Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

LIVE: Rittenhouse Trial Day 10: Closing Arguments

LIVE: Rittenhouse Trial Day 10: Closing Arguments

Once the jury goes into deliberations, we will go into VERDICT WATCH mode, so keep your eyes right here for breaking news and analysis of the final verdict(s) in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial.

Welcome back to our ongoing live coverage of the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse. Kyle is charged with a variety of felonies, including first-degree murder, for shooting three men, two fatally, as well as for alleged reckless conduct on the night of August 25, 2020, in riot-torn Kenosha WI.

Today the court will instruct the jury, explaining to them how to apply the law to the facts of the case as they determine those facts to have been proven or disproven.  This will be followed by the State’s closing argument, the defense closing argument, and the State rebuttal.  At that point, the jury will begin its deliberations. Once the jury goes into deliberations, we will go into VERDICT WATCH mode, so keep your eyes right here for breaking news and analysis of the final verdict(s) in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial.

You can find our commentary and analysis of from over this past weekend here:

Rittenhouse Analysis: State’s Weak Provocation Argument Is Still The Major Threat to Acquittal (Sunday (11/14/21)

Getting Jurors To Imagine “Provocation” In Blurry Photo And Video – Rittenhouse Prosecution Endgame (Saturday 11/13/21)

As usual, you can follow our live streaming of today’s court proceedings as well as our live, real-time commenting of courtroom testimony and argument as it occurs, right here.

LIVE STREAM

LIVE COMMENT

And don’t forget to join us this evening for our usual plain English legal analysis and commentary of the day’s proceedings, along with the courtroom video of it all.

Remember

You carry a gun so you’re hard to kill.

Know the law so you’re hard to convict.

Stay safe!

–Andrew

Attorney Andrew F. Branca
Law of Self Defense LLC

Nothing in this content constitutes legal advice. Nothing in this content establishes an attorney-client relationship, nor confidentiality. If you are in immediate need of legal advice, retain a licensed, competent attorney in the relevant jurisdiction.

 

 

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments


I would hope the defense has found some expert photo analyst to prove that the drone photo was doctored (and poorly) by the prosecution. The whole case should be tossed based on that.

    Joe-dallas in reply to Layman101. | November 15, 2021 at 9:13 am

    Unfortunately – its too late to introduce new evidence. The evidenciary phase of the trial has closed which prevents the introduction of new evidence. There are very limited exceptions, one being proof of fraud, though that hurdle is extremely hard to overcome at this stage of the trial, ie once the defense rested.

      ryStatDL in reply to Joe-dallas. | November 15, 2021 at 9:48 am

      Would it be possible for the Defense to put forward another motion mistrial with prejudice based on prosecutorial misconduct ?

      If they have evidence that the prosecution was tampering with / faking evidence, it seems to me that would be the logical route.

      But – I don’t expect the law to be logical so who knows.

    LetsGoBrandon in reply to Layman101. | November 15, 2021 at 9:20 am

    The best photo I have seen on this has 2 already introduced photos. One the prosecution’s assertion of the pointed gun and Kyle’s social media photo. Both show the gun in the same position, pointing down with the butt pointing up and over his right shoulder.

    TargaGTS in reply to Layman101. | November 15, 2021 at 9:27 am

    Only a potential appellate issue, now.

    Elzorro in reply to Layman101. | November 15, 2021 at 9:44 am

    The first word of Richards close should be ‘Yougottabekiddingme’.

What time does it start

So the state gets a rebuttal to the defense closing argument? WTF?

    OldCop876 in reply to ernest1000. | November 15, 2021 at 9:40 am

    Yes, that is pretty much always the case. The theory is that since the state has the burden of proof, they should get the last word. I disagree, but that is how it is done.

How do you defend against charges that are introduced after the evidentiary phase of the trial?

    fogflyer in reply to Rube. | November 15, 2021 at 9:35 am

    Well, it’s not a new charge, it is just a jury instruction that has them consider whether Kyle provoked the events which causes him to lose his self-defense claim. Jury instructions are always hashed out at this stage of the trial.

    Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think the judge should have allowed the drone video and doctored photo in this late in the trial, but that is a different argument.

    TargaGTS in reply to Rube. | November 15, 2021 at 9:42 am

    Exactly. It’s unbelievable, isn’t it? I don’t know much about state criminal court. But, in military law, a lesser included offense is ALWAYS attached before the trial begins. In fact, it happens long before the trial begins and usually during the Article 15 hearing, analogous to a grand jury indictment in the civilian world.

      Kemald71 in reply to TargaGTS. | November 15, 2021 at 11:14 am

      The defense has the option of allowing the jury to convict on lesser charges, On Friday Mr. Rittenhouse, on the advice of his defense team, chose to allow the jury to consider lesser charges. He could instead have chosen to preclude the jury from considering lesser charges.

        fogflyer in reply to Kemald71. | November 15, 2021 at 1:16 pm

        You sure about that? I can’t imagine the defense would allow the lesser charges to be considered if they had the option not to.

          healthguyfsu in reply to fogflyer. | November 15, 2021 at 1:26 pm

          Lesser charges can go either way…a “compromise” verdict is the risk but the other risk is that absent said compromise option and with enough people convinced you are guilty of something, you get the full shebang.

      Article 15 is non-judicial punishment. You’re thinking of an Article 32 proceeding.

Reimagining getting up early Monday morning and making my way downtown only to have to sit and listen to 2 1/2 hours of Binger Babble with no way out. Ugggh!

The DAs enlargement is an obvious photo-shop. The shapes of objects in the original have been altered. My best guess is that the tech ran the program with many different configurations of the data and the prosecution chose the one that best made the case that the object in question is a gun rather than simply the car in the background which is the same color.

The data is something like this. Say you have a 10×10 box which is square so it has 100 pixels. Each pixel corresponds to a number (or possibly a triple of numbers for color images). To enlarge through interpolation to a square whose dimensions are ten times as large, you are filling a box with 10,000 pixels, so in the data matrix you need to fill in almost 100 empty entries for each entry in the original data matrix.

Interpolation works by fitting some kind of function to the original data and interpolating the 99 missing data entries using the approximating function. Linear interpolation used to be used in high school trig classes to find data about triangles. It basically takes to pairs of data, draws a line connecting them and guesses that the values for in between data lie on the line. That works okay if the unobserved data actually lie on the line. However, if they don’t, linear regression is misleading.

How the data points are chosen can greatly affect the outcome. Shifting the data by a single unit can yield very different results. This can be somewhat handled by averaging over several shifts but this process can result in many different outcomes.

What is startling in the submitted evidence is the number of clear differences between the enlargement and the original. The are items whose boundaries have clearly changed shape and in some cases rotated. I suspect that these changes are artifacts introduced by the algorithm. It is not likely that someone went in and changed the data pixel by pixel. It is more likely that it is opportunistic selection from a large number of outcomes obtained by running the algorithm from shifted data sets or some form of weighting of the data sets.

    exactly right on interpolation !

    the one thing the “prosecutor” keeps missing is that interpolation is only required when enlarging a picture beyond the point where the pixels start showing a blurr

    if one has a 4k UHD picture – it will have over 8 million pixels per inch and can be zoomed in (enlarged) to a much greater degree than a 1080p picture with only about 2 million pixels

      fogflyer in reply to ryStatDL. | November 15, 2021 at 1:18 pm

      8 million pixels per inch!?!?
      LOL! I think not🤣

      JMark in reply to ryStatDL. | November 15, 2021 at 1:21 pm

      A bit over 8 million in a frame, not per inch. Problems with the way various algorithms “enhance” an image still apply, though.
      Dad is a retired imagery analyst and went into a long explanation of the technical issues at play, but then looked at the images and concluded they were overly processed, appeared to have been manipulated, and provided no intelligible information. He used the technical term “crap”.

    Remember also that the original video was *compressed* in a lossy format, so the pixels you see on screen are not the ones the camera recorded in the first place, but as close to them as possible when you have the average compression of an MP4 being around 50x.

Assume they are late so BLM can issue their own jury instructions first.

Prepare for Richards to slouch on the podium and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. It appers to be his legal specialty.

Richard is already preparing to throw his harm over the back of his chair and slouch.

I sure as heck hope the judge and/or defense knows how to measure a barrel length.

Sweet on count 6 getting tossed.

This issue with the firearm should have been hashed out well before now. Holy crap.

    TargaGTS in reply to Chewbacca. | November 15, 2021 at 11:06 am

    I now understand why he didn’t dismiss it until now. When the trial began, the state had the opportunity to demonstrate that Kyle didn’t meet the statutory exceptions, which was his age and the barrel and gun length. They didn’t. They didn’t even try to. So, he dismisses.

      Chewbacca in reply to TargaGTS. | November 15, 2021 at 11:43 am

      That makes sense. I just can’t believe the ADA never bothered to have the barrel measured before filing the charge. As someone who has to do follow up for prosecutions it’s just baffling this was not done. I’m glad it was finally thrown out.

        TargaGTS in reply to Chewbacca. | November 15, 2021 at 12:02 pm

        Let’s not delude ourselves. They knew EXACTLY how long the rifle was and they were certain Rittenhouse did not meet the statutory requirements of the crime. They charged it anyway because they could.

          JMark in reply to TargaGTS. | November 15, 2021 at 1:26 pm

          Concur. I have to believe the routine processing of evidence like that would be measurements (using the proper method for checking barrel length). They knew it wasn’t short-barrelled or they’d have brought it up during their case.

Count 6 (weapons charge) DISMISSED.

The jury CAN NOT measure the barrel accurately! These people are idiots!
You can measure the barrel properly when the gun is assembled! Part of the barrel is internal. The jury could actually measure this incorrectly and convict Kyle on the gun charge. Madness that the judge thinks this solves the issue!

Count 6 dismissed! GREAT!

TaxPayingPatriot | November 15, 2021 at 10:42 am

Going to be over 50 here in Chicago-land for Tues and Weds. A nice warm patch of weather for the activists to rampage assuming Kyle is found not guilty across the board. Nice that Count 6 finally resolved.

Richards already in full slouch now. Bad habit for trial lawer.

HOW can the prosecution ask the judge to instruct the jury that Kyle “broke the law” if they believe he pointed a weapon at someone at this point in the game? IF Kyle “broke the law” then CHARGE him!

TaxPayingPatriot | November 15, 2021 at 10:49 am

Did the kimiskis or whatever their name is testify that they were triggered by KR pointing a gun in their direction? did they testify he threatened them?

    Ziminski didn’t testify.

      healthguyfsu in reply to Terr. | November 15, 2021 at 1:29 pm

      Because he would be able to plead the 5th and say nothing. In fact, Binger is prosecuting him and had the arson case pushed back just so he wouldn’t be forced to testify…it’s a dirty move but one that is done often.

    No, they did not even testify that Rittenhouse pointed a gun at them. There is no evidence that Rittenhouse pointed a gun at them. The prosecution is speculating that Rittenhouse migh have pointed a gun at them and that it might have provoked Rosenbaum.

So – explain – based on not knowing who the weapon was “pointed” to – how can the provocation instruction be included?

    fogflyer in reply to Terr. | November 15, 2021 at 10:59 am

    Yeah, never should have been allowed, but the judge appears to have handcuffed the state enough in closing arguments that they will not even be able to suggest that it was Ziminski that he pointed the gun at. They will try though and the defense better be quick on the objections.

      fogflyer in reply to fogflyer. | November 15, 2021 at 12:58 pm

      Did I miss something or is the defense asleep at the wheel? Binger just stated that Kyle was pointing the gun in the direction of the Ziminskis. This is exactly what the judge warned would not be allowed. Where was the objection!!!??? WTF?!?

Kyle looks very worried. Just about hugging himself.

Was probable cause based on Kyle illegally posessing the rifle?

Eben the judge is confused about the instructions.

Richards has no read on this judge. He keeps opening the door for the defense to get rid of the provocation instruction, and Richards keep stepping on his manhood and snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Ummm….
Didn’t the judge just screw up the instructions regarding McGinnis? He got it right at the end, but in the beginning he said the Kyle could be acting with legal self-defense against Rosenbaum, but still be guilty of reckless endangerment against McGinnis. Then the judge said the opposite of that a little later. Well that was just clear as mud!

    thad_the_man in reply to fogflyer. | November 15, 2021 at 11:29 am

    That’s because wording of the law is clear as mud.
    I believe the intent of the law is simple. If you have a gun and a flamethrower and act in self defense but used the flamethrower and endangered other when you didn’t have to then you are guilty,

I would prefer if the judge paused, and added verbal italics to “or great bodilly harm” in the instruction on use of force, as opposed to slurring it over. That is absolutely essential to Kyle’s defense. He couldn’t “know” he was about to be beated to death by the mob, or shot with his own gun, but he damn sure had reason to believe any/all of that would happen, OR merely to be maimed for life.

Preventing “great bodily harm” to yourself is the essence of self defense, and you’re not required to find out if they are actually going to kill for sure, by which time of course you’ve lost the ability to defend yourself.

I say there are not 12 people in Wisconsin, let alone Kenosha, that can understand all these instructions. Their eyes are glazed over. I have a PhD and I am not comprehending this. If instructions are this long, we have a judicial system problem.

    LetsGoBrandon in reply to sdharms. | November 15, 2021 at 11:26 am

    Well, the instructions are 36 pages long- per the judge. I suspect folks have mentally fallen asleep at this point. My guess is that they will not deliberate long enough to even read these pages.

      Agreed. The only part they need to understand is that if they believe Kyle was acting in self-defense, then it is not-guilty on ALL charges. I believe they will indeed come to that conclusion.

    Elzorro in reply to sdharms. | November 15, 2021 at 11:39 am

    Not even a Supreme Court Justice could understand this Mumbo Jumbo.

I hope the jury gets a flow chart in order to decipher this.

    JMark in reply to sdharms. | November 15, 2021 at 1:32 pm

    That’s exactly what I’d be trying to work out were I on the jury. 36 pages of instructions should just be a one page flowchart.

This hammering on every count on the Self-Defense “reasonableness for the defendant at that time” is interesting.

Jury simultanius…Huh?

Good Lord

If Rittenhouse is found not guilty on all charges do the charges against his buddy Dominic Black get dropped since they’re in relation to Rittenhouse’s actions?

    ChrisMallory in reply to Chewbacca. | November 15, 2021 at 12:32 pm

    Even if Wisconsin drops the gun charges against Black, he could still face Federal charges. Both Rittenhouse and Black gave enough evidence in the initial police report and in media interviews to convict Black of a Federal straw purchase. Both said Rittenhouse provided the money to buy the rifle and asked Black to buy it. So once Black checked “Yes” on the 4473 question 21:a he broke the law. Not sure how they would charge Rittenhouse for that “crime” but since it is the Feds they will find a way if they want to.

    If this reporting is true: https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/kyle-rittenhouse-reveals-how-gun-was-paid-for-in-first-interview-since-arrest/2366751/ then it is a very good reminder of why you don’t talk to the cops or the media.

      henrybowman in reply to ChrisMallory. | November 15, 2021 at 2:13 pm

      Well, it’s not like blabbing mattered. Kyle was underage to buy from an FFL, so somebody else obviously bought the gun. And the gun has a serial number, so finding out who bought it is trivial.

        ChrisMallory in reply to henrybowman. | November 15, 2021 at 3:49 pm

        True, but giving the state the evidence it needs to prove a straw purchase is different than making them prove it if both of you shut up about where the money came from.

Lucifer Morningstar | November 15, 2021 at 11:37 am

Great Maker in the void. Watched all of a couple of minutes of the live feed while Judge Schroeder stumbled an bumbled through reading the jury instructions and can’t help but think that there’s no way in hell the jury is going to be able to comprehend even a fraction of what he read.

Unless someone straightens out these instructions, the jury is likely to be terribly confused. The common defense running across all the indictments is: Self-defense, yes or no? If self-defense and reasonable conduct by Rittenhouse, then acquit.

A second issue is “making up evidence.” We’ve seen the prosecution mischaracterize the evidence numerous times. That pattern of behavior should be an indictment of the video into which pixels have been added.

Were I the defense, I would take that same photo, blow it up, and show that their pixels show the AR being held differently, and that it totally disagrees with what the prosecution put on. May be too late for that.

    lurker9876 in reply to Mdirmeier. | November 15, 2021 at 11:41 am

    In that case, the confusion over these instructions tells me that the state did not build a good case.

    Their closing argument and rebuttal are going to be interesting.

    The instructions are very confusing. I have a problem with the idea of a person being justified in using self defense but still guilty of behaving recklessly in so doing. Am I understanding that the instructions allow otherwise?

    Also the judge was clear that the jury is not supposed to speculate. But doesn’t the photo from the drone video lead to just that? The State is demanding a conclusion based on speculative evidence. They can’t possibly show factually that Kyle is pointing a gun at anyone let alone Z so they are telling jury what the State thinks is shown. That is opinion which to me requires speculation by the jury to reach whether they agree.

The confusion over the instructions by the judge presents a pretty good example of why submitting a slew of lesser charges ought to be banned because it makes the defendant look like he or she has committed more offenses and puts a lot of pressure to convict “on something” regardless of guilt or innocence over charges not separately argued before the jury. This case is a real eye opener of how perverse criminal justice law really is and how a prosecutor can not only indict a ham sandwich but obtain a conviction.

    Midfiaudiophile in reply to PBM. | November 15, 2021 at 12:42 pm

    Is Richards over-objecting during State’s first bite at the closing apple? I’ve been told that doing so pisses off jurors.

    I would understand it during Rebuttal arguments, since Defense isn’t going to get an opportunity to respond to any slimy crap Binger pulls, but Richards has 2.5 hours to explain all of Binger’s little white lies after the state’s closing.

Arson should be legalized for the jury instructions.

I dont see why they cant just decide self defense or no, then if not self defense, give them all this other crap to consider.

Amazing jury out during this disaster by means of insane instructions.

Why isn’t the instruction something like “If you conclude the defendant was acting in lawful self defense, you should find the defendant ‘not guilty’. If you conclude the defendant believed he was acting in self defense, but that his belief was objectively unreasonable, you can consider second degree intentional homicide. If you do not conclude that the defendant was acting in self defense, you can consider first degree intentional homicide.” After all, the defense isn’t arguing that he didn’t do it, they’re arguing that he did it in self-defense, which is an affirmative defense. It seems to be the only point that actually matters as far as the jury should be concerned.

effing complicated jury instructions. Lawyers sheesh

GOLD!
“Judge: I think it’s a little unclear.
Richards: I think it’s very unclear.
ADA Kraus: I think it’s clear enough.
No words.”

Excuse me but isn’t the flow chart for the Jury of the order of answering questions and when to go on (e.g. if you answer “A” then go on to “B” or stop, etc) clearly marked on the Verdict Sheet, as opposed to just in the verbal jury instructions?

This is what we routinely do in complex civil trials….

I don’t think I’ve ever seen so much confusion with writing jury instructions.

A little unclear…very unclear…perfectly clear!!

This is so far in the weeds please call a search party out.

If they dont have good clear jury instruction ready by Monday morning (and they dont) then they did not work all weekend and I could have done it and I dont have a law degree. These people are NOT CLEAR THINKERS.

    You are mistaking their vague wanderings for incompetence, when they are most likely an attempt to spread as much smoke as possible by declaring the highly complex process to be required, rather than the simple and direct rules for self-defense that they are terrified the jury will follow instead.

    “So, he meets the four requirements for self-defense under the law on all counts, right? Well, let’s notify the judge of the Not Guilty verdict and we can be out of here for lunch.”

      henrybowman in reply to georgfelis. | November 15, 2021 at 2:16 pm

      Let’s not forget to give some credit to our marvelous Wisconsin legislators, who have written laws so complicated and self-contradictory that one of them even has “18 year olds” in the title when it turns out to apply only to 16 year olds.

Unanimous? The defense team should simply push for simple majority.

Might be time for Judge Schroeder to retire.

I’m losing confidence in this judge. He should already know what the jury instructions are

Lucifer Morningstar | November 15, 2021 at 11:57 am

Judge pauses instructions, calls lawyers to the bench.

He clearly sees the instructions being given to the jury are extremely confusing–I mean, they’re confusing even the judge reading them! What’s a jury of lay people supposed to do with this hot mess?

Holy Crap on a cracker. This whole trial is just a fuckup in the making. This all should have been discussed and decided before the judge even started reading the instructions to the jury. Not halfway (?) through the recitation. At this point a mistrial might be in order. But I’m sure Schroeder will bullshit his way through to a guilty plea.

(And what the hell is going on with that phone that keeps ringing in the background shouldn’t it be muted at this point as the court is in session?)

The instruction are so confusing that they guy doing the instructing is confused. What could possibly go wrong?

Yet more proof that opening the trial up to a slew of lesser charges turns it into a shitshow and a super highway for appeals. What a grotesque system for anyone caught in it.

Binger has yet to even BEGIN his 2.5 hour’s worth of meandering.

If I’m on the jury, and the defense simply followed with, “Hey, no use wasting any more of your time – we’re done, thanks”, I would vote to acquit out of pure gratitude.

They have put the jury in to the lottery jurist picking machine and spinning them round and round scrambling their brains.

Andrew — If the judge’s instructions include an error, and the jury acquits, can defendant be retried?

    TargaGTS in reply to Mdirmeier. | November 15, 2021 at 12:09 pm

    No. Prosecution is foreclosed from appealing not guilty verdicts even if the judge has committed what might be reversible error.

    .No.

    I said no, but I guess I should clarify. My non-professional opinof is if the prosecution objects to an instruction and takes an exception to the judge overruling his objection, then the prosecution can appeal the verdict.

      TargaGTS in reply to bigo. | November 15, 2021 at 2:44 pm

      An acquittal is not subject to appellate review irrespective of what reversible errors the judge may have committed that damaged the state’s case. Once the jury says, ‘Not Guilty,’ that’s the ball game for the state.

They are getting themselves confused on the issue of imperfect and perfect self defense.

What a complete clown show. How about calling the jury back in, tell them to disregard everything they were instructed on, dismiss them for the day and start this whole thing over again tomorrow? Let the lawyers and judge hash out revised instructions the rest of the day. The kid’s life may depend on this.

I used to study with a guy who did not start a sentence until he knew how he was going to end it. That is not this Judge.

A reasonable alternative hypothesis from the claims of Binger…there it is. NOT GUILTY!

Youtube right now censors @RekietaMedia coverage to hide the truth of the trial.
Unbelievable. They should be sanctioned and antitrust action must be taken.

    thad_the_man in reply to felixrigidus. | November 15, 2021 at 1:05 pm

    No. Rekieta is back up.
    Law and Crime was taken down earlier.
    Probably some kind of copyright strike.
    Just incompetence on YT.

      henrybowman in reply to thad_the_man. | November 15, 2021 at 2:26 pm

      Yes, yes. It’s all just another regrettable, innocent mistake.

      …when the sources of news keep getting things wrong, and all the errors lie in the exact same direction, and they are reluctant to acknowledge error, we have a problem. If you look back at the last few years, the record of errors, small and large, about major stories, is hard to deny. It’s as if the more Donald Trump accused the MSM of being ‘fake news’ the more assiduously they tried to prove him right…
      What makes this more worrying is simply that all these false narratives just happen to favor the interests of the left and the Democratic party. And corrections, when they occur, take up a fraction of the space of the original falsehoods. These are not randos tweeting false rumors. They are the established press… And at some point, you wonder: what narrative are they pushing now that is also bulls—?
      –Andrew Sullivan, 11/13/21

Turned on the live feed just in time for Binger to talk heroes. The utter contempt he has for the idea, I had to turn it off again.

It’s gross that Wisconsin elected someone like him. They deserve everything they get.

    nacnud62 in reply to Voyager. | November 15, 2021 at 12:53 pm

    IIRC, Binger is an ASSISTANT DA. An employee, not elected.

    Midfiaudiophile in reply to Voyager. | November 15, 2021 at 12:58 pm

    Apparently he failed to be elected by a pretty wide margin (From memory, 16% margin vs. the guy who won, or something like 58/42).

    That’s assuming only two candidates. More candidates, the more disgraceful that 16% margin.

Hmm, he felt the need to carry the fire extinguisher in the first place and when did he drop it? When he began to sense the hostility of the crowd. Actually, they had been hostile for a while by that point.

    fogflyer in reply to jdmac44. | November 15, 2021 at 1:04 pm

    Actually, as Kyle testified to, it was when he ran into Ziminski who was pointing his handgun at him that he dropped the fire extinguisher.

Would not provocation include everything that Rosenbaum did including threating to kill him if he got him alone?

Hard to listen to Binger twist the truth to hang an innocent kid for defending himself from violent felons. The defense final remarks will be great tonic for this BS.

Binger says no life has priority over another. That would seem to contradict the Black Lives Matter trope.

Once more, for emphasis, “This is not a political trial.”

Defense needs to expose the lies of Binger. Eacj time explicitly repeat:
“Binger lied”.
End with: did Binger even once tell you the truth?

Cops are trained to continue shooting until the threat has ended. Hence, the mag dump.

    Mag dump comes from lack of proper training (you might need some rounds to address another threat) and I can’t think of the other word I am looking for, but basically an out of control over reaction.

So Binger continues to lies during his closing argument???

Binger is a lying snot. I hope the Jury has kept notes so they can entertain themselves with his fairy tale.

Binger pushing the narrative that when someone is armed they lose the right to self defense.

Binger is so full of garbage. He’s outright lying and disputing the testimony of his own witnesses.

Midfiaudiophile | November 15, 2021 at 12:53 pm

I wonder if Binger really recognizes how poorly this is going to play for any juror who has ever taken a class on self-defense (from people whose main job is to prevent their students from doing something stupid and winding up in jail).

He’s basically admitting the game: “The only law is whether or not I like you. If I don’t, you’re going to jail forever”.

Andrzejr2 (właso) | November 15, 2021 at 12:56 pm

Rittenhouse pursued Rosenbaum, fire extinguisher in hand, probably to run faster. Is this really happening, or is it possible that the State of Wisconsin is so hopelessly stupid?

Lots of flaws and contradictions in Bingers Fractured Fairy Tale.

A short argument by Binger; full of lies and lack of evidence. All speculation.

Posobeic believes that the jury will return with a verdict today.

Not sure about that.

Read that the DA saw this as a losing case and passed the buck to Binger. And Binger had no one else to pass the buck.

at the start of his closing he ridiculed KR because “He didnt come to Kenosha with BLM. He didnt come for Jacob Blake.”
Is it a crime to tell someone you are an EMT if you dont have a certificate? I dont think so. Binger needs the snot beat out of him at a riot.

I get that closing arguments are given latitude but IMO DA Binger is weaving a tale of not just innuendo but clear falsehoods. His opines on what “skateboard guy” was thinking and doing is silly and unsupported by anything beyond speculation. Binger’s argument that Rosenbaum never threatened anyone is unsupported by witness testimony (witnesses he called to the stand)! Finally this idea that suddenly Rosenbaum was triggered by Rittenhouse pointing a weapon at the Ziminski couple and this provoked him into action is pure lunacy! Binger could’ve put Ziminski on the stand and confirmed that but instead he seeks to you a horribly grainy photo that has been altered? He seems to seek to make Rosenbaum a hero who was provoked into action to protect others but his own witnesses have painted Rosenbaum as a hostile, aggressive and violent fool! Moreover he seems to forget that if the witness testimony is correct and Rosenbaum did say, “if I get one of you alone, I am going to kill you” – gee, he (Rosenbaum) got his wish and found one of them alone! Isn’t that a much more reasonable and rational explanation? In the end, I have a sinking feeling that Rittenhouse will be found guilty of one of the lessor charges but the behavior of Binger has proven to me that a prosecutor with a political bent is the most horrific creature walking this earth as they have the weight of the state behind them to destroy the life of an innocent person.

    Observer in reply to WillS68. | November 15, 2021 at 2:07 pm

    Binger did that during the trial too. When Kyle was on the stand, Binger said that Rosenbaum was clearly just trying to push Kyle’s gun away from him, he wasn’t trying to grab it. How the hell would Binger know what Rosenbaum’s intent was? Rosenbaum was a literal lunatic. He was on anti-psychotic meds and had just been released from a psychiatric ward earlier that day. He was a white man in the middle of a race riot running around repeatedly yelling “shoot me n*gger!” at multiple armed people. Nobody can know what was going on in that crazy man’s head, not Kyle and certainly not Binger, who wasn’t even there. Kyle had to respond to what he was seeing Rosenbaum do, not try to guess what was going on in his distorted, deranged mind.

Binky sez: ‘You see the crowd running before you hear the shot…’ (from memory)
Could the fact that sound travels slower than light have anything to do with that?

    sdharms in reply to tsomer. | November 15, 2021 at 1:25 pm

    dont argue the sound. You see the “smoke” (actually prob concrete dust) when KR shoots and the crowd SCATTERS.

    What that tells me if the cops had fired at a few people with live rounds, alot of these people would have gone home. And you would have been left only the FBI infiltrators and instigators.

Is it important to note Rosenbaum threw that bag with his left hand, the same hand that was shot?

What do you think about this? Found comments at Conservativetreehouse

There were major differences between Barnes and Kyle’s “main” “attorney.”

The “main” “attorney” insisted on putting Kyle on the stand. Barnes disagreed.

Barnes had lined up four of the leading body language and interpretation experts in the country to assist with jury selection, pro bono.

Kyle’s “main” “attorney” refused to use them.

There were more differences but those are the two Barnes mentions most often.

5
Reply
MaineCoon
MaineCoon
November 15, 2021 1:00 pm
Reply to jeans2nd
And Kyle’s “main” “attorney” has been weak through the trial, IMO. Very weak. Barnes would have blown this entire defense out of the ballpark, including the body language experts, who are great.

A five year old could defend Kyle better than his defense team.

What is funny about all of this is if Rittenhouse is convicted there will be an appeal for sure. The 5A mess alone would justify it but it is far from the only time Binger screwed the pooch. Not to mention threats to exposed jury members posted on the internet. Truth be told it is hard to even list all the reasons that justify an appeal of any guilty verdict.

    Observer in reply to ragebot. | November 15, 2021 at 2:16 pm

    Yes, there will be multiple grounds for appeal if Kyle is convicted, but Kyle will still have to go to prison while those appeals are pending, and that would not only be an outrage, but it would put Kyle’s life in serious danger. Thanks to all the insanely biased and false media coverage referring to him as a white supremacist, racist, militia member, etc., Kyle would have a huge target on his back in prison, and other cons wanting to make a name for themselves would constantly be trying to get to him to beat him up or kill him (or worse).

I don’t understand court room etiquette, so I would like an attorney to help me understand. Binger actually said that when you bring a gun, you lose the right to self-defense. Andrew Branca commented that is not the law. But it’s Judge Schroeder’s job to tell the jury what is or isn’t the law.

How does the defense attorney delivering the final summation counter this blatant lie.

Also, can anyone tell me if it’s permissible to mention that Grosskreutz was carrying a handgun without a permit. That’s also illegal, yet he wasn’t charged. That would seem relevant since the prosecution wants the jury to believe that if you have a gun with you then you have no right to self-defense. KR was of course carrying his rifle legally, yet Grosskreutz wasn’t.

Can the defense object during the prosecution’s closing argument? Because I’m disgusted by this farce and all the prosecution’s lies. How much prosecutorial misconduct will this judge let the state get away with before he declares a mistrial with prejudice and refer the prosecutors to the state bar for discipline? My memory is a little fuzzy but I think these two pricks have surpassed Mike Knifong of Duke lacrosse team infamy as possibly the most unethical prosecutors ever.

The defense attorney could have spoken up when Binger said it. That’s why he sucks.

    Arminius in reply to ernest1000. | November 15, 2021 at 1:31 pm

    Ok, so the defense attorney can object. He’s just incompetent. Can Rittenhouse still fire his teams incompetent asses or is it too late.

      OldCop876 in reply to Arminius. | November 15, 2021 at 1:43 pm

      As I mentioned in another comment, I spent this morning researching what is and is not allowed in closing arguments by both sides. As part of that research, I found that many legal authorities think that objecting too much during opening or closing arguments works against you, because jury research has shown that unless it is on a very major point, the jury considers objections then as merely a ploy to derail the other side’s argument., while they expect objections during the presentation of evidence. Most of what I read said that it was better to address untrue or misleading statements in your own close rather than to object much during the other guy’s time.

      So perhaps the defense is not objecting much during the prosecution closing as a tactic to not piss off the jury, and plans to address areas of contention in their own closing. Let’s hope so.

        ernest1000 in reply to OldCop876. | November 15, 2021 at 1:47 pm

        I wouldn’t bet on that with this defense team. They’re so bad it wouldn’t surprise me if they don’t even present a closing.

    Arminius in reply to ernest1000. | November 15, 2021 at 1:39 pm

    And yes, I know, the prosecution has told too many lies to count. But Schroeder, it seems to me could also have done something since during the prosecution’s cross of KR he on his own accord told the jury that regardless of what KR thought the law was, regardless of what Krouse thought the law was, he as the judge would tell them what the law was.

    Yet here is Binger misinforming the jury about what the law is and he just lets him get away with it.

As of the lunch break, I’d say the morning before closing arguments began was a net win for the defense. The gun charge was dismissed. The defense got some changes to the instructions they wanted, and the judge threw in some changes of his own to clarify standard instructions, especially to make it clear to the jury that on each count, if they agreed that Kyle acted in lawful self-defense, then that was it for that count, and they should not even consider the lesser included offenses under that count. Binger argued strongly against this instruction, because clarity on that point doesn’t serve his interests.

Defense attorney Charifisi mentioned that he had filed a formal written motion askng the judge to declare a mistrial with prejudice, which is why we didn’t hear about it on prior days. The judge said he had just received it this morning, and would rule on it after closing arguments. One would hope he would do so before sending the case to the jury.

When Little Binger started his closing argument, he wasted no time trying to hammer his “provocation” theory, and portraying Joseph Rosenbaum as a choir boy who only held the love of Jesus in his pretty blue eyes. He portrayed Kyle as someone who ran around Kenosha with a “deadly weapon” and mentioned several times that he “lied about being an EMT” Is this really the best he’s got? In the words of Joe Biden, “C’mon Man!”

Binger spent the rest of his time before lunch telling lies about Kyle to the jury and misrepresenting evidence. But so far, I’m not too worried about that. Telling lies in court is what lawyers do.

Some may wonder if the defense can effectively put Little Binger’s bad faith on trial during their closing argument. I wondered this too, so I spent this morning researching what tactics are and are not allowed in the close. What can be argued is surprisingly limited, especially given the closing arguments we see on dramatic legal shows and movies. Charges that the opposing counsel has lied, or acted in bad faith seem to be specifically prohibited. All the defense can say is “while the prosecution has stated this, the evidence does not show it” or words to that effect. They can argue differences in what they think the evidence shows, but can’t call each other liars or cheats. So we might not hear the level of dramatic argument that we non-lawyers might have expected.

Still, I’ve got my popcorn ready for this afternoon!

    ernest1000 in reply to OldCop876. | November 15, 2021 at 1:35 pm

    Defense counsel can object in closing if the prosecutor misrepresents the law which Binger did.

      OldCop876 in reply to ernest1000. | November 15, 2021 at 1:47 pm

      No argument there. But sometimes it is more beneficial to cover that in your own closing argument since “speaking objections” are supposed to be out of bounds. Even though Judge Schroder has allowed them from time to time in this case.

    pst314 in reply to OldCop876. | November 15, 2021 at 1:41 pm

    “He portrayed Kyle as someone who ran around Kenosha with a ‘deadly weapon’ “

    I suppose it would be useful for someone to construct a detailed timeline of his movements and actions, to counter the “ran around” narrative that I keep seeing.

    “Telling lies in court is what lawyers do.”

    At least when the facts are not on their side…

    Arminius in reply to OldCop876. | November 15, 2021 at 1:50 pm

    “…When Little Binger started his closing argument, he wasted no time trying to hammer his “provocation” theory, and portraying Joseph Rosenbaum as a choir boy who only held the love of Jesus in his pretty blue eyes…”

    That’s one reason I would hope that the defense could work in the fact that Grosskreutz was carrying a concealed handgun illegally. That not only do you NOT lose your right to self-defense if you bring a gun with you but the state of Wisconsin issues CCW licenses precisely so you can have a handgun with you precisely so you can defend yourself with it.

    But open carry with a long gun for self-defense is legal and you don’t need any sort of permit.

    And oh BTW, “choirboy” Grosskreutz was breaking the law by carrying his handgun illegally since he didn’t have a valid CCW.

      Including his statement that he wishes he had shot kyle, I would think his gun use would be considered attempted murder. But binger and grosskreutz must be butt brothers…

Did anybody else notice, during all of the other bullshit that Binger was spewing, that he said that 0.76 seconds was plenty of time to reassess shooting a target charging at you?! Is he fucking serious?

    OldCop876 in reply to jmare. | November 15, 2021 at 1:54 pm

    Yes, I noticed that he thinks .76 seconds is “plenty of time”. Apparently, according to Little Binger, Kyle also must have had a portable X-ray machine in his medical kit, because The Bing seriously suggestd that he should have known, in that .76 seconds that Rosenbaum had a factured pelvis and should have stopped shooting.

      kak185ttx in reply to OldCop876. | November 15, 2021 at 2:07 pm

      Kyle was supposed to take one shot and wait to see if it had any effect.

      Observer in reply to OldCop876. | November 15, 2021 at 2:44 pm

      Yep, that argument was monumentally stupid. Somehow, in a mere fraction of a second, Kyle is supposed to assess and accurately diagnose Rosenbaum’s internal injuries as he’s in the act of shooting him in defense of his life. Even if Kyle were a combination of Albert Schweitzer, Marcus Welby, and Dr. Gregory House, he couldn’t do that unless he were also part alien or time traveler or something similarly other-worldly, because mortal human earth beings simply can’t think and process information that quickly. Kyle was just a 17-year old kid, in the middle of a hostile mob, fighting off an attack by a man who was literally a crazed lunatic. He fired four shots at the lunatic in under a second, and had neither the time nor the ability to stop in between shots to try and diagnose the lunatic’s injuries.

    stl in reply to jmare. | November 15, 2021 at 2:11 pm

    Exactly! How many times do we hear of cops with all sorts of training, spraying bullets when they “felt” threatened. (No offense to the cops here, just making a point about bingers ridiculous notion that Kyle should have exercised better trigger control in an incredibly short period of time.

TaxPayingPatriot | November 15, 2021 at 1:48 pm

Other than the testimony of the prosecution’s own witnesses, the story on Rosenbaum is fetching … I’ve heard that cops can shoot if you’ve advanced within 21-feet, as it takes seconds from there to reach your target, and that much time to draw, think, decision, fire … if Rosenbaum’s within a few feet and has earlier threatened Kyle, why would Kyle not be the one provoked? That the bag in retrospect was of no threat is as stupid argument, other than to confuse the jury. It’s like arguing he should’ve asked Grosskreutz if his gun was real and loaded before he shot him.

    It’s too late now, but knowing that the prosecution would argue that KR should have waited until Rosenbaum to see what he would actually do once he got his hands on KR’s rifle, the defense should have had a police training officer testify about how long they would wait before shooting. Perhaps putting on a demonstration showing how close an attacker with a knife can be and still kill if the defender doesn’t have his firearm ready to fire. Demonstrating that contrary to the state’s baseless assertions, KR didn’t fire to quickly. He actually waited too long.

    Hopefully using one of these asshole prosecutors as the target in this little demonstration. I think it would make an impression on the jury to hear one of these prosecutors scream like a little girl and have to ask for a recess so he can change his pants.

    I can dream, can’t I?

    Colonel Travis in reply to TaxPayingPatriot. | November 15, 2021 at 2:09 pm

    There is no 21-foot rule. It was a training exercise

    Great point

Binger’s only argument is emotion and not law! He ought to be drawn and quartered for his complete disregard for his ethical and legal responsibilities.

Today I learned: You’re supposed to not lie to people who are trying to kill you…

For any 2a people, should you have to use it, plan on having a binger to look forward to and act accordingly.

He lied…he lied…he lied…he lied…

LongTimeReader | November 15, 2021 at 2:06 pm

This prosecutor is rage inducing. KR was not posing any unlawful interference upon anyone by running away.

I always found it strange that the only people sworn to tell the truth are witnesses. Judges, lawyers, etc. can tell whatever lies they can get away with and there’s little consequence even if they don’t get away with it.

Completely irrelevant, but I think the spot where he puts down the extinguisher is where he takes his gun off safety. I didn’t hear any testimony about that though.

Judge is getting threats. He may want to give Kyle his rifle back. The cops are not that reliable in stopping the crazies.

Binger now advocating for mob justice as a form of self defense….this is comically bad

    TargaGTS in reply to healthguyfsu. | November 15, 2021 at 2:47 pm

    I agree, to a person of reasonable intelligence who respects a first principle like Self-Defense, Binger is offering an insane argument. But, the fact of the matter is there might be some people who think it’s criminal defend yourself particularly if you’re using an ‘evil’ AR-15 which is a weapon that should only be used on the battlefield because that’s what the media routinely tells them.

    While juries usually get it right, that doesn’t mean they’re not capable of SUPREME stupidity, just ask O.J.

Now I know I’m not a big city prosecutor, but isn’t part of being an “active shooter” actively shooting? It’s kind of in the name, isn’t it? I can’t decide if a Inigo Montoya meme or a crazy pills meme is more appropriate here.