There is, unfortunately, nothing to keep lawyers and witnesses from lying in the court of public opinion, and if they can’t win in the actual court, they can still be vindicated by the public: “I presented an excellent case, but the judge and jury were unreasonable and obstinate.” The vast majority of those interested in the case will never know what was presented in the real court and will accept the lies. And of course if the defendant is convicted, it will be even better for the liars.

quote:

Originally posted by nasig:
I've followed the trial fairly closely. Listening to some of the 'news' accounts makes me wonder what trial they are watching. Watching that scumbag with the reduced bicep and his attorney lie about what he testified to in court just the day before was unbelievable. It should be reasonably clear to any fair and thinking person what happen and I expect the jury will acquit on any major charges. The Media is really going to be butthurt

If the jury follows the evidence and facts of the case, there is no conceivable way KR is convicted of murder. However, look at the Chauvin case. He was convicted on ALL counts, despite clearly not meeting all the required elements for any of them.

Regardless, the lying, biased media have their marching orders- paint him as a premeditating willful killer. When he does get acquitted (I believe he has to) it will spark the inevitable rioting, looting, burning spree the street trash all but told us they would be engaging in. It is agenda driven.

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
WP has a paywall.

You can view all of your paywalled links through this site:

https://archive.ph/

Ha. The defense picked up that the pic "showed him" firing left handed.

Prosecutors are lying their asses off. They are using the extremely poor quality picture as "proof" that Kyle "provoked" Rosenbaum by pointing his gun at Ziminski



the judge needs to put these prosecutors back on their heels.

BTW the white blob behind Kyle in the pic is someone in a wheelchair


finally - judge says he can't instruct on a provocation charge based on a fuzzy pic !!! Judge is changing his mind now !!! This is why I criticized the judge earlier

if prosecutors can prove Kyle provoked Rosenbaum, then there is a higher / different bar for self defense

They are trying to fabricate a "provocation" claim

^^^

All I see is Bigfoot and ET having a 3 way with a unicorn.

A buddy at work told me today that several people on Facebook believe the people killed by Rittenhouse are black. He said he's posted news articles, pictures, links to the trial and there's no convincing them otherwise.

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:
^^^

All I see is Bigfoot and ET having a 3 way with a unicorn.

That's Centaur!

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:
^^^

All I see is Bigfoot and ET having a 3 way with a unicorn.

I thought the blob under Ziminski was a horse. Honest!!

quote:

Originally posted by SIG228:
A buddy at work told me today that several people on Facebook believe the people killed by Rittenhouse are black. He said he's posted news articles, pictures, links to the trial and there's no convincing them otherwise.

Perhaps they identified as black somewhere deep inside

^^^I see TWO Horses...

SIG228

Your post above reflects a false belief held by many.

example of a recent tweet:

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
^^^I see TWO Horses...

The one on the right under Rittenhouse looks like a Brahma Bull to me. Seriously!!

And THIS...is what the prosecution is going on??? Pfffff...JSMH.

Even if that damn picture were explained to me, point by point, by both the defence and the prosecution, there's no way I would make a decision. It would have to be much clearer than that, for me to consider it as evidence.

I'm amazed it was even allowed.

quote:

Originally posted by SIG228:
A buddy at work told me today that several people on Facebook believe the people killed by Rittenhouse are black. He said he's posted news articles, pictures, links to the trial and there's no convincing them otherwise.

I've had conversations with A LOT of people who were in the same camp as the post from sdy above. The media has brainwashed half the freaking population. I know, shocking.

Now the judge is getting criticized for trying to make a joke about the Asian food being late due to the ships backed up at Long Beach.

Get over it folks. it was just a bad joke. Jesus, is everyone upset by everything today?

https://www.washingtonpost.com...sian-food-schroeder/

As the court in the murder trial of Kyle Rittenhouse was set to adjourn for lunch Thursday, Judge Bruce E. Schroeder thought it was a good time to joke about whether their food would get there on time. “I hope the Asian food isn’t coming … isn’t on one of those boats from Long Beach Harbor,” he said. The comments, which appeared to refer to the supply-chain backlog at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, Calif., were met with backlash from critics who said the judge made “a thinly-veiled anti-Asian comment,” questioning how Schroeder could oversee a trial with racial implications and make a joke at the expense of Asians and Asian Americans. “Maybe I’m supposed to applaud him for not saying ‘Oriental food,’” tweeted John C. Yang, executive director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice, an advocacy group defending the human and civil rights of Asian Americans. “During a trial that clearly has race implications, no less. Definitely not okay.”

They can't argue the facts so their turning to their go-to: Character assassination.

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
WP has a paywall.

Da. But I C/P the high points. I didn't read much more, but here it all is. Unabridged.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...4632af69b_story.html

‘He could lose it’: Legal experts see prosecutorial missteps in Rittenhouse trial
By Justin Jouvenal and Kim Bellware • Yesterday at 7:42 p.m. EST

Judge Bruce Schroeder suddenly halted the homicide trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, the teenager charged with killing two people and wounding a third during unrest in Kenosha, Wis., last year, to lambaste the chief prosecutor on Wednesday. The judge accused him of violating orders about discussing a video in which the defendant had allegedly talked about wanting to shoot looters.

Kenosha Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger insisted it was his “good-faith feeling” that he could introduce the evidence, but Schroeder shot back with fury, “I don’t believe you.”

And neither did some legal experts.

The dramatic rebuke in front of a national audience that is watching the streaming trial encapsulates what some experts saw as a rocky prosecution for Binger, who was undercut by his own witnesses, made strategic missteps and has struggled with inconvenient facts and a high legal bar to prove Rittenhouse’s guilt.

Janine Geske, a former Wisconsin Supreme Court justice, said Binger, a seasoned litigator, must have understood it was dicey to introduce the evidence without the judge’s permission, but probably did it anyway because he was worried he hadn’t proven his case to the jury.

“I think he sees that he could lose it. It’s a case where the jury could come back not guilty,” Geske said. “I think he’s cutting corners as close as he can to get his evidence in front of the jury. Unfortunately, he’s really angered the trial judge.”

The testy exchange has thrust the little-known prosecutor and his lawyering into the spotlight as the divisive case nears its conclusion. Rittenhouse, 18, is charged with homicide and attempted homicide for opening fire on three people, killing two of them, during a chaotic night following a police shooting in Kenosha in August 2020. He has pleaded not guilty.

The defense rested on Thursday afternoon. Schroeder then spoke to the prosecution and defense about their closing arguments, which are set to take place Monday. The judge initially suggested both sides get 90 minutes for their closing arguments, but Binger asked for more time, prompting some skeptical remarks from Schroeder. The judge relented when Binger noted that he needed time to show video evidence.

Binger did not respond to requests for an interview, and the Kenosha County district attorney’s office declined to comment. Binger has decades of experience as an attorney and has handled murder and rape cases previously, but the Rittenhouse trial is far and away his most high-profile case.

It has come with close scrutiny.

Dan Adams, a defense attorney and former prosecutor in Milwaukee, said Binger may have felt compelled to introduce some witnesses who saw the shootings, but their testimony sometimes ended up bolstering Rittenhouse’s claim that he shot in self-defense.

Adams said the most glaring instance came when Gaige Grosskreutz testified that he approached Rittenhouse with a gun and pointed it at him, before the teen shot Grosskreutz in the arm.

“That was the most explosive testimony in the whole trial,” Adams said. “Binger introduced . . . witnesses that could have easily been introduced in the defense’s case. It was unclear what the strategic value of those witnesses were.”

Binger also called Richie McGinniss, a videographer for the conservative website the Daily Caller, who affirmed he felt he was in danger when Rittenhouse shot and killed the first victim, 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum. But McGinniss’s response to a question from Binger established a crucial point for the defense — that Rosenbaum, not Rittenhouse, was the instigator of the encounter.

Legal experts said Binger charged aggressively in the case, something not uncommon for prosecutors in Wisconsin since judges can instruct juries to consider lesser charges in addition to the more serious offenses.

Still, some felt strategically it might have been wiser to pursue fewer and lesser charges given the facts.

“They overcharged the case for sure,” said Paul Bucher, a defense attorney and former district attorney in Wisconsin. “Why would you charge a curfew violation? This is a homicide case.”

Schroeder dropped the curfew charge Tuesday, indicating prosecutors failed to present evidence a curfew was in place.

But legal experts said the most questionable conduct may have come Wednesday when the judge launched into a series of fiery asides against Binger for allegedly overreaching during his cross-examination of Rittenhouse.

When Binger questioned Rittenhouse for not previously speaking about the shooting — suggesting Rittenhouse’s earlier silence has allowed him to listen and then tailor his testimony to the trial narrative — Schroeder erupted.

“You’re right on the borderline, and you may be over,” Schroeder said, warning Binger that he was impugning the defendant’s constitutional right to remain silent. “It better stop.”

Later, when Binger blitzed Rittenhouse with questions over when it is acceptable to use deadly force, he began to ask about an incident from days before the Kenosha shooting.

Binger had touched on video evidence that had been the subject of a pretrial hearing in August that appears to capture Rittenhouse saying last year, “I wish I had my AR, I’d fire some rounds” at people he believed were looting a CVS store in Chicago.

Binger argued that the video goes “exactly to [Rittenhouse’s] state of mind” when it came to understanding use of force and self-defense: the same weapon, the same desire to take matters into his own hands with regard to a business he has no ties to and a community he doesn’t live in.

At the time, Schroeder was unconvinced but said he would withhold a final decision until trial. When Binger waded into the evidence in court Wednesday, the judge sent the jury out of the room before yelling at Binger.

The defense motioned for a mistrial with prejudice — meaning Rittenhouse couldn’t be retried — arguing that Binger was losing the case and trying to provoke a mistrial himself so he could have another shot.

Defense attorneys said Binger has a reputation for being careful and methodical.

In 2016, Binger ran for district attorney in neighboring Racine County as a Democrat, losing to the Republican in the race. If elected, he planned to implement a diversion program for drug offenders and use academic researchers to create data to guide prosecutions.

“I think that Racine County needs to have a district attorney that is willing to go in to court and fight for justice and put away the most violent offenders,” Binger told a local newspaper during the Racine race. “In the last two years as a prosecutor, I have won 13 jury trials. I have convicted murderers, rapists, child molesters, drug dealers, drunk drivers, home-invading burglars and men who abuse women.”

Binger previously worked as a civil litigator for a large firm and in the Milwaukee prosecutor’s office. He graduated from the University of Michigan Law School in 1996.

Not all reviews of Binger’s performance were critical. Geske said his cross-examination of Rittenhouse was effective, but Rittenhouse was also well-prepared.

“I think he’s been good,” Geske said of the questioning. “He certainly tried to lead Rittenhouse where he needed to go.”

And many said some factors were beyond Binger’s control.

The case is challenging for prosecutors, Adams said, because the extensive video evidence portrayed a scene of mayhem on Kenosha’s streets, before Rittenhouse opened fire. He said Binger did an “adequate job” presenting his case given its limitations.

“It follows the old adage that you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear,” Adams said. “There were a lot of inconvenient facts for the state and a lot of those inconvenient facts were documented in the video evidence.”

Defense attorneys also said the case quickly became quite challenging for prosecutors. Under Wisconsin law, once self-defense has been raised as an issue, the burden switches to the state to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.

“It’s almost like the state has to prove a negative once somebody claims self-defense,” said Racine, Wis.-based defense attorney Patrick Cafferty. “We all know from our philosophy class in college that it’s next to impossible to prove a negative.”

Mark Berman and Mark Guarino contributed to this report.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Ha. The defense picked up that the pic "showed him" firing left handed.

Did anyone testify as to what “Could be” and “Probably” “Difficult to say” meant relative to the photo.
Who was the expert that added that wording.

Photo sdy posted should have never been entered into evidence.

A complicated case but here is where I think we are

Kyle was claiming self defense in all 3 shootings

you can't claim self defense if you provoked the incident

prosecutors snookered the judge to admit a blurry picture that was indecipherable
(bad bad bad move by the judge to let that blurry pic on p28 be entered)

but they will claim to the jury it shows Kyle pointing his rifle at a man named Ziminski (sp?)

Rosenbaum "saw" Kyle point the gun at Ziminski and was thus provoked to go after Kyle

Thus no self defense

That will be the prosecutor argument to the jury as best I understand what is going on

xxxxxxxxxxx

sounds bizarre and crazy, but I believe that is what the judge allowed to happen
this judge really liked to hear himself talk. Several times it appeared he knew what was happening, but then ruled the wrong way.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

clarification - the picture I posted on p28 is the one I think was submitted into evidence

The picture I posted on this page was brought up to the judge today to further argue the same point. But I don't think the pic on this page was entered as evidence

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:
All I see is Bigfoot and ET having a 3 way with a unicorn.

It looks like a baboon in a closet at midnight.