Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Rittenhouse VERDICT WATCH Day 2: Defense Files For Mistrial With Prejudice

Rittenhouse VERDICT WATCH Day 2: Defense Files For Mistrial With Prejudice

Defense files motion for mistrial with prejudice; State withheld high-definition version of “unicorn” drone video

Today completed the second day of jury deliberations in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, with no verdict being achieved before the jury was sent home for the day.The jury deliberations take place in private, of course, so we can only speculate as to what discussions are taking place amongst the 12 jurors.  That doesn’t mean the day was uneventful, however, as the defense once again asked Judge Bruce Schroeder for a mistrial–notably, this time a mistrial without prejudice, meaning that Rittenhouse would be subject to a retrial on these charges.

This newest request for a mistrial is based primarily on the undisputed fact that the prosecution had provided a copy of drone video to the defense that was 1/16th the resolution of the version that would be actually shown to the jury during the trial.  With no way to know that the high-resolution version existed, the defense now tells the court that they would have shaped their legal arguments, and prepared their client to testify, different than they did with only the low-resolution version in their possession.

The drone video is particularly important because it is the only evidence offered by the State to support their argument that Kyle Rittenhouse has no privilege of self-defense in this case because he provoked the attacks upon himself, and therefore the State need merely prove provocation, rather than have to disprove self-defense itself.

The act of provocation–specifically, the claim that he pointed his rifle at others, provoking Josep Rosenbaum to chase him across the Car Source parking lot–is supported by no other evidence but for this video.  Without the video, then, there is no act of provocation, and the prosecution would then have the unlikely-to-win task of attacking Kyle’s claims of self-defense directly.

The prosecution has a Constitutional obligation to provide the defense with the evidence to be used against the defendant in court and failed to substantively meet this obligation by providing the defense with only a low-resolution version of this video, rather than the high-resolution version actually used as evidence before the jury.

Assistant DA Kraus had a laundry list of excuses for why the defense ended up with only a lower-resolution, smaller file size, different file name version of this critical drone video, including blaming everybody but himself–indeed, both this colleague ADA Binger and lead Detective Howard were blamed by Kraus, as well (of course) as the defense itself.

The judge was unconvinced by these excuses and suggested the possibility of putting the prosecution on the witness stand themselves to testify under oath as to how this video mix-up occurred.

Interestingly, a photo purportedly of ADA Kraus’ laptop screen being projected onto the large 4k TV screen in the courtroom shows the presence of an imaging software named Handbrake. I lack any technical expertise or experience with Handbrake software, but apparently, a core purpose is to generate low-definition versions of high-definition videos.  This has led to speculation that the provision of the low-resolution video to the defense was not an accident at all, but rather an intentional act of the prosecution.  If so, this would be prosecutorial misconduct sufficiently grievous to not only warrant a mistrial with prejudice but certainly misconduct perhaps even malicious prosecution charges.

In fact, Judge Schroeder even cautioned the prosecution that he had warned them that there would be a day of reckoning about this drone video left on the prosecution’s doorstep mid-trial, and the very fuzzy “enhanced” still-image photographs pulled from the video that supposedly shows Rittenhouse pointing his rifle in an act of provocation–the photos that defense Attorney Marc Richards referred to as “hocus-pocus, out of focus” during his closing argument.

Today was not to be that day of reckoning, however, as the judge simply took the defense motion for a mistrial without prejudice under advisement.  He appears to be leaning towards not ruling on this third motion, or the two prior, before waiting to see if the jury will return a verdict of acquittal.  If they do, then the whole mistrial issue becomes moot. On the other hand, if the jury returns any guilty verdicts, the judge can theoretically revisit these mistrial motions then.

That the drone video was playing an important role of some kind in the jury’s deliberations became clear this afternoon when they asked to be able to view the video as part of their deliberations, and on the large 4k TV screen in the courtroom.  This was permitted by the judge, who had the courtroom vacated so the jurors could deliberate in privacy, as is the norm.

As for why the defense, which had been asking for a mistrial with prejudice, would today ask merely for a mistrial without prejudice, we can only speculate that the defense may be concerned that with the third day of deliberations rapidly coming to a close, and the prospect of a quick acquittal now only a fond and unrequited hope, that the jury might have begun leaning towards a conviction on one or more charges.

A mistrial without prejudice would be a better outcome than a conviction, despite the awareness that a re-trial would surely follow.  With presumably adequate financial resources available for a second trial, Rittenhouse may be thinking that a second shot with a different legal defense team and more aggressive jury selection might better position him for complete acquittals on all counts the second time around.

Highlights of the Day

Here are the major highlights of the day, accompanied by their corresponding video clips from the courtroom, as they were tracked in today’s VERDICT WATCH post:

11/17/21: Discussion during jury instruction hearing (charging conference) on Friday, November 12, 2021, where prosecution reveals it has a higher-resolution version than what it provided to the defense:

The entire key to the prosecution’s theory of the case is the purported provocation of Rosenbaum by Kyle Rittenhouse pointing his rifle at another person. This video is the only evidence the prosecution has ever offered in support of this theory. The high-definition version which was used to support the provocation theory in closing argument was never provided to the defense, and particularly not prior the defense putting Rittenhouse on the witness stand to testify–thus the defense was unable to properly prepare their client to testify. Naturally the defense was also not properly able to prepare its own closing argument to counter the prosecution narrative of provocation as purportedly demonstrated in the high-definition version of this video.

11:05 a.m.: Jury sends notice to court saying they want to view some of the videos.  Defense concerned about the drone video. Also complaining about when received drone video.  Also, defense attorney Richards tells court that the manual for AMP imaging software apparently says methods used in this case are intended for investigative purposes only, not for forensic use in court.  When Judge Schroeder asks Binger if that’s true, Binger response is that information is not in evidence.

12:55 p.m.:  Parties back in court, jury wants to see videos, hashing out the procedure, limits on viewing, especially “militia” video and drone video are problematic. Prosecution explains away providing defense with low-resolution drone video to apparent satisfaction of Judge Schroeder–Judge wants to take testimony from experts on this issue, doesn’t believe prosecution credible on this issue. Jury to be given access to some videos, ones they requested that apparently do not include videos about which the defense has raised objections.

2:45 p.m.: Defense makes verbal motion for a mistrial WITHOUT prejudice.  Prosecution makes laundry list of excuses over the state not providing defense with high-resolution drone video.  Judge warns prosecution that he’d warned them there would be a day of reckoning over this drone video–and then says he’s not going to make a decision now, inclined to see what the verdict is going to be.

3:15 p.m.: Jury being allowed to view Exhibit 5, the drone video, in the courtroom. Courtroom vacated so only jurors present. Will be allowed to view drone video as much as they like.

4:40 p.m.:  Court recessed for the day with no verdict, back at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow.

Verdict Watch Day 3

Be sure to join us tomorrow right here at Legal Insurrection for our ongoing VERDICT WATCH coverage, as await the jury’s determination of Kyle’s fate.

Until then:

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


Guess who’s on the RekietaLaw YT panel right now?!!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qbnc9IfSe3Q

    RobertC in reply to JustSayN2O. | November 17, 2021 at 4:01 pm

    Motion for mistrial WITHOUT prejudice? Kyle’s attorneys must really hate him. Insanity.

      Mister Logic in reply to RobertC. | November 17, 2021 at 4:47 pm

      I would rather have that than a conviction. The judge is going to let the jury verdict come back and then decide the pending motions for a mistrial. So, the mistrial without prejudice will only occur in the event of a conviction. Better to ask for it and preserve the right to object to the late disclosure of evidence on appeal, too. The appeals court could find the argument waived if they defense didn’t ask for a mistrial and give the trial court the opportunity to correct the error.

Colonel Travis | November 17, 2021 at 3:43 pm

The prosecution is tyrannical, the defense is inept and the judge is a coward.

Is this how “justice” is carried out over the rest of America?

This is a circus, with so many rings you can’t count them.

Krause has Handbrake software on his computer – from screen shots taken during the trial when showing videos. Handbrake is a video encoding software. Krause claims to be ignorant of such things in open court to the judge.

Interested Party | November 17, 2021 at 3:59 pm

So, is there currently a jury decision to come.
Plus a motion for Mistrial with Prejudice
AND a motion for Mistrial without Prejudice?

That’s how I see it. The defense seem to be covering all bases (much like the Prosecutors asking for lessor charges as well).

If this goes on to be a mistrial without prejudice either through a judges ruling, or hung jury, I hope to God Rittenhouse seeks new council. If I were sitting next to these chumps as a defendant I would be losing my mind over their meekness.

    jagibbons in reply to NotCoach. | November 17, 2021 at 4:04 pm

    For the benefit of self defense rights for the foreseeable future, Kyle needs top notch legal representation from the kinds of lawyers involved in CCW Safe, US Law Shield or USCCA. The riotous progressive left is throwing everything they can. Those who would stand for justice and the God-given right to defend oneself should do the same.

    gran2ten in reply to NotCoach. | November 17, 2021 at 6:11 pm

    If I’m on trial I want the MEANEST, LOUDEST SOB IN TOWN TO SHOVEL THEIR SHIT DOWN THE PROS. THROAT! I WANT A BEAST WHO EVERY TIME HE OBJECTS TAKES THEIR HIDE OFF AND HANDS IT TO THEM. This lead defense attorney “wonder if I should object…naw, never mind” Me, I’m female 5’3″ 80 years old and I’ve whipped better men than he is! He’s got some kind of indecision complex going on, prosecutors know he’s not a formidable foe they knew in short order smelled weakness at the defense table, and the bench! BLOOD SMELLS and two Prosecutors are blood-thirsty animals.

Motion for mistrial WITHOUT prejudice? Kyle’s attorneys must really hate him. Insanity.

Kraus claims that sending a cropped video to defense was not malicious but then how did they know in right away that their video was better quality in court last Friday?
Little Binger question: This isn’t the same quality as our version, is it?

Fatbot answer: No. OUR version is much clearer.

Getting nuttier and nuttier by the minute. This is the outer limits in the twilite zone

All that tough talk from the judge was bullshit. He’s afraid to do his job. Ugh.

    gran2ten in reply to RandomCrank. | November 17, 2021 at 6:15 pm

    My comment from the beginning I did not have confidence he was any match for these two blood-thirsty animals, to beat a brut you have to be brutish! this is not a nice game of Old Maid!

Please god have a hot-mic while the judge is out and jury is in there

Liberals have been pushing for civilian review boards of police departments nationwide, but after watching the prosecution in this case I am thinking what we really need are civilian review boards that review potential prosecution misconduct issues with the ability to discipline prosecutors guilty of misconduct.

Re latest post. Why would the Defense make a motion for mistrial “without” prejudice? Why put Kyle through the prospect of another trial. Dear Judge, End. It. Now.

    Smooth23 in reply to JRaeL. | November 17, 2021 at 4:24 pm

    Because Richards is a fucking idiot

    Mister Logic in reply to JRaeL. | November 17, 2021 at 4:56 pm

    Because it is obvious the court is going to wait for the jury to come back before ruling. If it’s not guilty, Kyle walks. If it’s a conviction, then the judge can declare a mistrial. (Heads Kyle wins, tails Kyle doesn’t lose, I guess.) They can argue after the fact as to whether the mistrial should be with or without prejudice, but either way, it avoids a conviction if granted. Also, it might be necessary to ask for it to preserve the error. I am not familiar with criminal law in Wisconsin, but asking for the mistrial without prejudice may be required to preserve the error of the prosecution not turning over the evidence timely on appeal. If you don’t ask the trial court for that relief, in some circumstances, the court of appeals will find a waiver of the error. So, this seems to me like a belt and suspenders defense.

    gran2ten in reply to JRaeL. | November 17, 2021 at 6:16 pm

    The judge’s balls are worn out he doesn’t know how to use them anymore!

When this is over are we going to see the jurists on NBC or CNN?

Looks to me like the defense objections are pro forma. Rittenhouse is badly served.

Dear God help this boy

“Without prejudice” means a new trial. They base this on not having the best quality video. They say they would have prepared their defense differently.

This could just be setting up an “in case” situation if Rittenhouse is found guilty.

But this also means the defense thinks that Rittenhouse will be convicted.

    jagibbons in reply to gonzotx. | November 17, 2021 at 4:28 pm

    Gives the judge multiple options. Both motions are still under review, with and without. There definite grounds for appeal. The result of this trial is anything but decided.

    Pettifogger in reply to gonzotx. | November 17, 2021 at 5:50 pm

    Well, it means they’re covering their bases in case.

This poor kid.

Barnes thinks the foreman is one of the Karens.

The Jury only wanted to see the drone video? So the verdict is coming down to the Jurors figuring out how they view the State’s end of trial Hail Mary submission? Or is it the Bureau’s video? If the former, I’m still bothered about admitting “evidence” with no knowledge of the source of the “evidence” (the Evidence Fairy is an apt description, but not a legal one). I guess the expert said “yeah, it’s real video” and that’s enough to establish the bona fides?

I always said that state courts struck me as multi-ring circuses compared to Federal court. This trial hasn’t changed my mind.

    darwin in reply to Edward. | November 17, 2021 at 6:21 pm

    I think they originally wanted videos relating to Grosskreutz. That suggests they have settled counts 1-4, but who knows. They asked for the drone video after that. It has nothing to do with counts 1 or 2, so I don’t know WHAT that means!

So the Defense has now motioned for a mistrial both with AND without prejudice? Or just without? I am confused.

Why on earth is the City of Kenosha allowing the protesters to shut down the streets? Nothing good comes of allowing lawlessness. Exactly how problems started before.

They should be ticketing at minimum and arresting people who fail to comply.

How long are they going to play with the video?

    lurker9876 in reply to Elzorro. | November 17, 2021 at 5:05 pm

    As often as they want and however long they want. It could be that they are really reaching for some proof of provocation.

Whichever one is the fat prosecutor, he downloaded the file AT HOME on a Saturday from his PERSONAL computer to a thumb drive and drove it to the crime lab? Did I hear that correctly?

I’m not an attorney. I keep saying that. As a former Naval Intel Officer, command Assistant Special Security Officer, and collateral duty Urinalysis and Legal Officer, might I offer a suggestion.

CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY, motherf*****s!

Anybody besides me ever hear of it? I couldn’t have gotten an E-3 kicked out of the Navy, let alone convicted at court-martial, if my record keeping was this much of a cluster f***. And by cluster f*** I mean non-existent.

And they’re going to send Rittenhouse to prison for life based on “Saturday Night Mystery Cinema” videos provided by persons unknown?

I’m so disgusted I’d like to beat all their heads in with my cane. I can’t know how KR must be feeling. Everybody besides him is only concerned nobody can pin the blame for this fiasco on them. He can rot in prison for all they care. Then after they toss this hot potato to the court of appeals they can all get together at whatever bar the legal folks in Kenosha hang out in and have a few laughs over some drinks.

If he survives until the appeals court decides to take it up (if they do, or is the first appeal guaranteed) hopefully the appeals court judges won’t be intimidated by the “No justice no peace” crowd surrounding their building and they might, might, fix THEIR MESS.

    KPOM1 in reply to Arminius. | November 17, 2021 at 5:09 pm

    Beat their heads with a skateboard. According to Krause, a skateboard isn’t a weapon.

    Arminius in reply to Arminius. | November 17, 2021 at 5:09 pm

    “Anybody besides me ever hear of it? I couldn’t have gotten an E-3 kicked out of the Navy…”

    I was referencing my job as command urinalysis officer. These people are supposed to be attorneys? I’m watching them try to figure out which one of a multitude of videos went where and they can’t do it. They clearly couldn’t manage “Operation Goldenflow” because, guess what, in order to boot a Sailor out of the Navy you have to be able to link a particular bottle of piss to a particular individual.

    If I had been this bad at my job I would have been the one in trouble.

    This isn’t a justice system. It’s not even a legal system. In fact, it’s not even a system. Kyle would be better off if he could just flip a coin with the judge.

    Mister Logic in reply to Arminius. | November 17, 2021 at 5:23 pm

    I don’t know. This isn’t blood or DNA evidence. This is digital media. So, I don’t know that chain of custody is such a big deal in this case. Krause had to back track and admit that while he gave the 12 MB video that he got from the officer by Apple Airdrop to the crime lab, he got a separate file from the officer via e-mail that was only 4 MB, and that is the file he gave to the defense. So, it’s undisputed the prosecution didn’t give the full size file to the defense. The issue is whether that matters. Does having a blurry version of the video matter in this case? I certainly think so given the allegation from the prosecution that the HD version shows Kyle raising his gun even though that is not at all clear from the image, and frankly I think the prosecution is simply making that claim up without any real evidentiary support. But the issue isn’t chain of custody, or contamination (like with DNA evidence). It’s well established now exactly what was happened. It’s clear the defense was not given the same thing the prosecution had.

      Arminius in reply to Mister Logic. | November 17, 2021 at 5:59 pm

      DNA/blood evidence isn’t stored in police property rooms. But they keep chain-of-custody records.

      For example KR’s rifle. If one rifle went in, but the wrong one was brought into court, he could still be facing the gun possession charge.

      They should eventually be able to figure things out given the legal owner of the rifle would be in possession of the documentation including serial number but watching these lawyers try to get a handle on the videos presented in court and which one the defense might or might not have stipulated to makes me think this crew couldn’t find their own asses with both hands.

        gran2ten in reply to Arminius. | November 17, 2021 at 6:30 pm

        You speak the kind of forceful truth I’m talking about! Both Judge and Defense are playing old maid and the prosecution is playing Cut Throat Poker, all in for the pot! The trounce is on, the two playground bullies are knockin em down! Ali n me in the ring I’m getting my lights punched out=defense and judge! Pray NOT! PLEASE FOR THE KIDS SAKE SEND SOME HELP!

      The evidentiary Chain of Custody is always a very big deal in every case, both before and particularly after it goes to trial. Or at least it is in US District Court, state courts are often multiple ring circuses.

Is it true former KR attorney John Pierce had the high-res video all along? If so, that would likely scuttle the mistrial-without-prejudice motion.

    dawgfan in reply to KPOM1. | November 17, 2021 at 5:11 pm

    Where are you hearing that?

      KPOM1 in reply to dawgfan. | November 17, 2021 at 5:14 pm

      Twitter CDA @beyondreasdoubt is saying that it came up during one of the discussions with the judge that “previous counsel” may have been the one who gave the video to Tucker Carlson.

        ernest1000 in reply to KPOM1. | November 17, 2021 at 5:17 pm

        What does that have to do with anything in the trial?

          if KR’s counsel ever had possession of the video, then KR had possession of it, and would not be in a position to argue that not having it put him at a disadvantage to the prosecution.

    Mister Logic in reply to KPOM1. | November 17, 2021 at 5:27 pm

    I don’t think the prosecution actually said that. I think they were saying that former counsel was aware of the higher definition video’s existence because it was shown on the same episode of Tucker Carlson that he appeared on. I don’t know how Krause can actually represent that former defense counsel actually had possession. But the argument that counsel was aware of the video’s existence is a red herring. There is no evidence that the former counsel actually had possession. But it is now undisputed that the prosecution had it and didn’t give to the defense.

      Moreover, there is nothing that suggests former counsel has knowledge of the video resolution. A reasonable defense counsel would assume the prosecution provides them with a correct copy.

      DelightLaw1 in reply to Mister Logic. | November 17, 2021 at 7:02 pm

      Correct.
      Tucker had purchased the video. Pierce, the previous atty for KR, viewed it on Tuckers show, but did not posses it.
      The Defense argued that they had tried to track down the video for themselves but were unsuccessful.
      Then, someway, somehow it made its way into the Prosecutions hands.
      BUT, the version they sent/shared w/ the Defense was different (blurry, and nearly 3x shorter).

    TargaGTS in reply to KPOM1. | November 17, 2021 at 5:27 pm

    That allegation was made, but no evidence of that fact was given. Krause’s reasoning was essentially: Well, since he was on Tucker Carlson while the video was being played, he must have given the video to Carlson. That allegation doesn’t seem to be credible considering the clip of the show CLEARLY indicates that the video isn’t courtesy of that defense lawyer but instead, courtesy of the person who – get this – shot the video.

    felixrigidus in reply to KPOM1. | November 18, 2021 at 6:39 am

    That does not seem to follow.
    It is just one of the many dishonest, blabbering excuses of ADA Kraus.

    The question is not whether they have seen the video on TV, nor even if they have it (clearly that is not true) but whether the video that the prosecution actually wants to be admitted into evidence was properly disclosed.

    Clearly, it was not. Instead, the DA’s office provided a different video file: different title, different aspect ratio, and lower resolution. A file that, apparently, according to meta-data was created 21 minutes after the prosecution’s version. A time that sounds suspiciously like it might be the time needed to crop and render the higher resolution file to the downgraded version the prosecution provided to the defense.
    A file, apparently cropped if compared to what the prosecution successfully tried to sneak into evidence.

A Karen as a Forman
Where the hell are the men in this city?

You can catch Andrew Branca, and sometimes Ron Coleman (the second best IP lawyer among those associated with and/or who comment on legalinsurrection.com) right now at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qbnc9IfSe3Q

I have a question. Kraus and Binger theoretically work for a government; I don’t know, I’ve never been to Wisconsin. I used to, though, when I was in the Navy. They don’t IT people in Wisconsin?

Because watching a bunch of liberal arts majors try to sort this out made my blood boil.

    AnAdultInDiapers in reply to Arminius. | November 17, 2021 at 6:03 pm

    Yeah, I’m listening to Krautz literally saying, “We can’t be held responsible for the software on Wiska’s phone”, because what she received in email was a compressed video.

    Krautz is blaming Wiska for running Android and not having an Apple device that would let him “airdrop” a video to her, and blaming her for the compression that we all know Apple’s shitty OS compressed prior to emailing.

    What this is telling me is that they’ve presented so-called evidence to court with no chain of custody, no definitive version, just randomly transferred through a myriad of technologies any of which could have – and clearly did – alter it.

    To blame the defence for the prosecution’s inability to manage their own evidence and to provide it in a valid form is frankly astonishing.

      AnAdultInDiapers in reply to AnAdultInDiapers. | November 17, 2021 at 6:09 pm

      Oh, and Wiska didn’t even open the file on her phone, she saved it on her laptop.

      Prosecution fucked up. Benefit of doubt might allow that they didn’t do it on purpose, but they did it, and they’re now flat out denying it and blaming the defence.

      The judge needs to start giving out good solid kickings. And this is before we discuss the other kicking: Jump kick man.

It’s interesting that the defense still hasn’t raised the potentially enormous issue of Jump Kick Man’s identity and if it was known to the prosecutor months ago.

    gonzotx in reply to TargaGTS. | November 17, 2021 at 5:36 pm

    Interesting but totally sad because KR has been ill served.
    Why his parents dropped Lin Wood amd settled for this… their heads must of been spinning when Mr Wood went off the Clift and were sold a bag of crap by Richards
    It’s all I can surmise

    Colonel Travis in reply to TargaGTS. | November 17, 2021 at 5:43 pm

    It’s interesting that the defense still hasn’t raised….ah…er….about 10 billion things!

    Olinser in reply to TargaGTS. | November 17, 2021 at 6:07 pm

    Honestly I’m highly skeptical of this particular claim.

    I’m willing to believe that the prosecutor hid evidence (like they’ve already done), but the fact that this leak claims they know the identity – and yet the identity HAS NOT leaked, makes me skeptical.

    If it were true then we should know his name now.

I am actually originally from Wisconsin. It’s a 50/50 state because Milwaukee and Madison, the two biggest cities are very very left, commie really. Kenosha use to be a middle class hard working town. They unfortunately are too close to Illinois and became heavily populated with Black,Racist left wing commies. .
Just the truth

So let me get this straight.

The prosecution is allowed to hide evidence from the defense, introduce doctored ‘enhanced’ evidence, and the judge’s response is to just pull the jury back in and show them the video?

What the fuck is this clown show.

    PhillyWatch in reply to Olinser. | November 17, 2021 at 6:32 pm

    They’re seeing the original, unenhanced, video in it’s entirety now. Prosecution only showed snippets that made the points they wanted to make, and slowed it down in points to leave an impression Kyle had a lot of time to decide what’s next. Watching the whole thing, at full speed, end to end makes a compelling case for self defense with no evidence of provocation and that Kyle tried to retreat all the way to the point he’s cornered in the cars.

    It’s actually working against prosecution, it’s just that defense never had it to also play and make those points expressly in trial or closing.

      traderjoe91 in reply to PhillyWatch. | November 17, 2021 at 6:36 pm

      How do you know this? What videos exactly did they request? Can you YouTube link those videos they requested?

        PhillyWatch in reply to traderjoe91. | November 17, 2021 at 6:52 pm

        I don’t know it directly….I picked this up in comments on Rekieta’s channel.

        PhillyWatch in reply to traderjoe91. | November 17, 2021 at 7:06 pm

        Found this…at top of this page an update from AFB:
        3:15 p.m.: Jury being allowed to view Exhibit 5, the drone video, in the courtroom. Courtroom vacated so only jurors present. Will be allowed to view drone video as much as they like.

Judge warns prosecution that he’d warned them there would be a day of reckoning over this drone video–and then says he’s not going to make a decision now, inclined to see what the verdict is going to be.

So the Day of Reckoning will be the week after Never.

    This judge’s Chamberlain coward impression is going to have catastrophic consequences for him.

    If the fucking jury comes back with a guilty verdict he’s going to face his nightmare scenario of letting a ludicrously biased prosecution stand or he’s going to have to personally overrule them.

    The last week has changed my impression of this judge from ‘well he seems decent’ to ‘complete coward terrified of making an actual decision’.

    He said it could get ugly too. Could that mean he’s leaning toward awarding the mistrial if the jury returns guilty? If so…with….or without prejudice??

    True. True. The Judge warns prosecution that he’d warned them.

    That must have them shaking in there boots. “And if you pull this s***, again,” the Judge warns the Kenosha county DA’s office, “why, I just might double dog warn you. This is your last single dog warning,” warns the Judge.

    I was going to ask if this is an SNL skit because like that show this trial hasn’t been funny for a long, long time.

So, did the defense file for a mistrial without prejudice because they think they’re about to be screwed by the jury?

Or because they think there’s little to prosecution can do to improve their case next time, whereas the defense’s closing argument sucked?

Other than making sure not to ask the girlfriend about Rosie’s meds, what can the prosecution actually do better next trial, since the defense has the transcript to tell them what questions to ask people

    Olinser in reply to GregTCT. | November 17, 2021 at 6:28 pm

    I think it’s to nail down the coward in the judge’s chair and preserve the issue for appeal, remove his ability to say there wasn’t enough to dismiss with prejudice.

    There is MORE than enough for a standard mistrial, so the defense has formally requested it.

    Edward in reply to GregTCT. | November 17, 2021 at 6:37 pm

    Given the history if this state team in this trial, the prosecution will have a whole new lineup of witnesses to parade before another Jury when they re-try the case. And all their new witnesses will have video, even if more than a little blurry, they personally took that night to back up their stories.

Is every judge afraid of the mob? Roberts is, this guy is

I foresee two possibilities:

1) there are 10-2 in favor of acquittal, and someone among the 10 is really trying to convince the holdouts.

2) they are a cowardly bunch that feels bad about convicting Kyle so is trying to compromise for a lesser offense.

If the group was evenly split I think they would have told the judge by now that they can’t come to an agreement. And I really cannot believe it would be 10-2 in favor of conviction.

The judge is a paper tiger and I think the prosecution knows it at this point. He’s going to yell at Binger and scold him for being a very naughty boy, but in the end, nothing will come of it.

It’s going to come down to whether the jury actually decides this on the evidence, which is 100% in Rittenhouse’s favor, or whether they will decide on emotion. Unfortunately, most people decide on latter, which is why I’m not optimistic for Kyle.

    Elzorro in reply to CarlosT. | November 17, 2021 at 6:41 pm

    I first thought the holdouts were for guilty. Now I worry they are for not guilty. I think that the jurors viewing the evidence in question though is good because if the reopened evidence is ruled inadmissible it has to be a mistrial granted I think and is a fatal error and if not it is on the record for appeals. I think appeals can only be based on the trial record.

My original impression of this judge was very positive. He seemed old school and by the book. This would excuse some of his extreme deference to the jury, at least at first. But as the trial has gone on I now see him as a really indecisive judge who only talks like a good one when it doesn’t matter. We are so far into mistrial territory and he is still kicking the can down the road. On a conviction he might declare a mistrial, but my guess he he’ll sentence Kyle to life with “I hope you win your appeal.” He isn’t going to face the mob. If the appeals court upholds the conviction (always the most likely outcome) he has so much trust in the institutions he won’t lose a minute of sleep over his poor work.

On Rekita Law the said that Binger has been in front of this judge hundreds of times so he knows the limits. The state seems to have the formula down: break the rules and he’ll only yell, then give him a large quantity of BS arguments and he can’t tell them apart from a good one. The defense needs to get wise to this fast, they’re playing a losing game with their timidity.

    Binger was a room mate living with one of the other Kenosha judges, Usually local judges are all good pals. They know all the lawyers especially prosecutors. One of judges favorite pastimes when they hang out together is bitching about all the lawyers. It is a courthouse club. You ain’t in it.

      Elzorro in reply to Elzorro. | November 17, 2021 at 6:51 pm

      No lie the name of Bingers judge room mate is Chad.

      janitor in reply to Elzorro. | November 17, 2021 at 6:59 pm

      I was going to warn this. Small town. And the Democrat judge (former prosecutor) and ADA with political ambitions are friends. This is why the defense lawyers are somewhat hesitant, and also why the judge yammers on about his thinking (bias covering) and really doesn’t want to rule against the prosecution.

        DelightLaw1 in reply to janitor. | November 17, 2021 at 7:26 pm

        Just today the Judge complimented all five of the lawyers as great professionals who have been before him many times. It is basically a “small town” environment trying a case on an international stage.
        The Judge has enormous faith and confidence in the Jury system, almost to a fault you might say, but it’s genuine.
        Withholding judgment until post-verdict is a strategy, employed often by judges, who let the system work all the way to the end, giving benefit to the jury to to due their duty according to the law. Once they have rendered their verdict according to the law, the judge then makes his ruling on the mistrial motions, regardless whatever the verdict. I believe that is the systems this Judge prefers overall.

      richtrue in reply to Elzorro. | November 17, 2021 at 7:09 pm

      Watching the court activity today brought me back to episodes of Making a Murderer and Manitowoc County, Wisconsin. All these friendly adversaries having a good old time skirting the rules because they just don’t care that much about the defendant. All using that same grating accent. But Kyle Rittenhouse is no Steve Avery, and the whole nation has a vested interest in this case.

Midfiaudiophile | November 17, 2021 at 7:10 pm

It seems to me like Binger and Kraus decided “I don’t care if this ends my career and any goodwill I’ve built up with the judge, I’m sending this kid away using whatever means, regardless how shady, I have at my disposal”.

Meanwhile, Richards and Chirafisi haven’t fully committed to burning bridges to save their client. They’re concerned about other cases they might have to try in front of Schroeder and so don’t want to be excessively obnoxious about it (probably the same reason Barnes was fired).

I wonder if we’ll see any of Binger’s previous convictions being appealed as lawyers look more closely at his conduct in previous cases. His team has clearly become comfortable with questionable practices.

I took a one minute video on my wife’s iPhone today and emailed it to my Android phone. The original video was 124 Gb in size. I selected the video on her phone and clicked the share button and chose “Email” When it popped up to fill in the email addresses, it clearly showed the filename (img_6146.mov) and the size as 6.5 Mb. This also tells me the original video wasn’t transferred because no drone is going to use a name like that.

    ConradCA in reply to darwin. | November 17, 2021 at 8:52 pm

    Compression algorithms reduce the size of a file so that it takes less space and transfers faster. However, it doesn’t change the file that is compressed.

    When you email a large video the emailer will give you the option of reducing the resolution. The person who emailed the video must have reduced it’s resolution.


Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend