The Trial of Kyle Rittenhouse Continues to Be Unnervingly Weird
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The Trial of Kyle Rittenhouse Continues to Be Unnervingly Weird
CHARLES P. PIERCE NOVEMBER 10, 2021
✕
ESQUIRE ›
Annotations
The Trial of Kyle Rittenhouse Continues to Be Unnervingly Weird
CHARLES P. PIERCE NOVEMBER 10, 2021
The prime video on Wednesday from the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, who killed two men and wounded a third in Kenosha, Wisconsin during the disturbances there that followed the police shooting of Jacob Blake in August 2020, is going to be Rittenhouse’s operatic breakdown under the questioning of defense attorney Mark Richards. Either that, or yet another high-decibel scolding of the prosecutors by Judge Bruce Schroeder.
(A note: while I thought it odd that a 17-year old who’d so coolly turned himself in to police after shooting three people in the middle of a riot would come apart so completely while testifying in his own defense, I would point out that the witness box is a godawful place to be. I have testified twice in my life, both in civil actions in which I was neither plaintiff nor defendant. It’s a goddamn nerve-wracking experience even in the most benign circumstances.)
However, late in the afternoon session, as Rittenhouse was being cross-examined by prosecutor Thomas Binger, the trial veered into a very strange place. Binger, as I noted, has been the target of Judge Schroeder’s ire on several occasions, including earlier on Wednesday, when Schroeder told Binger, flatly, “I don’t believe you when you say you were acting in good faith.” (Binger had attempted to introduce, through a side door, evidence that Schroeder already had refused to admit under other circumstances.) When they came back from recess, the defense accused Binger of trying to incite a mistrial, and then moved for a mistrial with prejudice, which would mean Rittenhouse would walk and then he never could be tried again. Schroeder took the motion “under advisement,” keeping it in his pocket where it could function as a warning against angering him further.
Which is about when things got weird. Binger began to show Rittenhouse drone footage from the night of the shootings that seemed to contradict some of Rittenhouse’s account of what happened. Binger quite naturally asked the detective who was operating the iPad on which the drone footage was being shown to use the pinch-zoom function common to any of us who have an iPhone. The defense leaped to object on the grounds (I think) that “artificial intelligence” in the pinch-zoom changed the pixels according to what Richards called the “logarithms” of the device’s design. The software, Richards argued, might create “what it thinks is there, not what necessarily is there.”
Frankly, I didn’t know what in the hell Richards was talking about. Artificial intelligence? Logarithms? (I guess he was going for “algorithms,” but I can’t be sure.) But Judge Schroeder then leaped in and further confused matters. From the New York Times:
That objection set off a 10-minute discussion among the lawyers and Judge Bruce Schroeder. Mr. Binger said zooming in on images shown on iPads, iPhones and other similar devices is a routine part of daily life that all jurors would understand, and that the procedure would not affect the integrity of the image.
He argued that if the defense lawyers thought otherwise, they should have to present expert testimony saying so. But Judge Schroeder said that the burden was on Mr. Binger to prove that zooming would not distort the video. “Is the image in its virginal state?” the judge asked.
(Ed. Note: Oh, dear god in heaven.)
Mr. Binger then asked for an adjournment, but Judge Schroeder denied the request. Instead, he ordered a 15-minute recess and suggested that Mr. Binger could, perhaps, get somebody to testify to the zoomed video’s accuracy “within minutes.”
Were I a cynical fellow, I might conclude that Richards knows better, but that he was counting on the judge being something of a Luddite, which turned out to be a pretty good bet. So the judge gave the prosecution 15 minutes to find an expert to testify that something every baby’s grandma knows to be true is actually the way things are. Right now, that witness box Kyle Rittenhouse is in looks an awful lot like the catbird seat.
This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io
To me, the case involving Rosenbaum hinges on whether or not he grabbed Rittenhouse gun and there was a struggle.
It appears to me from this video that Rosenbaum had not gotten close enough to Rittenhouse to grab the gun when he was shot.
I wonder if that is what the "enhanced" video that the judge would not allow showed.
This might be the worst judge in a high profile case since Julius Hoffman and the Chicago 7.
Am I imagining things, or was Rittenhouse being chased through a parking lot by someone and when the man got close to him Rittenhouse wheeled back and shot the guy 4 times . Was Rosenbaum armed? What did Rittenhouse use deadly force to defend himself from? A fistfight?
I'll leave the innuendo alone but self-defense isn't a weapons match - you use what you have. The amount of force allowed depends on the beating-recipient's reasonable belief that he is in imminent danger. A fear of a manual beating to death by a large human gets you over the threshold.
Rittenhouse doesnt appear to be tiny.
I dont recall Rosenbaum being armed. Unless there is video evidence that Rosenbaum grabbed Rittenhouse's gun , I think the kid has to face the music. The video is not entirely clear, but it did not appear to me that Rosenbaum grabbed the barrel of the gun.
Viewing the video and it looks like Rittenhouse turned and shot Rosenbaum two of the shots were at a downward angle.
The video is on you tube but I can't link it here for some reason.
Legal news from one of the most deranged leftists out there. Good one.
One of Rosenbaums friend fired a shot directly behind Rittenhouse as he was trying to taken Rittenhouse's gun..
You are allowed to defend yourself with a gun if you are reasonably threated with bodily harm. The gun shot, being chased by an unstable man who was threatening to kill people and who attempted to take his gun creates a threat of bodily harm. I think anyone who claims they wouldn't be threatened in Rittenhouse's situation is lying.
Where is the video of Rosenbaum trying to take Rittenhouse's gun? The video I see shows Rosenbaum being shot before he reached Rittenhouses gun. Maybe I am missing something.
You have the eyewitness testimony, the video, the medical evidence. The state examiner said he was either touching the gun or was very close when he was shot
So he shot an unarmed man four times because he was getting too close to him. Unless Rosenbaum grabbed the gun I dont see what the defense is.
You can just shoot someone because they said they wanted to kill you?
I still think he is going to get off but the fact that the judge wont allow video that contradicts Rittenhouse story is disturbing. I am not sure this trial has been on the up and up.
ou can just shoot someone because they said they wanted to kill you?
It's a factor. You add up all the circumstances and the issue is whether he reasonably thought he was in danger of being killed or seriously hurt. Rosenbaum's actions make that a credible threat.
Even Jeffrey Toobin is now admitting he has a good case.
It is getting close to Christmas, probably about time to do some gift looting....
Pretty damn high.
They will destroy Kenosha for the right to riot, loot, commit arson and threaten people without any consequences.
What shit would that be?
No, I hadn't heard that Christmas was dead. I did hear it was going to be really freaking expensive this year though.....
You are not wrong.
Yes, he shot the stupid the felon who had threatened to kill him earlier in the evening. What was he suppose to do, you never answer that.
Irrelevant
The "stupid" was referring to anybody chasing someone who has a firearm. Never answered what he was suppose to do.
If Rosenbaum grabbed the barrel of his gun, Rittenhouse will be acquitted.
His entire presence there, in Kenosha, doing what he was doing, was unjustified.
So Rosenbaum chasing with intent to do bodily injury is "Justiifed"?
The Usual Suspects of course
Considering the whack a doodle judge is running his own 3 ring circus, I don't expect him to be found guilty unless they jury has a collective IQ higher than the judge's shoe size.
Lance Ito says hello.
No, that honor goes to the judge on the OJ murder trial.
Add to this the judge's refusal to allow the people shot to be called "victims".
They were criminals right up until the time the bullet went through them and they magically became victims.
The judge doesn't allow people in his courtroom to be referred to as victims. ANY people.
That is NOT true. He has been known to use that restriction, but that true for every case of his.
What crime is that? Being on a public street?
Seems like the prosecutors proved the people shot weren't victims.
He just knocked down the firearms violations. This little POS will be let loose and he will kill again. Bet on it.
Assault, assault with intent to do bodily harm, Assault with a deadly weapon, assault with intent to kill. Maybe YOU should answer why they where attempting to "assault" Rittenhouse or do you not believe your lying eyes.
Will Rittenhouse skate because Trump has thus far? I look for a hung jury. It only takes one.
If he is found guilty, I bet that Jackass of a judge will overturn the conviction.
Prosecutor asks Kyle Rittenhouse why a man with a handgun pointed at him is a threat when he has an AR-15.
How is this real?
— David Hookstead (@dhookstead) November 10, 2021
The Rittenhouse prosecutor is just flailing. He just asked Rittenhouse (a firehouse cadet) why he ran toward a fire with an extinguisher.
Rittenhouse: "It was a fire?"
This is how insane the prosecution is. It's no wonder people believe the prosecution is trying for a mistrial to avoid going to a jury.
A liberal blogger, a HuffPost contributor and someone called "Northern lights"? Mmmmkay....
You want weird? This dick is doing his own TV trial -
Thread 6.1 locked and comments deleted as a meta derail.
Am watching the trial. Friggin prosecution vid is three hours long in cross examining Rittenhouse and it's mostly him asking irrelevant questions, like does Rittenhouse know the difference between a FMJ round and a hollow point. Who bought the ammo. Why did he choose an AR15 rather than a handgun.
Still watching it but so far it seems to be the prosecution's case that because Rittenhouse shot someone it must therefore be murder.
I thought I had seen it all with this trial, until now. They put the names of the potential jurors into a container and let Rittenhouse pull out the names to determine his own jury. Unfreaking believable.