You seem to be unable to distinguish the Sandman case from the Rittenhouse case. In the first one, the kid didn't do anything actionable other than stand there smirking. The video and photos made him look like he was doing something he was not -- harassing the old native guy. That's why the media settled their cases with him. Sandman was an unknown private citizen until the photos/video was taken.
Rittenhouse, on the other hand, went to Kenosha, got an illegal-for-him-to-have weapon, and shot three people, killing two of them. The fact that it was self-defense per the jury isn't important. Whoopi, Uygar, me, and everyone else has the right under the 1st Amendment to give their opinion on both what he did and the jury's verdict. Rittenhouse went there hoping to kill. He killed. He went on trial. He lost his anonymity because of his own actions, not the actions of the media or others. He now has a high bar to jump in order to prove defamation. He will not be able to do that.
