glhs837
Power with Control
Right up until they attacked him....
The Rittenhouse Incident
- Thread starter kom526
- Start date
Right up until they attacked him....
Big win for Kyle Rittenhouse in final pre-trial hearing…
“If the jury is being told, if the defendant is walking down the sidewalk and doing what he claims he was hired to do and police say good thing you’re here, is that something influencing the defendant and emboldening him in his behavior? That would be an argument for relevance,” the judge said.
Schroeder also denied Prosecutor Binger’s request to bar the defense from referring to Rosenbaum, Huber and Grosskreutz as rioters, looters or arsonists. The judge said those terms would be allowed if the defense can produce evidence showing that’s what they were.
“If more than one of them were engaged in arson, rioting, looting, I’m not going to tell the defense you can’t call them that,” the judge said. The judge also ruled that the two deceased men and the injured man could not be referred to as victims.
“If the jury is being told, if the defendant is walking down the sidewalk and doing what he claims he was hired to do and police say good thing you’re here, is that something influencing the defendant and emboldening him in his behavior? That would be an argument for relevance,” the judge said.
Schroeder also denied Prosecutor Binger’s request to bar the defense from referring to Rosenbaum, Huber and Grosskreutz as rioters, looters or arsonists. The judge said those terms would be allowed if the defense can produce evidence showing that’s what they were.
“If more than one of them were engaged in arson, rioting, looting, I’m not going to tell the defense you can’t call them that,” the judge said. The judge also ruled that the two deceased men and the injured man could not be referred to as victims.
I wouldn't call that a big win yet. It has potential, but they have to provide proof of rioting, looting and arson before he can call them that.
Prosecutor Lists Numerous Alleged Crimes Of Man Kyle Rittenhouse Fatally Shot, Downplays As Irrelevant
“There’s an allegation that he’s telling other people at [a] gas station to shoot him, which, really, is different than what was going on with Mr. Rittenhouse,” he argued. “Um, he clearly didn’t want Mr. Rittenhouse to shoot him. So, I don’t see that there’s any commonality, there.”
“So, this is bad character evidence, your honor,” prosecution claimed. “This is an attempt to tell the jury Mr. Rosenbaum was a bad guy and deserved to die. That’s really what it is.”
“‘He was an arsonist, he was a rioter, he was starting fights — well, not starting fights, he was starting problems, he’s disorderly, he was loud — whatever. Therefore, it was okay for the defendant to kill him.’ That’s really what’s going on here, your honor.”
It seems prosecution is getting ahead of the narrative that Rosenbaum is a “bad guy,” which has been circulating in news reports since the fatal shooting. For example, Rosenbaum’s criminal history and apparent sexual abuse of minors surfaced online after the riot.
“There’s an allegation that he’s telling other people at [a] gas station to shoot him, which, really, is different than what was going on with Mr. Rittenhouse,” he argued. “Um, he clearly didn’t want Mr. Rittenhouse to shoot him. So, I don’t see that there’s any commonality, there.”
“So, this is bad character evidence, your honor,” prosecution claimed. “This is an attempt to tell the jury Mr. Rosenbaum was a bad guy and deserved to die. That’s really what it is.”
“‘He was an arsonist, he was a rioter, he was starting fights — well, not starting fights, he was starting problems, he’s disorderly, he was loud — whatever. Therefore, it was okay for the defendant to kill him.’ That’s really what’s going on here, your honor.”
It seems prosecution is getting ahead of the narrative that Rosenbaum is a “bad guy,” which has been circulating in news reports since the fatal shooting. For example, Rosenbaum’s criminal history and apparent sexual abuse of minors surfaced online after the riot.
Kyle Rittenhouse Goes on Trial This Week. Here's Why the Media Are Trying So Hard to Dirty Him Up
Prosecutor Thomas Binger describes Rittenhouse as a “chaos tourist” who hung around with white supremacists and Proud Boys before the shooting. But that didn’t hold up under scrutiny by the judge. In an evidence hearing, Binger cited media reports as “evidence” to support his speculations about Rittenhouse. The judge scoffed. Indeed, some Wisconsin Proud Boys saw the teen and his mom in a restaurant after he was charged and became publicly known. They gave him a warm greeting and asked him to pose with them for a photo, flashing an “OK” sign. Binger and the media used the photo to make assumptions, but during the investigation it was discovered the Proud Boys had never heard of Rittenhouse until long after the shootings.
Binger wanted to introduce “evidence” about where Rittenhouse got the money to buy his rifle, suggesting he got the money illegally or unethically.
The judge didn’t let it into the trial because it wasn’t germane to the charges against Rittenhouse.
Binger argued in court that it was somehow illegal for an armed person to shoot an unarmed person, hoping to set an expectation in the minds of the public that it was unreasonable for Rittenhouse to shoot the men attacking him. Use-of-force attorney Andrew Branca says Binger went “off the rails” with this absurd line of argument.
But some damage was arguably done in the court of public opinion.
Robert Barnes, who at one time was a Rittenhouse attorney, and who’s offered to help lead defense attorneys Mark Richards and Corey Chirafisi with jury selection, says Binger, has “lie[d] about Kyle for year” and “defined him in the court of public opinion that when that jury sits down, it doesn’t matter whether they see the evidence because they will see the evidence through their preconceived prejudices.”
He says those “lies” have been borne out in the polling he’s done showing “2/3 of the people of Kenosha” believe Rittenhouse is guilty of the charges against him. Indeed, we’re seeing some of the same PR tactics in Kenosha as we saw in Minneapolis in the trial of former police officer Derek Chauvin for the death of George Floyd. It was nearly impossible to get a fair trial as we saw from jury statements after the guilty verdict.
Barnes says the prosecutor knows that his audience – the media – will dutifully transcribe his wild accusations, which he knows the judge won’t allow in the trial. Barnes says it’s a classic case of projection. “Take everything that the rioters and the looters and the arsonists and the sociopaths that were there that night, several of whom stalked [Rittenhouse], tried to kill him, physically attacked him – take their traits and Binger has stuck them onto Kyle.”
Prosecutor Thomas Binger describes Rittenhouse as a “chaos tourist” who hung around with white supremacists and Proud Boys before the shooting. But that didn’t hold up under scrutiny by the judge. In an evidence hearing, Binger cited media reports as “evidence” to support his speculations about Rittenhouse. The judge scoffed. Indeed, some Wisconsin Proud Boys saw the teen and his mom in a restaurant after he was charged and became publicly known. They gave him a warm greeting and asked him to pose with them for a photo, flashing an “OK” sign. Binger and the media used the photo to make assumptions, but during the investigation it was discovered the Proud Boys had never heard of Rittenhouse until long after the shootings.
Binger wanted to introduce “evidence” about where Rittenhouse got the money to buy his rifle, suggesting he got the money illegally or unethically.
The judge didn’t let it into the trial because it wasn’t germane to the charges against Rittenhouse.
Binger argued in court that it was somehow illegal for an armed person to shoot an unarmed person, hoping to set an expectation in the minds of the public that it was unreasonable for Rittenhouse to shoot the men attacking him. Use-of-force attorney Andrew Branca says Binger went “off the rails” with this absurd line of argument.
But some damage was arguably done in the court of public opinion.
Robert Barnes, who at one time was a Rittenhouse attorney, and who’s offered to help lead defense attorneys Mark Richards and Corey Chirafisi with jury selection, says Binger, has “lie[d] about Kyle for year” and “defined him in the court of public opinion that when that jury sits down, it doesn’t matter whether they see the evidence because they will see the evidence through their preconceived prejudices.”
He says those “lies” have been borne out in the polling he’s done showing “2/3 of the people of Kenosha” believe Rittenhouse is guilty of the charges against him. Indeed, we’re seeing some of the same PR tactics in Kenosha as we saw in Minneapolis in the trial of former police officer Derek Chauvin for the death of George Floyd. It was nearly impossible to get a fair trial as we saw from jury statements after the guilty verdict.
Barnes says the prosecutor knows that his audience – the media – will dutifully transcribe his wild accusations, which he knows the judge won’t allow in the trial. Barnes says it’s a classic case of projection. “Take everything that the rioters and the looters and the arsonists and the sociopaths that were there that night, several of whom stalked [Rittenhouse], tried to kill him, physically attacked him – take their traits and Binger has stuck them onto Kyle.”
He might do better being judged by the judge rather than a jury if they've dirtied up the jury pool that badly.
PJay
Well-Known Member
How it's going..
"One potential juror said she would find Kyle Rittenhouse guilty on all counts because he used an AR-15 and that type of weapon should be banned"
"A potential Kyle Rittenhouse juror said she was so worried about the cases she didn’t drive her own car to the courthouse so people wouldn’t be able to see it"
"A potential juror in Rittenhouse trial is saying "it's scary" to be on a case like this because she lives so close to the situation. She specifically cited "riots." Wow, how can this possibly be fair... "Am I gonna get home safe?" she said."
"Another potential Rittenhouse juror just said, "I'm more afraid of our community and the outsiders of our community that are coming in... it just brings us back to August (2020)." Also said she's "potentially" afraid of reliving riots depending on verdict."
"A guy said he believed in 2A so he was biased and wanted to be excused."
"One potential juror said she would find Kyle Rittenhouse guilty on all counts because he used an AR-15 and that type of weapon should be banned"
"A potential Kyle Rittenhouse juror said she was so worried about the cases she didn’t drive her own car to the courthouse so people wouldn’t be able to see it"
"A potential juror in Rittenhouse trial is saying "it's scary" to be on a case like this because she lives so close to the situation. She specifically cited "riots." Wow, how can this possibly be fair... "Am I gonna get home safe?" she said."
"Another potential Rittenhouse juror just said, "I'm more afraid of our community and the outsiders of our community that are coming in... it just brings us back to August (2020)." Also said she's "potentially" afraid of reliving riots depending on verdict."
"A guy said he believed in 2A so he was biased and wanted to be excused."
FBI Spy Video Shows Kyle Rittenhouse Being Chased Down at Kenosha Riot...Which Explains Why You've Never Seen It
For more than a year, prosecutors in the Kyle Rittenhouse case have possessed FBI spy video footage taken by a fixed wing plane flying above the Kenosha riots. Kyle Rittenhouse’s defense attorneys say they only learned of its existence recently. On Tuesday, the public finally got a look at it.
It’s pretty clear why the prosecution was playing hide-the-ball with the evidence and why Rittenhouse’s defense attorneys were the first to show it in court. Over prosecutorial objections, Judge Bruce Schroeder allowed Rittenhouse’s attorneys to use their opening statement to show photos, videos, and, yes, the FBI’s FLIR thermal images of the first of three shootings the night of August 25, 2020. It was an unusual move and one you’ll see more defense attorneys replicate in the future.
[clip]
The video demonstrates fairly clearly that the first person shot that night, Joseph Rosenbaum, appeared to lie in wait for Rittenhouse – hiding behind a car – and that when the teen jogged past the car looking for the burning cars he’d come to put out, the 36-year-old man came up from behind, chased, and lunged at Rittenhouse.
It then shows Rittenhouse apparently trapped as Rosenbaum lunges–and that’s when the 17-year-old fired four shots in a span of .76 seconds, killing Rosenbaum. The prosecution claimed in court that the kill shot was fired into Rosenbaum’s back and plans to make this a big point in the state’s case.
Defense attorneys depicted the chase as a man who had already threatened Rittenhouse’s life wanting to get a hold of the teen’s gun. Prosecutors say, however, that Rittenhouse chased Rosenbaum, hoping to somehow start something. Prosecutors haven’t answered what that something was, but defense attorneys say Rittenhouse came with a fire extinguisher to put out fires that Rosenbaum had been starting.
The FBI video also corroborates video showing Rosenbaum’s friend, Joshua Ziminski, firing the first shot that night.
For more than a year, prosecutors in the Kyle Rittenhouse case have possessed FBI spy video footage taken by a fixed wing plane flying above the Kenosha riots. Kyle Rittenhouse’s defense attorneys say they only learned of its existence recently. On Tuesday, the public finally got a look at it.
It’s pretty clear why the prosecution was playing hide-the-ball with the evidence and why Rittenhouse’s defense attorneys were the first to show it in court. Over prosecutorial objections, Judge Bruce Schroeder allowed Rittenhouse’s attorneys to use their opening statement to show photos, videos, and, yes, the FBI’s FLIR thermal images of the first of three shootings the night of August 25, 2020. It was an unusual move and one you’ll see more defense attorneys replicate in the future.
[clip]
The video demonstrates fairly clearly that the first person shot that night, Joseph Rosenbaum, appeared to lie in wait for Rittenhouse – hiding behind a car – and that when the teen jogged past the car looking for the burning cars he’d come to put out, the 36-year-old man came up from behind, chased, and lunged at Rittenhouse.
It then shows Rittenhouse apparently trapped as Rosenbaum lunges–and that’s when the 17-year-old fired four shots in a span of .76 seconds, killing Rosenbaum. The prosecution claimed in court that the kill shot was fired into Rosenbaum’s back and plans to make this a big point in the state’s case.
Defense attorneys depicted the chase as a man who had already threatened Rittenhouse’s life wanting to get a hold of the teen’s gun. Prosecutors say, however, that Rittenhouse chased Rosenbaum, hoping to somehow start something. Prosecutors haven’t answered what that something was, but defense attorneys say Rittenhouse came with a fire extinguisher to put out fires that Rosenbaum had been starting.
The FBI video also corroborates video showing Rosenbaum’s friend, Joshua Ziminski, firing the first shot that night.
Last edited:
I saw a Yahoo news story about this and all it talked about was Rittenhouse chasing this guy and shooting him in the back. Different eyes see something different.
Yahoo News... nuff said.
Might has well have been a TASS headline.
Kenosha Judge Calls Out CNN for Knowing Nothing About Wisconsin Law
"I'm gonna comment about the media, again, because there was a gentleman on TV night before last who said, 'This is the most divisive case in the country today'...There are people on the media, on reputable sites, that are saying things that are totally bizarre," he said, adding the reason why he is bringing up CNN is due to how it is a prime example of talking heads making comments about state law they know nothing about, in this case, the "uncommunicated threat rule."
The rule states the defendant does not need to be aware of the deceased past violent actions in order to claim self-defense if circumstantial evidence shows such evidence. Schroeder allowed evidence of Rosenbaum's actions on August 25 to be admitted.
"Now one of these, this was on CNN, Jeffrey Toobin and another attorney there, and a comment was made the ruling was 'incomprehensible.' They obviously are not familiar with this rule. That's our law," Schroeder said.
In response, Binger said he hasn't paid attention to what Toobin has said on the network: "It is of no concern to me."
CNN legal analyst Areva Martin had stated it was "incomprehensible" for Schroeder to prevent the prosecution from calling the men Rittenhouse shot as "victims" but the defense can call the men either arsonists, rioters, or looters if the evidence showed they engaged in such behavior. Schroeder's reasoning for the ban is because if the prosecution calls the men "victims" then it could prejudice the jury when the jury could rule Rittenhouse acted in self-defense, making the men "assailants."
"It's a very troubling situation because ... using that word suggests that Rittenhouse was justified in what he was doing because these were bad people that he shot," Toobin said. "They were committing crimes. They were out there looting. They were out there being arsonists when that is very much in dispute in the trial, what these people were doing."
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattv...ing-in-new-je-n2598510?utm_campaign=inarticle
"I'm gonna comment about the media, again, because there was a gentleman on TV night before last who said, 'This is the most divisive case in the country today'...There are people on the media, on reputable sites, that are saying things that are totally bizarre," he said, adding the reason why he is bringing up CNN is due to how it is a prime example of talking heads making comments about state law they know nothing about, in this case, the "uncommunicated threat rule."
The rule states the defendant does not need to be aware of the deceased past violent actions in order to claim self-defense if circumstantial evidence shows such evidence. Schroeder allowed evidence of Rosenbaum's actions on August 25 to be admitted.
"Now one of these, this was on CNN, Jeffrey Toobin and another attorney there, and a comment was made the ruling was 'incomprehensible.' They obviously are not familiar with this rule. That's our law," Schroeder said.
In response, Binger said he hasn't paid attention to what Toobin has said on the network: "It is of no concern to me."
CNN legal analyst Areva Martin had stated it was "incomprehensible" for Schroeder to prevent the prosecution from calling the men Rittenhouse shot as "victims" but the defense can call the men either arsonists, rioters, or looters if the evidence showed they engaged in such behavior. Schroeder's reasoning for the ban is because if the prosecution calls the men "victims" then it could prejudice the jury when the jury could rule Rittenhouse acted in self-defense, making the men "assailants."
"It's a very troubling situation because ... using that word suggests that Rittenhouse was justified in what he was doing because these were bad people that he shot," Toobin said. "They were committing crimes. They were out there looting. They were out there being arsonists when that is very much in dispute in the trial, what these people were doing."
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattv...ing-in-new-je-n2598510?utm_campaign=inarticle
Rittenhouse Defense Suggests Kenosha DA Colluded With Detective to Hide Cell Phone Evidence Taken by Wounded Man
It turns out that Deputy District Attorney Thomas Binger decided to keep Grosskreutz’s phone contents from that night a secret because of his status as a victim under Marcy’s Law.
The issue caused a hubbub in the courtroom, and due to the time, testimony was suspended until Thursday morning.
On Thursday morning, defense attorney Richards elicited in testimony from the detective that police had received a search warrant for Grosskreutz’s phone but never served it. When Richards asked why, the detective said it was because he wasn’t “comfortable with Marcy’s Law.”
It was at this point that Richards pointed at the prosecutor and demanded of the detective, “He’s nodding at you now, isn’t he?”
That made everyone sit straight up in their seats.
It turns out that Deputy District Attorney Thomas Binger decided to keep Grosskreutz’s phone contents from that night a secret because of his status as a victim under Marcy’s Law.
The issue caused a hubbub in the courtroom, and due to the time, testimony was suspended until Thursday morning.
On Thursday morning, defense attorney Richards elicited in testimony from the detective that police had received a search warrant for Grosskreutz’s phone but never served it. When Richards asked why, the detective said it was because he wasn’t “comfortable with Marcy’s Law.”
It was at this point that Richards pointed at the prosecutor and demanded of the detective, “He’s nodding at you now, isn’t he?”
That made everyone sit straight up in their seats.
The actual exchange is in the video, so you can watch it for yourself, but a reasonable paraphrase would go something like this:
Binger: So Rittenhouse shot Rosenbaum, in the back, as he was falling, correct?
McGinnis: No, Rittenhouse didn’t fire until Rosenbaum charged and lunged at him.
Binger: So he shot him as he was falling?
McGinnis: No, not falling, lunging.
Binger: So you’re saying he shot him while he was falling?
McGinnis: No, that’s not my testimony. Lunging.
This is NOT how it’s supposed to be done, folks.
legalinsurrection.com
Binger: So Rittenhouse shot Rosenbaum, in the back, as he was falling, correct?
McGinnis: No, Rittenhouse didn’t fire until Rosenbaum charged and lunged at him.
Binger: So he shot him as he was falling?
McGinnis: No, not falling, lunging.
Binger: So you’re saying he shot him while he was falling?
McGinnis: No, that’s not my testimony. Lunging.
This is NOT how it’s supposed to be done, folks.
TRAIN WRECK: Rittenhouse Prosecution Implodes With State Witness Richard McGinnis of Daily Caller
This is NOT supposed to be how the direct examination of your own witnesses is done.
legalinsurrection.com