LIVE: Rittenhouse Trial Day 4
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.
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.
You can find our commentary and analysis of yesterday’s trial proceedings here: Rittenhouse Trial Day 3: State’s Own Witnesses Damage Prosecution, Reinforce Self-Defense Narrative.
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
What are the odds that ADA Binger did not really want to prosecute this case and is intentionally sabotaging it? I knows it’s not likely, but it is at least a more reasonable explanation of the prosecution’s case so far.
0%. Binger is as lefty as they get and he would love to lock up an innocent man for having a scary black rifle.
That’s too bad, although I think it would be an awful way to run our Judicial system, at least it would provide some relief that there was not such a high level of incompetence in charge.
To me, this case isn’t about legal competence; this is about politics and ideology. This is a manifestly politically-motivated and politically-grounded prosecution that as far as I’m concerned implicates basic legal ethics and attorneys’ Code of Professional Conduct. Prosecutors are not supposed to bring charges that lack evidentiary and factual supports, and, that are grounded in political animus and the sating of mob bloodlust. The prosecutor’s proper role is “to see Justice done.” Which means possessing the moral courage and the professional integrity to not bring unfounded charges, as much as it means pursuing legitimate charges, with zeal.
These charges never would have been brought had Rittenhouse been an “Anti-fa” or “Black Lives Matter” member, and, the decedents, Trump-supporters/conservatives. Binger looks like an idiot because he brought politically-motivated charges that have zero factual and evidentiary supports.
My suspicion is that Binger brought these charges because he possesses Leftist sympathies and political allegiance, and/or, he harbors political ambitions, and, he thought that this case could be his ticket to stardom/prominence.
I think the odds are Binger’s a Humdinger.
Something I thought about last night… Dominick Black(?) is being charged in Kenosha county with the straw purchase of the MP-15 for Kyle. Is that appropriate or legal? Isn’t the testimony that Dominick went up north somewhere to purchase the gun for Kyle? Kenosha Co. is pretty southerly, so I presume he was at least into Milwaukee or Waukesha Co, and thus wouldn’t that prosecution have to take place THERE?
Dominick Black is not charged with a straw purchase (and indeed, he is not guilty of a straw purchase as defined in the law in Wisconsin). He is charged with two counts of providing a dangerous weapon to a minor, resulting in death. That act took place in Kenosha County.
Thanks, I guess I’m not really in the loop on his charges. My question then becomes, if Rittenhouse is found not guilty by reason of self defense, can those charges still be valid? As factually, providing the weapon actually saved Kyle’s life.
How does that hold up against 948.60 (3) c?
This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who
possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in
violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and
29.593. This section applies only to an adult who transfers a firearm
to a person under 18 years of age if the person under 18 years of age is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593 or to an adult who is in violation of s. 941.28.
941.28 forbids short-barreled long guns.
29.304 only applies to children under 17.
29.593 forbids hunting without a license.
It seems to me that Kyle Rittenhouse and Dominick Black are both in compliance. Very probably the purpose of the law was to allow teenagers to hunt and the lack of restrictions in it was to stop abusive prosecutors from harassing teenagers who practiced target shooting for hunting, ran errands on the way to and from hunting and practice, etc. But the fact is, THERE ARE NO RESTRICTIONS.
The judge is still withholding his ruling on the motion to dismiss the related count for rittenhouse (I think its count 7). It plainly reads that Kyle is in the clear in that regards, but for some reason the judge seems unable to read as such.
The Khindri brothers and the prosecution are doing one helluva version of “who’s on first”.
He is being charged with it, but there is no Federal or State law against it, that is why the prosecution put the case off until after this case.
If you only watched Court TV’s talking heads attorneys, you’d think the prosecutor is masterfully building a slam dunk case for conviction. No lie, that’s what one of them said late yesterday. lol
I can’t even…
Media spin like this leads juries to feel pressure to reach guilty verdicts when they can sense the community will not understand a not-guilty verdict. That’s why the media does this, I think.
That’s my read on it too. By posing as authority figures and throwing stuff at the wall, they’re trying to see if they can direct the verdict.
The risk is they do something so transparently ridiculous that it destroys their “authority figure” skin-suit and their target rejects their directions as fraud.
I mean if the cop who pulled you over and is asking you to get into their cruiser is also wearing googly-eye glasses, you’re likely going to see them as a probable psycho with a gun instead of an authority figure, even though everything else says legit police officer.
In media think Beeve should have taken a knee, groveled, handed over his weapon and begged for his life. They are so far gone they actually think that way. I used to think it was just a put on to advance their cause but now I think tthey are card carrying true fellow travelers.
Who/what is “Beeve”? I’ve seen that mentioned a few times and it’s confusing to me.
Rittenhouse does look like the Beaver on Leave it to Beaver. lol
@AnAdultInDiapers “The Beeve” is a reference to Jerry Mathers. Kyle resembles him somewhat. Also a reference to Kyle’s being a little too earnest for his own good on the night of the incidents.
Math and Science were always my best subjects in school, and I try my best to observe things as objectively as possible, using logic and common sense rather than emotions. I used to wonder the same thing about these people that view reality from a 180 degree opposite perspective than I do. Are they willfully blind sycophantic lemmings, or are they inherently ignorant and actually believe the nonsense they are spouting?
Then, I came across a Bible passage a few years ago that made the real reason for their condition perfectly clear to me. In 2nd Thessalonians Chapter 2, it says that in the last days, God shall send a strong delusion to those that reject His Truth, so that they may believe a lie. Now, I no longer wonder; in my heart I know.
Hence the need for a directed verdict. Assuming that the DA does not come up with testimony that actually hurts Kyle rather than help him, the Judge should take the burden off the shoulders of the jury and issue a directed verdict or summary judgement after the prosecution rests. Will he do that? Who knows.
That’s why I stick to Andrew. Self-defense law isn’t hard to understand. Why people who should know better don’t bother? Who knows. Or they know the law and they don’t care. Either way, they come across as idiots.
It will be cold comfort to you or Kyle Rittenhouse that the jury that convicted you “came across as idiots”.
Also consider that the process is the punishment. Prosecutors like ADA Binger, who intentionally charge someone with multiple murder charges when each and every instance of them is — according to your own presentation of the case, mind you — as clear a case of self-defense as you are likely to come across.
In fact, this should be the reason for the “Binger Act” that allows us to actually punish prosecutors that act maliciously in the manner Binger does.
I do not consider jury members to be idiots. They may not know the law, but it is up to the defense to educate them. I’m talking about TV talking heads with law degrees.
No argument there.
I can come up with a lot of idiots that have served on juries. Not hard at all.
What worries me is during the Floyd case, I often laughed at the TV talking heads who were incessantly, talking about the brilliant case the prosecution was making. Boy, was I wrong.
After the year of rioting and looting that saw entire neighborhoods burned to the ground, I don’t think it’s possible to overstate what a psychological impact that had on the jury pool. People don’t want their neighborhoods and homes burned and they certainly don’t want their families to be in mortal danger. In our new reality of violent, reactionary wokism, I’m extremely skeptical it’s possible for people like Chauvin and Rittenhouse to get a fair trial.
I have tried to watch portions live via LI
It’s painful.
I had to put towing mirrors on my Ford E350 van, which required major mods to fit. Had to use my step bit (I never knew my real bit) 🙂
But I digress
The boring and irrelevant endless diatribe pisses me off
Does anyone think this will prejudice the jury against the prosecution on general principal?
Not strictly related to this particular post, but it occurred to me that you should change your tag line at the bottom to say “ Know and follow the law so you’re hard to convict.”
I’m not sure I can listen to another day of Binger going over videos second by second and badgering his own witnesses.
So…anyone figure out Binger’s “Lapel Pin of the Day”?
Star Wars Rebel Alliance Insignia
Binger is wearing a Star Wars Rebel Alliance pin and I am very confused.
His relative on the stand said Anthony Huber was a Star Wars fan, I bet that’s why.
witness just said Huber liked Star Wars. hes playing with the subconscious of the jury
What a waste of time
Prosecutor’s continued emphasis on the slings these guys were using is laying the foundation that there was no threat of their rifles being taken from them that evening, including Kyle’s being taken by Rosenbaum.
I was surprised Binger didn’t ask him that. Or what kind of ammo he had, allowing him to bring up full metal jacket ammo, which can go through the target and hit someone behind the target.
Since FMJ is considered “humane” by the Hague Convention versus expandable (see Dum Dum Arsenal and Capt.Neville Bertie-Clay. )… he has better standing with military ammo..
That’s the beauty of widespread ignorance about guns. If it’s FMJ, it’s military ammunition designed to kill human beings. If it’s hollow points, it’s ammunition designed to do the most damage. Whichever you choose is evidence of evil intent, and there are appellate court decisions that say so.
I blacked out and don’t remember anything after that!??!!!
This witness just seems incompetent and like he’s lying or trying to hide something
“I dont recall” is a valid legal answer. especially for something that happened an year ago
I have prosecuted a fair number of homicides and assaults during my (former) career as a prosecutor.
Never have I prosecuted a case where the “victim” is depicted, by the prosecutions own witness, as an arsonist who threatened to kill the defendant and was the aggressor throughout the entire confrontation.
I would have refused to prosecute such a case if it had been assigned to me, and I would expect any ethical prosecutor to do the same in this case.
This case is a fiasco, and a permanent blot on any prosecutor who chooses to pursue it.
I hope the jury does the right thing.
This is an elected office (at its head). Elected by the Jury pool.
Be very weary of “jury of your peers” in blue hell holes.
Kenosha County voted for Trump in 2020 and has a (R) member of Congress. The DA is a (D) but ran unopposed.
If only Chauvin had those jury odds. I take it from the guy dismissed yesterday that there’s probably 1-2 others who aren’t buying Bingers shtick and think Kyle did the world a favor.
I hope. This kid does not deserve this.
wary is a better word. I’m getting Weary of Binger not actually breaking any of the self defense pillars AFB outlined.
Perhaps Binger is shooting for the easier target of proving to the jury that Kyle shot someone? In that case Binger needs to be prosecuted for recklessly weaponizing his office.
This witness sure is contradictory from one answer to the next
he’s being honest- he doesn’t recall. A lot of crazy happening.
what is the purpose of this line of questioning? medical supplies?
Laboring every irrelevant detail is beyond annoying. I would be mad at this point if I was a juror.
In case anyone’s wondering, as I had to look it up: The jury was initially 11 women, 9 men, all white except one hispanic. Now presumably its 10 woman 8 men and I’d guess the hispanic is still there.
My impression so far: Binger shouldn’t have brought Lackowski to testify. Balch provided more or less the same information and was, to put it bluntly, less likeable… and I think the main point of this testimony is guilt-by-association “look at the troubling people with whom Kyle associated himself” stuff.
I’m also growing increasingly annoyed by this “You said north. But really it was south, right? Or was it upwards at a 37.2 degree angle?” nonsense Binger is doing with every witness.
It’s a tactic of a pathetic idiot that knows he has no case.
Essentially it’s an attempt to make the jury forget ANY actual factual information, and vote on pure emotion.
It doesn’t work very often.
I am expecting the DA to come out and say he was driving a mint green Skylark.
Instant grits?
Hey y’all. So Im wondering does WI allow a motion for directed verdict at end of State’s case and if so, what do you think odds of Rittenhouse defense prevailing. Im thinking 95%
The law does allow a motiion for a directed verdict when the prosecution rests its case, actually the law requires the court to direct a verdict even without such a motion if the prosecution failed to intorduce substantial (any) evidence to disprove at least one esential element of justification or excuse.
So you’re telling me Kyle held the gun?! ridiculous!
After this, I wouldn’t put the defendant on the stand–I’d just argue that the prosecution proved up a case of self defense and there’s nothing more to add
It depends on whether you think your defendant is going to be be likable or not, as the jury sees him. If you have a defendant that looks friendly and is able to project an aura of warmth and competence, put him on the stand by all means.
Is this aunt giving anything of relevance??
Let me guess: Huber was a saint.. A good kid. Was about to start college. Never would have pulled a gun on someone lying on their back on the ground and tried to execute them.
Oops, wrong felon here.
Altar boy, looked both ways before he crossed the street, etc. Couldn’t possibly be him with the skateboard assaulting the minor, totally not in character. And if that chick from the lab found DNA on the skateboard that was Huber’s the police are trying to besmirch his character.
the picture that we’ve all seen of Huber standing over Rittenhouse preparing to bash Rittenhouses head in with the heavy board is Prima Facie evidence that the shooting
was justified; Rittenhouse had a very reasonable fear that he was about to be physically harmed (if not killed) No amount of testimony can overcome that picture.
The only one of the shootings that was questionable as to whether it was self defense was the first one, of Rosenbaum. And not BInger has already killed his own case there.
They are claiming Huber (possible relative of Bingers Assistant DA, Anthony Huber maybe his son) is a Hero. Does Binger know Huber? Going after an armed whites supremacist armed with a machine gun with just his widdle skateboard. Amazing but that appears to be their theory of their case in chief. I would like to know if Bingers associate is related to Huber. Uncle, Cousin, Father, Brother, or just a coincidence of names in Kenosha?
The ADA is Alexander Huber. Anthony Huber’s obit says “he was the son of Karen Bloom and John Huber, Jr.” Could be a more distant relative, but apparantly not the ADA’s son.
Moving to the “he was a good boy and dint do nuffin” phase of witnesses.
I want defense to show the pic of huber hitting rittenhouse with the skateboard and ask “Does it appear he is riding his skateboard in this picture?”
I laughed
I’m no attorney, nor have I played one on TV or for Halloween, but this is a pitiful prosecution thus far. If I lived in the city, I’d be livid that this clown is actually on the payroll and will someday earn a pension. I’ve watched a lot of this live, and feel that they’ve presented nothing that would lead a reasonable person to find KR guilty. Tossing ‘stuff’ at a wall and hoping something sticks is not a winning stategy.
So Anthony Huber is the skateboard assailant and there is an Anthony Huber Assistant DA that works with Binger. The probability is that the Assistant DA is his father. If true Is this ethical?
The attorney in the ADA office is Alexander Huber. Dead skateboard guy’s dad is John Huber, the one giving the middle finger to the judge in this case in a ruling earlier via Zoom:
https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/2021/02/11/hubers-dad-flips-him-off/
It seems the state is trying to claim that The Beeve is first aggressor because he shot The Looney without ever establishing Looney Tunes was not the first aggressor. The state case is a Fractured Fairy Tale of wishful thinking.
Introduing character evidence on the part of the prosecution would open up evidence of criminal past as well, no? Another own goal in the making?
I really don’t get the point of this though. Regardless of what Huber thought was his reason for attacking KR, he was still in the process of attacking someone running away from him when he was shot.
Anyone else hoping one of the defense attorneys has a girlfriend who took a picture of the car leaving the Sack of Suds and having a eureka moment that the car in the picture had positraction? This can’t be a surprise to them. Mewling libs have been suggesting for a year that Huber and Gaige were trying to stop an active shooter.
It doesn’t matter what their intent was. Their intent, stalking and tracking a fleeing man, then attacking that man while he was on the ground, may have been great and honorable. And has ZERO to do with the PERSON ON TRIAL and HIS thoughts as to HIS safety. There is no legal question here. Huber’s “intent” doesn’t matter as he’s not on trial. Kyle’s intent does matter as he is.
Great movie … hope the cross asks when she learned her fiancee was a child sex offender … swell guy
Their obituary the family wrote for him states he was a Hero …fighting…for a cause he believed in. Yes it says fighting.
I think Kyle just pointed out the law to his atorneys: “How was I supposed to know what was on his mind?!”
“The proper argument is that the ENTIRETY of Huber’s motive is irrelevant.”
This seems overstated. If Rittenhouse had been standing there shooting people one by one Huber would probably been justified in trying to stop him. Of course that isn’t what happened. One thing you are cautioned about when considering coming to the aid of somebody else is that you may have misjudged the situation and end up on the wrong side.
“If Rittenhouse had been standing there shooting people one by one Huber would probably been justified in trying to stop him.”
When trying to prove or disprove Kyle’s justification, it is about what Kyle believed (or a reasonable person in his position). The good or evil intentions behind Huber was not known to Kyle. They should stay unknown to the jury.
Wow, if the defense can introduce the damning evidence that the prosecution that wants to pain Huber as a hero charged him with attacking violently his brother and threatened to gut him like a pig, I’d say, let the lady tell us that in the past he once was peaceful…
Though neither counsel nor the Court may have appreciated the legal issue, I like the instincts of the Judge to err on the side of “let it all in” vs overmanaging the trial. Since the video/facts are so strongly on KR’s side, I think in the final analysis he will be served by a “looser” as opposed to more restrictive trial.
They will have to admit he was trying to disarm and grab The Beeves gun. Painting him as a hero stopping an active shooter is the crux of their case it appears. They have to admit he attacked him with his skateboard too. The fog is lifting now and you can see where Binger is going.
WTF is going on with this case??? I thought this was a murder trial. Who cares about whether these guys were dating or whatnot
The absolute idiocy of the prosecution will make this hurt even more when the jury somehow inexplicably comes back with guilty on all counts.
Im hopeful that a directed verdict mercifully ends this nightmare
Since the prosecution gets to use Rosenbaum’s fiance as a character witness, does that mean the defense gets to point out that he was homeless & carrying his stuff in a hospital plastic bag because she filed a restraining order against him for smacking her around?
Maybe he opened door on medication. Wish Beeves lawyer would quit slouching on his chair.
I wish you’d stop posting your homosexual zoophilia fantasies and call Kyle Rittenhouse by his actual name.
If you can’t spell Rittenhouse just stick with Kyle.
Why is the defense not objecting to all of this as irrelevant??!?!?
Why is defense not objecting to these photos of decedents????? WTF legal purpose does it serve other than to pull at heart strings of liberal jurors.
So Rosenbaum wasn’t an aspring rapper?
Aspiring? Don’t sell him short. He was an accomplished raper.
Mr. Branca, have you any idea why defense not objecting to 90% of this decedents testimony/pictures???
Gabapentin for bipolar disorder? All I ever knew it to be used for is for neuropathy
Gabapentin is an anti-epileptic drug, also called an anticonvulsant. It affects chemicals and nerves in the body that are involved in the cause of seizures and some types of pain.
Gabapentin is used together with other medicines to treat partial seizures in adults and children at least 3 years old.
Gabapentin is also used to treat neuropathic pain (nerve pain) caused by herpes virus or shingles (herpes zoster) in adults.
I know gabapentin is used for migraines. I think there is some tie-in with seizures and migraines, but that reaches my limits.
Seroquel (quetiapine) is an antipsychotic medicine. It works by changing the actions of chemicals in the brain.
Seroquel is used to treat schizophrenia in adults and children who are at least 13 years old.
Seroquel is used to treat bipolar disorder (manic depression) in adults and children who are at least 10 years old.
Seroquel is also used together with antidepressant medications to treat major depressive disorder in adults.
Seroquel is an anti-psychotic drug
Seroquel
increase risk of suicidal thoughts
an antipsychotic reduces antipsychotic thoughts.
Defense dropping the ball big time hope they can recall her.
The defense did what they needed to do with her. The prosecution opened the door to get the medications entered into the record. The defense will undoubtedly bring an actual expert in to testify concerning the nature of the medications when they present their case.
The prosecution asked the girl friend what time Kyle Rosenbaum left the motel. On cross I would have asked her: You said Rosenbaum was your fiance, right? Did you love him? Yes. And you were worried about his safety,right? And, he had no where to sleep, right? Is there a reason he didn’t just stay the night qith you?
But that would be unfair. What’s not fair is the jury doesn’t get to hear what a peeverted piece of shite that creep was.
Excuse me for being superficial, but sometimes juries are as well. This is how you dress for Court?
I wouldn’t dress that way for court, but the first time I was subpoenaed, I asked an attorney friend if I needed to suit up, and the reply was, “Yes if you’re the defendant. If you’re a witness, you can just wear whatever you normally wear.” Granted, this person knew that “whatever you normally wear” out in public in my case was not ripped jeans and a puffer.
Would they have routinely tested Rosenbaum in a way that would capture his meds at the autopsy? Could it show if he had actually taken them or not?
It can be done, but probably wasn’t done here. Usually, a basic post-mortem tox screen just tests for certain classes of drugs like opiates, amphetamines, barbituates, alcohol, and marijuana. They don’t usually test for specific prescription meds, or to see if there were therapeutic levels present in the blood, unless there is a reason to look for that (such as, for example, when a prescription drug overdose or drug interaction is suspected as the cause of death). Since Rosenbaum died from GSW, it’s likely they didn’t bother to do the more sophisticated testing.
Binger is being a condescending punk to Mr. Khindri. “See the little cylindrical thing? That’s what we call a laser pointer. No, it’s powered by batteries, not magic. You see the button on it? Push the button and point it at the map to show us where the dealership is”.
“And you go by Sam?”
“No, Sal”
“I don’t even work there”
“You probably want to ask my brother Sam about this.”
Is the prosecution even aware of who the person is that they’re questioning?
It barely seems like it.
Amazing how poorly prepared the witnesses are for direct.
Proper response: “Don’t patronize me you arrogant ass.”
Good Grief
Why does binger insist on everyone pointing out the car lots on the map?
This Sam guy is confusing the crap out me.
I’m gonna go out on a limb and say he’s confusing the crap out of himself.
Are these car dealership folks all high or something?
So if I follow this convoluated line: the prosecution is trying to prove that KR was not specifically asked to guard the dealership, and to imply that the text sent by KR later was an attempt to cover his tracks. In the process he produces two witnesses who describe the burning/vandalizing mob, how it almost broke these guys hearts, and how KR was there with other civic minded guys to protect them and help them raise funds to bring their business back. And the KR was a polite guy. Am I missing something?
Agree. The repeated asking of whether anyone had permission to be there seems at most irrelevant (the lot is/was open to the street with no fencing and some of the events (including the shooting) happened in the street at not at the car lot or mechanic shop) and at worst damaging as there were also clearly protestors and people with ill intent there burning cars / destroying property.
Yes. One of them was also impressed by them.
Wouldn’t they have the actual time stamp of any texts Kyle sent since he let them search his phone? I don’t understand the point of trying to drag it out of this witness as though they don’t know.
How did the jurors stay awake through all this?
The owner of the car lot is not coming off as being honest. I suspect he’s just trying to avoid getting his business burned down again.
The brothers are sons of the owners
Technically, they have not gotten testimony from the owner yet. First was his son who runs dealership in Milwaukee & has nothing to do with Kenosha. The second is his older brother who was inventory manager for all Car Source locations in Kenosha. Their father is owner. Why not go straight to him with questions about requests for protection?
Because he would testify that he gave them permission and blow the prosecution’s entire case?
Since none of the three casualties of that night were directly confronted on the premises or about the damage to any of the Car Source properties, why is this testimony relevant?
The prosecutor should just turn left at Albuquerque and get on with it.
What should have happen on cross
Would anyone other than you or your brother Sal have the authority to ask anyone to protect the business?
Well, YEAH. My father and mother, the actual OWNERS of the car lots. I’ve been wondering why the prosecution bothered to have ME and my brother to come here to testify. What are they, idiots of some sort?
Seems the prosecution’s legal theory is that Kyle is guilty of murder because he was trespassing at the car dealer? This all seems like a huge waste of time.
That would be a valid point if either the confrontations or the shootings happened at a Car Source property. But they did not.
I believe the psychotic thug with the Napoleon complex was shot in a Car Source parking lot.
Since Kyle was chased onto that lot, I think it’s fair to say the confrontation that resulted in first shooting happened off the property. Also, seems like confrontation was not about damage or trespassing at Car Source locations.
If Kyle had fired first shots while protecting Car Source property or inventory, they would definitely have some liability. It would be hard to blame Car Source for a shooting that occured as a result of general rioting/insurrection happening all around town.
He was trying to escape from a crazy psychotic violent loonatic. Let them try to charge him with tresspassing then. LOL pathetic. They did not. Too late now.
This whole, misguided line is, I think, to tie the word “vigilante” around KR’s neck, as someone “not invited” to help and who “stirred things up.” But per my observations (above) I think he didn’t really prove that, and if anything establishes more connection between KR and these specific businesses than otherwise would have been known. And, in the process is undermining the broader themes of who are the “good guys” and “bad guys” here. Good!
Were autopsies done on Rosenbaum and Huber? Does anyone think the prosecution would call the medical examiner to testify? One would think the prosecution would call their most important witnesses first and they are reduced to girlfriends, great aunts and relatives of the car lot owners.
Sam Khindir has been the strongest State witness so far. Unforutnately for the State, his testimony has nothing to do with the core elements of self-defense, right? Is the State going to argue Kyle was not innocent because he was trespassing at the time he defended himself?
Maybe? As you metion, they could possibly assert that he was trespassing on the property and therefore not “innocent” at the time he shot Rosenbaum? Thin, especially since prior to being chased across that property he was on the public street/sidewalk and traveling between locations. Might be stronger if he was just stationary on the lot without permission, but still kinda weak to my non-lawyer mind.
The owner family witnesses seem more like they’re trying to avoid public knowledge that they invited anyone on than that they are answering truthfully.
And cross jumped right in on that avoidance.
The owner (Sam and Sal’s father) is the one that asked for help. Not the brothers
Innocent means that Rittenhouse did not use or threaten the imminent use of unlawful force against Rosenbaum prior to Rosenbaum useing or threatening the imminent use of unlaful force against him. Trespassing on someone else’s property doesn’t loose Rittenhouse the element of innocence in respect to Roesnbaum.
Balch yesterday
Binger: Then?
Asked them what planned was. Explained they worked for car source, three locations, then owner showed up.
Hey Sam, did you give permission to Rosenbaum and the rioters to burn your cars on yer property. Were they trespassing?
Sam’s lying his butt off
Sam really seems like he’s lying and trying to cover for some reason. Doesn’t want to admit that he wanted help protecting the property most likely.
If he let the group guard his property, antifa folks will come back at some point. His fear is reasonable.
That’s definitely his agenda. If they asked the people for help they could be found liable for damages. Keep in mind civil court uses a different set of standards when determining who owes what.
BLM rioters have also been known to torch properties for merely being the place where something happened. Like that Wendy’s in Atlanta after the Rayshard Brooks shooting.
This is strict legal liability. If Sam authorized gunmen on his property and one of that group killed someone (which happened) the person who was killed (his estate obviously) could sue. The fact Sam admits to non-mitigation of the car damage means he’ll never get insurance money, so they clearly fear that law suit more.
Tell me you’re not a lawyer without telling me you’re not a lawyer.
Crooked used car dealer.
They don’t want their businesses to be totally destroyed.
I think Chirafisi is trying too hard to impeach the witness here. It’s been clear for several minutes that he’s engaged in obvious CYA and the more time passes between “If you gave permission, you could be sued” and the end of the cross-examination, the less the jury is going to remember that fact during redirect.
Jesus, how hard is it to remember that the 24th was Monday and the 25th was Tuesday? Give him a calendar for Chrissakes so he can refer to it if need be.
Who could guess what this trial is about, by watching this witness?
I smell an insurance scam he made more from insurance and gov benefits than selling those clunkers
Sam and Sal are both desperate to say neither of them were at car source after curfew, and nobody let people on the roof. Nobody is insane enough to believe them…. right?
More, Sal knows he’s the good son now and wants nothing to do with Sam as daddy is mad Sam let white people come on his property and risks losing his businesses if Rosenbaum’s estate sues :).
No re-direct. I guess the ADA decided the witness was beyond rehabilitation.
testifying in body armor?
He’s face to face with a killer, you know? /s
SCAM!!! Insurance Scam!!!
Sure sounds like this detective only found the evidence for which he was looking.
It is, of course, super relevant. I wonder if they’re going to go into ballistics testing next, just to prove that Kyle was the one that pulled the trigger.
(Of course that fact is stipulated by both sides, but why not waste more of the court’s time).
Well, the 22 rounds in a 30 round mag was interesting. Might be the only material point the prosecution has elicited this week.
May have missed the specifics (multi-tasking), but wasnt he describing the magazine taken from his rife? If so, 8 rounds fired sounds consistent with how many rounds were fired.
Seems neutral at best, and shows KR didn’t totally panic/go nuts and empty the mag. This could be interpreted either way, but doesn’t seem that damaging to the defense to me.
…. you’re right. I’m forgetting the later rounds fired, thinking about the 4 at rosenbaum plus the 4 mystery shots seconds later, but that’s not relevant.
Kyle didn’t necessarily have 30 rounds loaded. The other guy only had 28. Sometimes the spring gets really tight and those last few rounds are a bear to load into the magazine
Alternately, as somebody that was in the military, quite a few military guys will NOT load a full 30 rounds because that significantly increases the risk of a first or 2nd round jam.
A decent number of guys loaded 27-28.
22 would be a little odd, but since he’s not expecting to NEED 30 rounds, wouldn’t be that shocking that he underloaded.
Who’s attorney Krispy Kremes?
Prosecution: Rittenhouse took the bizarre and unusual step of bringing a weapon to a protest.
Prosecution witness: Boy was there a heck of a lot of weapons out in the streets during these protests!
Is it standard to let armed officers into a courtroom, who have no other purpose there besides being a witness? Seems odd to me, but I guess wouldn’t bother me either.
Ideally they wouldn’t have come armed, but its pretty standard if they came to the courthouse armed they testify armed, as most active police officers will be if they have not set aside the entire day for court (and in a case like this where they’re only there for testimony in ONE case, they don’t spend the entire day there), they have to return to their job after testimony.
The only way to not have them armed in the courtroom would involve having courthouse personnel take possession of and store live weapons and ammunition, and that opens up a HUGE can of worms. Better that the police officers just maintain possession of their weapons.
It’s very common and normally expected everywhere except federal court. Federal law enforcement is allowed to carry in fed court, but local officers are not.
Officer just testified to randomly pointing his gun at a person with hands up attempting to surrender, yet didn’t bother to listen to the person as to why he was attempting to surrender. I wonder if he pointed his weapon at every one of the numerous armed folks he testified to interacting with that week – “more armed than not”, or conveniently just Kyle. Great job there.
Warzone? No it was a mostly peaceful protest. At least that’s what CNN told me and they are NEVER wrong.
How does he justify pointing his gun at him. And seriously he doesn’t even think about finding the shooter???
Officer on direct examination from prosecution: “There was constant gunfire ”
Prosecution in opening statement “It was a calm and peaceful night. Only murderous Kyle shot three unarmed saints.”
Not sure how many of you have read Andrew Branca’s book, but if you have, it’s completely obvious how stupid this entire trial is. All the elements of self defense are present but the prosecution is wasting time on non-relavent stuff. Not even trying to disprove self defense. Go buy Andrew’s book. And give a copy to a friend. The book’s fantastic.
Complete layman here; but is the prosecutor hoping the potential for more riots or community pressure will coerce the jury into convicting? To my completely untrained eye, the evidence looks to be either neutral of strongly favor the defense.
I know prosecutors can get away with just about anything so long as they claim they’re operating under cover of their duties; but does a hypothetically falsely accused defendant have no recourse?
I am not a lawyer but what in the hell is going on here? the prosecution is asking random questions of people that are not relevant to anything. Are they just wasting time?
“Go buy Andrew’s book. And give a copy to a friend. The book’s fantastic.’
****
Agree…..Anyone who owns firearms that might, however unlikely, be needed for self defense, should read his book. Following most internet “advice” on self-defense and defense of property likely ends in financial ruin and possible incarceration.
I’m curious as to why the defense objected to the questioning of Huber’s aunt. It seems had they allowed the prosecution to probe, to the end, for evidence of Huber’s good character, the defense would have been able to introduce the fact that Huber was arrested for felony assault, and he plead guilty. It’s called give them enough rope to hang themselves.. I’m not convinced Kyle isn’t being played.
So far my favorite part has been ADA Binger has been testifying on witnesses’ behalf for 4 days w/o being under oath
Sal. A brother. A stoned brother? His testimony seemed evasive when it wasn’t downright obtuse.
His daddy owned stuff. Some stuff of the $2,000,000 was in his mama’s name. His brother owned stuff, he had a stack of tires that reached to the roof but no ladder. He commutes to Kenosha from Milwaukee and earns no $$ for managing $250,000 of personal vehicles.
Maybe he’s having affairs with Great Aunt Huber and Ms. Swart and he’s afraid the IRS is going to discover that his family and his lovers have been laundering cars.
How would that work, laundering cars, used cars?