Rittenhouse Post-Verdict Analysis Online Event – Sunday, November 21, 7 p.m. Eastern
Andrew Branca and William Jacobson will discuss the case, the politics, and the verdict. Hosted by Kemberlee Kaye.
Another major case covered live at Legal Insurrection by Andrew Branca has come to and end, with Not Guilty on all counts. We will hold an online event evaluating the case, the politics, and the verdict. REGISTER HERE. Registration closes at 5 p.m. Eastern.
SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 7 p.m. Eastern
The event is free, but registration is required. Space is limited. First come, first served.
Andrew’s analysis has been the best around, once again. You remember the praise from Don West about the Zimmerman trial:
Andrew also picked up a nice shout out from Megyn Kelly on her Sirius radio show and podcast:
That's very kind of you, Megyn! I can cover this case at this level of intensity only because of the generous support of Bill and Legal Insurrection.
— Law of Self Defense (@LawSelfDefense) November 14, 2021
AND THE ACCOLADES JUST KEEP COMING
Rittenhouse: just observing that AndrewBranca @LawSelfDefense @LegInsurrection has been a dynamo without peer on this case … https://t.co/3GpYMXmQ75
— Andy McCarthy (@AndrewCMcCarthy) November 15, 2021
SEE YOU SUNDAY?
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Hearty congratulations to Andrew for the first-rate coverage and analysis! And many thanks to Bill for the reliable support!
Short of checking my phone every two minutes, is there a way to get a verdict alert so I can turned it before they read it?
A good question. As of about 12 noon tomorrow, I will be dead to the world for about three hours during surgery. I’d like to see a text or something on my phone when I come to get out of the hospital.
Hoping all goes well with your surgery.
Ditto.
I won’t know how successful at all is until I get the biopsy results back. But, after a delay waiting for one of the surgeons to arrive from an emergency procedure he was doing, everything seem to have gone smoothly. The only problem I had is I normally recover from anesthesia quickly. I was still gaga three hours after I woke up in recovery. It was quite a procedure, and the next weeks work was explain to me and it’s not exactly going to be a walk in the park. But, I’m holding good thoughts. Depending upon what the biopsy shows is how much more work there will be. They’re going to do a type of skin graft on me called a fold I think that’s the name of it. For those that might be medically curious, take a look at the work that was done by a doctor McIndoe in England during World War II. He did this very strange type of skin graft on brown burnt Royal Air Force pilots. Quite a procedure! Forgive any of the strange days that you see in my text here, but I’m using speech to text. I can barely hold anything with the right hand, but that’s to be expected. Thank each and everyone of you that Mike might be or is concerned about my situation. The moral support is great
Wish you the best tomorrow
Good luck tomorrow , Griz
Hope you’re as good as new when it’s done and over
To Murky and the rest of the gang: This will be the first of two surgeries. I am really hoping for the best, so thank you all for your good wishes.
Unless the jur5y returns a verdict in less then 5-10 minutes, the won’t be announced for at least 1/2 hour after they return. More likely 1-2 hours.
So check every half hour.
Nothing but praise for Mr Branca’s coverage, thorough, detailed and refreshing.
Having taken several of Mr. Branca’s “Law Of Self Defense” classes (and read his book of the same title many times) it is most gratifying to see him finally getting widespread national recognition for his expertise. Full credit and thanks, LI, for bringing him onboard at an early day.
There is an error, in my view, in the provocation instruction, As read by the judge in court, the following was included in the provocation instruction:
However, if the attack which follows causes the person reasonably to believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, he or she may lawfully act in self-defense. But the person may not use or threaten force intended or likely to cause death unless he or she reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable
means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm.
But the following was not included:
A person who provokes an attack may regain the right to use or threaten force if the person in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice of the withdrawal to his assailant.
This excluded instruction derives from this statute:
939.48(2)(b) The privilege lost by provocation may be regained if the actor in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his or her assailant.
While the instruction as written may appear to be ambiguous as to whether it covers deadly force, the statute that it explains is clear that the full privilege is regained. Therefore, the second criteria by which self-defense may be regained should’ve been included in the jury instructions.
Prior to the verdict, I’d like to add my thanks to Andrew for his excellent coverage, and also recognise that he’s been brave enough to state his view of whether the charges against Rittenhouse have been proven or not.
There is much about this trial that has caused discomfort, strong differences in views and disagreements on the performance of the four lawyers and the judge. Throughout it all we’ve had clarity and insight here on Legal Insurrection. Thank you.
Off topic: I’m going to use my age “for ignorance on this topic” can someone explain how I can delete my comment after it’s been submitted? thanks all
I will look after I finish this message. I have to see what is on my screen from my post.
You can’t edit or delete a comment on this website once submitted.
An issue of much contention among the commenters.
Perhaps with some extra generous contributions to LIF they will be able to afford to task the web team with making this happen.
There isn’t an option for editing nor deleting, best I can tell. I can’t tell if you know that I responded to you. I can’t tell if you respond to me. I really haven’t been able to figure out much. lol
This may have been the best thing LI every did. I was spellbound throughout the trial. What a relief it’s over.
I am curious if Grosskreutz now faces the possibility of being charged with assault. With the jury finding that Rittenhouse was acting in self defense, Grosskreutz was necessarily assaulting him before he was shot. Not that the state would be so inclined as to prosecute him, but I’m wondering if the results of this trial open that door in any way.
The State, not a chance but Rittenhouse can file a charge of assault against him then go after him I would think.
I wouldn’t bother. Just as Kyle had no responsibility for knowing anything about his attackers’ beliefs about his motives, other than the objective fact that they were imminently threatening him with death or grave bodily injury, Grosskreutz could easily skate on the same argument.
“… With the jury finding that Rittenhouse was acting in self defense, Grosskreutz was necessarily assaulting him before he was shot. ..”
There are two things wrong with this. First the test is whether Rittenhouse reasonably believed Grosskreutz was about to kill or seriously injure him (and also whether Rittenhouse had done anything to lose his self-defense rights). This could be true without Grosskreutz having committed a crime.
Second the burden of proof means the jury didn’t actually find that Rittenhouse had acted in self-defense just that the state had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Rittenhouse wasn’t acting in self-defense. If the jury had to actually find beyond a reasonable that Rittenhouse was acting in self-defense this would have been a much harder case and might have had a different outcome.
Finally as I understand it Grosskreutz has a serious lifelong impairment from being shot which makes prosecuting him look like piling on (at least to me).
Can’t tell Andrew how much I’ve learned about the inner workings of the legal system, terms, why lawyers are doing what they are doing etc with his in depth analysis. First rate stuff.
I found LI because of Mr. Brancas coverage of the Zimmerman trial
It’s the ONLY place to go to get the truth in cases like this
Andrew! Andrew! Andrew!
And, Andrew has been a stand out panelist among a whole bunch of excellent panelists at Rekieta Law’s Youtube website.
An aside–In the comments section of the Youtube website, some of my comments were posted ever so nicely. However, my attempts to post link to an excellent Twitter analysis of the “provocation” video (a link I obtained from a comment here to one of Andrew’s brilliant summaries) were all deleted by Youtube.
Just watched the YouTube video of Andrew and Megyn Kelly shortly after the verdict was read
She was truly moved to tears reporting on it.
Gotta give her credit for her coverage, especially for having Mr. Branca sharing his time with her to spread the truth of the incident
Registered, only got an email linking back to the page to register. Never got to see it.
It’s scheduled for 7pm EST tonight (Sunday night).
Will there be a way to watch the reaction if we’re unavailable at that time?
Any way to watch this now (after the fact)?
I wasn’t able to attend the event and I’ve been checking multiple times daily for an upload of it. Are there plans to upload it some time so those of us who missed it can watch it?
We expect to be posting the video in the next few days. It will be a separate post, though. Thanks for your interest; I can’t wait to see it, as well!
Sarah, just in case you check back here first, the video has now been posted: https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/11/video-rittenhouse-post-verdict-analysis/