecution wanted to modify the terms of Rittenhouse’s release to include that he be not allowed to associate with known extremists and consume alcohol.  

When ADA Binger addressed the defense’s concerns over Rittenhouse’s safety and using it as a means to justify leaving his originally provided address, he alleged said actions also placed the current resident at his prior address in “jeopardy”:

“In essence, he put someone else in jeopardy to protect his own skin.”

Further commenting on the alleged threats, ADA Binger also claimed that all Richards has brought forth in terms of evidence is an anonymous email sent to his law office describing what might happen to Rittenhouse if he were ever sent to prison:

“This is hardly a specific, tangible and imminent threat.”

Richards found this claim by the prosecution to be disingenuous, noting that the prosecution has had access to Rittenhouse’s social media accounts that were flooded with threats within hours of the Kenosha incident occurring.

Also, Richards claims that there’s, “at least thirty-six other known pieces/categories of evidence [that] have not been provided to the defense,” that illustrates threats against the now-18-year-old Rittenhouse.

However, ADA Binger is attempting to wield sentiments of there being a sort of responsibility to inform the public of exactly where Rittenhouse is due to concerns that maybe victims, family members of victims, or even witnesses could be unknowingly living next door to Rittenhouse:

“He is, after all, charged with murdering two people and severely injuring a third.”

One must keep in mind that this is coming from the same prosecution that objected to Rittenhouse having attained bail back in November of 2020 – solely due to the fact that much of the bail amount was achieved via donations amassed through crowdfunding.

The prosecution back in November of 2020 was trying to argue that since the funds didn’t come directly from the Rittenhouse family directly, then he shouldn’t have been allowed to walk free after having posted $2,000,000.

Obviously, that effort was unfruitful considering that in the era of not only crowdfunding, but also donation-based bail funds existing all over the country, it’s a bad faith argument for a prosecutor to suddenly demand that bail only be paid by the family of those accused of a crime.

Nonetheless, Rittenhouse’s next court appearance is slated for February 11th, where Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder will hear from the prosecution on their latest requests regarding the status of Rittenhouse’s pre-trial release.

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

Back in October of 2020, we at Law Enforcement Today shared a report on an aspect that could prove beneficial to Rittenhouse’s defense – in that there was an reportedly a gunshot fired from behind Rittenhouse on the evening of the incident before he ever allegedly opened fire on Joseph Rosenbaum. 

Here’s that previous report. 


KENOSHA, WI – It has been widely reported that 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse is facing multiple felony charges, including first-degree intentional murder, in the shootings of three men during a Black Lives Matter riot.

What makes the charges against him sensational is that all the video evidence (which was readily available to the public almost immediately) indicates every shot he fired was in self-defense.

And now his attorneys are using one man’s confession to drive home Rittenhouse’s claim of self-defense, calling a shot fired prior to the teenager’s own a “pivotal moment.” 

All three men who were shot were convicted felons. One of the two men killed, Joseph Rosenbaum, was a registered sex offender and the other, Anthony Huber, was a domestic abuser who did time in prison for trying to strangle someone.  

Gaige Grosskreutz, the “protestor” who was wounded, was a convicted felon and had a firearm, but to our knowledge, he has not faced charges for his role in the events of that night.

Never mind the fact that he was a felon in possession of a firearm. 

While it is true that authorities in Illinois are not pursuing charges in their state, Rittenhouse still faces Wisconsin charges of first-degree intentional homicide in the two killings and attempted intentional homicide in the wounding.

He also faces a misdemeanor charge of underage firearm possession. 

Now, according to the New York Post, Rittenhouse attorney Lin Wood called a gun fired allegedly as a warning by Joshua Ziminski a “pivotal moment” that left the teen fearing he had “no way out” as he was chased by protesters with “no way to know who fired that shot.”

Rittenhouse’s attorneys are claiming that he acted in self-defense. 

According to the Post

“A man has admitted being first to open fire at the Kenosha protests in the moments before accused teen gunman Kyle Rittenhouse allegedly shot and killed two people and seriously injured another, according to court documents.

“Joshua Ziminski, 35, and his wife ‘both admitted’ to detectives that he ‘fired off a warning shot into the air’ during the Aug. 25 protests in Wisconsin, according to a criminal complaint obtained by The Post.

“Ziminski was booked last Wednesday on charges of disorderly conduct and use of a dangerous weapon, online court records show.”

According to reports, Ziminski was unable to produce that gun, claiming it had been stolen from his home. 

He entered a not-guilty plea at a hearing last Friday, and was released later that day on $1,000 cash bond. He has been barred from having any weapons. He has also been warned not to discuss the case with his wife.

A pre-trial hearing is scheduled for Dec. 4.

A photo of Ziminski shown in the Post article, taken on the night of the shooting, appears to show him standing behind Rosenbaum, the first man allegedly killed by Rittenhouse, as he chased the teen down the street. 

Is it possible that Rittenhouse heard Ziminski’s shot, assumed that it was actually Rosenbaum shooting at him, and turned to defend himself, shooting and killing Rosenbaum?

As reported by the Post:

“On-the-scene reporter Richie McGinniss has also said the sound of the shot was the moment Rittenhouse ‘went from running away to aiming his weapon’ in what the teen’s attorneys insist was self-defense.”

Rittenhouse’s legal team is currently contesting extradition from Illinois to Wisconsin. 

According to Chicago’s CBS affiliate:

“His attorneys have filed a petition arguing extradition would violate his constitutional rights, claiming video of the shooting clearly shows he was acting in self-defense, and that he would be in danger if he were held in an adult jail.

“They also argued Wisconsin prosecutors and Illinois authorities didn’t follow legal technicalities required for extradition. Angelina Gabriele, Kenosha County’s deputy district attorney, said Friday the county’s documents ‘are in compliance with all legal requirements and their other claims do not have any legal merit.’”

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!

Facebook Follow First

Related Posts