Okay, as a lawyer, I feel a need to interject

[Patton French]

The prosecution blew it. It’s a given that this nut job went to WI looking for trouble. OMG, but let’s turn it into whether this poor teenager can protect himself? That’s not what it was about and any objective observer should see that. It was never about self defense! Why would he have to defend himself from a situation he should never have injected himself into? But the prosecutor fell into the “there are riots” trap and focused on whether the defendant felt threatened. Of course he did, subjectively, but of course he created the threat. And the prosecutor exacerbated the problem by not seeking leave to address evidence that had previously been excluded. Rookie mistake by a non-rookie. Sorry, the prosecutor seemed woefully unprepared. This is just the tip of my analysis. Sorry for being contrarian.

[OAITW r.2.0]

1. The Judge blew hit it.

He telegraphed exactly what guns rights folks expect. A 17 YO can kill other folks, as long as he's on "their" side.

[onetexan]

18. Yup. Thw judge is a RW NUT himself.

[ShazzieB]

31. Correct, but you left something out.

A 17 YO can kill other folks, as long as he's on "their" side.

And as long as said 17 year old is white. Don't forget that all important requirement.

[OAITW r.2.0]

32. It's a foregone conclusion that "their" side considers whiteness in their Patriotic calculator.

[Haggard Celine]

2. Do you think it's possible that the prosecution is

fucking things up on purpose? That maybe he's on their side?

[JohnSJ]

4. +++

[Srkdqltr]

6. That was my thought.

[Patton French]

7. Anything is possible

But I don’t think so. I can’t get in his head.

[MustLoveBeagles]

11. Anything is possible

I think it's more likely that the judge tied both hands behind his back pre trial as far as what could be admitted into evidence. Thus he felt he had no other choice but to take these huge risks with the weak case he was left with. That's my take anyway. Take it with a huge grain of salt. I'm not a legal expert.

On a personal note I've had a very sinking feeling about this case even before jury selection. I had the same feeling of dread on election night 2016. Around 8:30pm that night I got a sudden feeling of dread that things wouldn't go well for us. Every time I get this feeling the worst always happens. I'd love to be proven wrong in this case.

[Haggard Celine]

13. I think your feeling is correct.

The judge is very obviously biased. Seems to me that he's determined to deliver a not guilty verdict. I guess he really doesn't need the help of the prosecution when he's already taken away the prosecution's best hope of winning the case. The kid is going to walk.

[Grasswire2]

33. yeah, why was that evidence to be excluded??

Why doesn't the jury get to hear all evidence?

[MustLoveBeagles]

34. Good question

I wish I had the answer.

[TomSlick]

14. Hanlon's Razor suggests otherwise.

Never ascribe malice to anything that can be adequately explained by simple incompetence.

[mountain grammy]

29. Ha.. a bit off topic

but that really describes Joe Manchin ..

[harumph]

39. Respectfully, it's super common for

malicious people to feign "incompetence" after getting caught to avoid the implication of mens rea. Relatedly, ivy league educated Tom Cruz and Josh Hawley "pretend" to be everyman and say reallygoofy shit (yuk, yuk) - but they're smart as shit and extremely dangerous.

I've never held much regard for that axiom.

[TomSlick]

42. True enough but this prosecutor seems sincerely incompetent.

[Hav]

15. No,

the last thing a DA needs to advance his carrier is blowing a high profile case.

I have a different opinion than the thread starter. I think if the prosecutor wanted to blow the case, he would have concentrated on aspects that aren't crucial for the case the defense wants to make.

[Haggard Celine]

17. Yeah, the defense doesn't need the prosecutor's help anyway.

They already have the judge in the bag, and he's just about cut off all of the prosecution's routes to success. Enlisting the prosecutor's help would be overkill, I think.

[Dr. Strange]

43. He is.

Link to tweet

[Haggard Celine]

45. OMG!

[Hav]

48. Oh god, please don't be serious about this...

You can find thousands of pictures of people doing this gesture without them being white supremacists (who happen to use a similar or this gesture).
This image in particular was cropped out of a collage of pictures showing people, including one with Obama, doing this gesture to highlight how stupid the claim is that a person doing this is clearly making the white power sign.

[Shellback Squid]

3. he made a mistake and the judge over blew it and used it in Kyles favor, he's a clearly biased judge

[Patton French]

8. Of course the judge over blew it

I don’t think there’s any question the judge is sympathetic to the nut job murderer. But if you watch his rulings on objections, he’s very careful to appear fair. And he’s very careful in front of the jury.

[Hav]

5. We had a thread about this subject earlier

but as a lawyer, do you really think that self-defense goes almost completely out of the window just because he wasn't supposed to be there and he also did something illegal in the process? That's hard to believe.
I think the prosecutor did the only thing he could by trying to question the self-defense angle.

[Patton French]

10. No, not out the window, but when that's all the jury is thinking about, it becomes an uphill battle.

[cadoman]

26. fact: if the little shit hadn't been there no one would have died

No one died the previous nights. Kyle goes there and starts acting out Call of Duty in real life and all of a sudden three people are dead?

Fact: If you go to a place you shouldn't be then you are doubly responsible for the shit that you do there. GQP should know this shit because they are the party of "personal responsibility". Where the fuck is the responsibility for Kyle and his goon friends harassing and intimidating people with fucking assault weapons? Where the fuck are the consequences for them going into the street during a protest? Where the fuck are the consequences when they stop protest activities or steal protest materials? Where the fuck are the consequences for pretending to be a fucking EMT? If Kyle was such a fucking EMT why didn't he help any of the protesters he fucking shot?

I'm hopeful the jury sees through the bullshit of this fucking blubbering kid and this borderline KKK judge.

And BTW throughout all this we forget about the first victim, the one that people marched for, whose name we should most remember in all this: Jacob Blake.

[Patton French]

35. Yes!

My point exactly. It seems to me the prosecution lost sight of that very basic and obvious fact.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

9. Criminal trial lawyer specialization?

[Bettie]

12. From my view the prosecution chose to blow it

because they didn't want the case brought in the first place.

[TomSlick]

16. I'm skeptical.

Most lawyers' egos would not allow taking a dive in a publicized trial. I think the guy may simply be incompetent.

[Beaverhausen]

19. What about the fact that he had a firearm he should not have had?

[Patton French]

22. Yes, of course!

And why have a firearm (AR15) if you don’t intend on using it. Seems kind of a no brainer, no?

[LiberatedUSA]

25. One of those be shot had a gun.

If brining a gun for Kyle means he was going to use it, then the same standard must be put on the others who brought guns.

[cadoman]

28. the protester with a gun had a reason to be there--Kyle didn't

The protesters aren't on trial. Kyle Shittenhouse is.

The protesters didn't fire their weapons. Kyle Shittenhouse did.

The protesters had defensive handgun weapons, not thirty round mass murder weapons like Kyle Shittenhouse did.

The protesters tolerated the assault weapon carrying terrorists there for as long as they felt safe and eventually they no longer felt safe and had to disarm Kyle Shittenhouse out of, wait for it, SELF DEFENSE. Instead of peacefully accepting a citizen's arrest of his terrorist actions, that would have brought safety to the area the level of prior nights, he elected to become an active shooter and go full on Call of Duty.

[LiberatedUSA]

30. All I just read was...

…”if our side brings a gun, it is ok.” That is what I get from your post.

[DVRacer]

37. Yes they did fire

At least one round because that was one of the triggers that led to the first shooting. It was in the video and about 20-30 feet from KR.

[LudwigPastorius]

20. The judge is a piece of work.

He wouldn't allow the prosection to pinch-to-zoom the shooting footage on an iPad for the jury to actually see what was going on.

The judge bought the defense lawyer's bullshit that Apple uses "artificial intelligence" to manipulate the images when zooming in. Then he allowed a whole 20 minutes for the prosecution to find an expert to refute that assertion.

The judge is clearly biased toward the defendant.

https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/10/22775580/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-judge-apple-ai-pinch-to-zoom-footage-manipulation-claim

[Patton French]

24. No doubt!

But the prosecutor can’t pass it all on the judge. If you haven’t faced an asshole judge, you haven’t tried many cases.

[monkeyman1]

21. agree with ya 100% !

[Gaugamela]

23. Seems to me that would play into the defense's strategy.

I was thinking something similar today watching to trial. If Rittenhouse had showed up at the protests unarmed and grabbed someone’s gun to defend himself, I’d say ok he’s a stupid scared kid who shouldn’t have been there but give him a break. But he brought an assault rifle he couldn’t legally possess in order to act out a hero fantasy and play self-appointed cop and got into bad situation that was easily predictable and now he’s trying to back-pedal. I figure the defense strategy is to limit conviction to illegal possession of firearms. The prosecutor figures that’s a given, and if he pounds on it that’s all he’ll get. So his strategy is to undermine the self-defense angle and get a manslaughter conviction.

[spanone]

27. From WaPo...

Then, as the prosecution rested its case on Tuesday, Schroeder dismissed a charge for his alleged failure to comply with curfew. The judge said he agreed with defense attorneys that the prosecution had not entered sufficient evidence to prove that a curfew was in effect the night Rittenhouse killed the two men.

The judge prohibited the prosecution from entering evidence allegedly showing links between Rittenhouse and the Proud Boys, a White nationalist group. He also rejected the prosecution’s request to be allowed to tell the jury about a June 2020 incident when Rittenhouse allegedly attacked a woman, who at the time was in a fight with his sister.

As the trial began last week, Schroeder forbade the prosecution from calling the three men Rittenhouse shot “victims,” which the judge has long called a “loaded term.” He prefers “decedents” or “complaining witnesses.”

**PayWall**https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/as-kyle-rittenhouse-trial-nears-end-judges-decisions-from-the-bench-come-under-scrutiny/2021/11/10/93cd45c6-3dad-11ec-9ef1-5cd499f0a123_story.html

[fescuerescue]

36. Rittenhouse had no right to be there

[Patton French]

38. That is the most salient fact.

He was there to look for opportunities to engage.

[EX500rider]

44. Not sure I get that, don't we have the right in America to go where were want pretty much? nt

[fescuerescue]

46. Not to a riot or protest

Unless you are there protest or riot.

Everyone else needs to stay clear.

[EX500rider]

47. Still seems like a personal choice, anybody who wants to can go if they are so inclined. nt

[Dr. Strange]

49. Wait, what? Can you explain this?

Not to a riot or protest

Unless you are there protest or riot.

Everyone else needs to stay clear.

I can't go to a riot or protest unless I'm part of the riot or protest?

Like if Westboro Baptist is having a protest, then I can't go and make fun of them? Or counterprotest? Or even watch them? I can only go if I join in their protest?

This seems weird.

[pinkstarburst]

50. This makes no sense to me either

We have too many guns. Guns should never be allowed at protests. Trying to split hairs over so and so was granted permission to be at this "riot" and so and so was not is never going to fly. There should never have been a riot at all. And there should never have been a single gun at one. We have lost the argument the moment our case hinges on KH not having permission to be there but a horde of angry rioters being allowed.

[traitorsgalore]

40. Doesn't matter how good the prosecution is, the court is rigged

Corruption rules most places in the U.S.. At least some of the 1/6 traitors are getting long sentences.

[Johnny2X2X]

41. The judge wouldn't let the prosecutor explore why he was there

Every time the prosecutor tried to talk about why Rittenhouse was there , what was his motive, the judge stopped him. The defense's version of why he was there is all the jury has to go on, the judge ensured that. The defense says he was there to help provide first aid to people, that's the only version the jury got to hear. Not that he was there to provide security, protect property, or defend people, but the judge only let it be known he was there because he was trained in first aid and wanted to treat people...

The only first aid kit he brought with him was some gauze. Says his gun was to protect himself. And that's that as far as the judge is concerned, every time the prosecutor tried to bring up why he was really there the judge stopped him.