Kyle Rittenhouse Trial?

lsudave said:

Like others, I'm hoping he's holding a mistrial with prejudice in reserve...

But the longer this goes on, the more I shake my head at the state of the nation.

Click to expand...

Simply put I think the judge is between a rock and a hard place at this point and has absolutely no other choice but to rule for a mistrial with prejudice in the event of a guilty verdict or hung jury considering the hold up in decision making by the jury involves the doctored drone video footage presented by the State.

lsudave said:

...to equate a capital case with a sporting event...

Click to expand...

Don't worry, that's just human nature.

The NEED to align WITH and AGAINST something.

For instance, during the antifa / neonazi disturbances...

...notice how the gun community vocally, vehemently hated the antifa while keeping largely silent over the equally abhorrent neonazis?

It's just the way the world turns...

Just want to say I feel bad for the jurors who are feeling the weight of all this. I applaud them for fulfilling the civic duty.


A lot of people want to talk about what America is, or isn't, or is becoming when they don't see the verdict they want in cases like this. Looking for a judge or a mistrial to make things right in their view. All the while running from jury duty. That's why it is something I take seriously and don't try to wiggle out of.

yeongjo said:

Simply put I think the judge is between a rock and a hard place at this point and has absolutely no other choice but to rule for a mistrial with prejudice in the event of a guilty verdict or hung jury...

Click to expand...

If the judge allows a verdict to be read, especially a guilty verdict, and especially in this case, and then overrules that verdict with a mistrial...this country will explode.

You may be right about the judge's intent, but if he plans to declare a mistrial, he better do it fast...indeed, it's probably already too late.

wiscoaster said:

If the jury hangs due to the video - that video just affects one of the five counts, is that correct? - because prosecution is using it to prove provocation? So if they agree on a verdict for the other four counts but cannot agree on the one, then what happens?

Click to expand...

I don't think so. The prosecution's whole case hinges on proving that Rittenhouse provoked Rosenbaum's attack. If they convinced the jury of that, then shooting Rosenbaum was probably unjustified, and shooting Huber and Grosskreutz would probably also be, especially because the defense never effectively argued about regaining your reluctant participant status by retreat even after provocation.

D.B. Cooper said:

If the judge allows a verdict to be read, especially a guilty verdict, and especially in this case, and then overrules that verdict with a mistrial...this country will explode.

You may be right about the judge's intent, but if he plans to declare a mistrial, he better do it fast...indeed, it's probably already too late.

Click to expand...

I think he's playing hot potato with the jury. He wants the jury to acquit so he doesn't have to declare a mistrial. If he can't get that, he wants a guilty verdict while having paved the way for the appeal. But he's absolutely in a tough place there because he's punted on the motions for mistrial with prejudice and without prejudice, so the prosecution's actions have been continuing in the same vein. He gets out of responsibility if the jury returns an acquittal or if there's a hung jury leading to a mistrial anyway. But if there's a guilty verdict, he's going to have to rule on the motions for mistrials, and they're gonna have to camp behind razor wire if he rules to dismiss with prejudice after that fact.

Since we’re all just speculating here I’ll throw in my opinion that the jury is probably spending all their time discussing the first incident. The other two are so clearly self-defense that there’s really not much to talk about.

Elkins45 said:

Since we’re all just speculating here I’ll throw in my opinion that the jury is probably spending all their time discussing the first incident. The other two are so clearly self-defense that there’s really not much to talk about.

Click to expand...

what are the alternative charges, again? The ones that can be considered, if the main ones are not met?

Could we be seeing the jury parse everything out, to see if he littered when he dropped the fire extinquisher (obviously just a joking example), or something like that? So the jury could come back with "something", but not destroy this person's life?

Branca said that asking for a copy of the jury instructions was a bad sign, might lead to "dictionary deliberation" with people looking up conventional usage instead of lawyer lingo.

wiscoaster said:

Agreed. I think that's where they can't come to agreement: provoked or not provoked? Spending too much time looking at that video is not a good thing. They should consider the totality of the contexts of both the situation as it's happening and what previously happened - and that's not on the video - to get into Kyle's thoughts and intents that lead to his responses and whether or not he was provoking Rosenbaum.

Click to expand...

Yeah, good point.

Not to make light of the case (or any case), but I'd say a juror doesn't need to ponder things THAT much. We're talking about 'beyond a reasonable doubt" being applied to the accusations. I would suggest that if you need to look at something 4 days, it's not beyond a reasonable doubt he did that. It should be fairly clear.
The longer they look, the more they are trying to construct something from a "what if".

I think it's a hung jury. If a guilty verdict were coming it would have been delivered by now. I see mistrial written all over this one. If the judge declares a mistrial I don't expect another trial requested by the prosecution. They don't really have a case here, and even if they did they have incompetent prosecutors.

Also, the city bears some responsibility here. 50 million in damages to private property isn't the result of active an effective riot control. When the city lets that happen citizens will step in to fill the void to prevent the looting and arson.

The Glockodile said:

notice how the gun community vocally, vehemently hated the antifa while keeping largely silent over the equally abhorrent neonazis?

Click to expand...

You say this in a manner where it implies there is tacit approval because the gun community is not out there butting heads with people over their idiotic nazi rallies. And what is this "gun community"... does that include Democrat gun owners?

I predict a lesser included offense.

Branca says

11:55 a.m.: Reports that Huber family is coming into courtroom.

11:54 a.m.: Law & Crime reports that family of those killed are being asked to come into courtroom.

11:53 a.m.: Seems like a false alarm, that court was coming back in.

11:49 a.m.: Some rumors possible verdict, doesn’t seem very solid. But looks like court may be coming into session in live stream above.

To put the worst face on it, does that mean the families of the "victims" are to get to see the killer sent up?

wiscoaster said:

Breaking news on OAN: jury has reached a verdict (holding breath) ....

Click to expand...

I can't find that breaking news anywhere... not even OAN. Correction... found it!! lol

live feed with legal commentary:

NOT GUILTY

NOT GUILTY... Let the crying and whining by the left wingers commence!! lol

Wow. Good. A victory for self-defense.

A little of my faith was restored today.

I am rather surprised. But gratified.
Now, Kyle, go and do not insert yourself into riots.

Not Guilty!