Kyle Rittenhouse Jury Selected – Trial Begins Tuesday

[Hoodat]

Not so sure after the fuzzy drone video is admissable.
.

Was the entire last-minute video admitted, or only the altered still photo?

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1459507415158702084

Posobiec also picked up on this.   Some killer.   

[Right_in_Virginia]

Posobiec also picked up on this.   Some killer.   

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1459518688080453642

[Right_in_Virginia]

Paging the Rittenhouse defense team ... please pick up the white courtesy phone.

Max
@MaxNordau

I just learned that Rittenhouse’s dad, grandma, aunt, uncle, and cousins live in Kenosha.

Was this reported ANYWHERE before the trial?


1:18 PM · Nov 12, 2021·Twitter for iPhone

[catfish1957]

Was the entire last-minute video admitted, or only the altered still photo?

Not 100% sure, but the shots where the Judge and everyone else is huddled around the larger TV seemed to focus on a short few second video rather than one shot as admissable.  Was kind of shocked, since the Judge mostly has been pretty nastry to to the tactics of the prosecution.

[Hoodat]

Not 100% sure, but the shots where the Judge and everyone else is huddled around the larger TV seemed to focus on a short few second video rather than one shot as admissable.  Was kind of shocked, since the Judge mostly has been pretty nastry to to the tactics of the prosecution.

My point is that if the stills or shorts were admitted, then the entirety of the video must also be allowed as well as the source of that video.  From the whole, the context of whether Kyle had the gun in the wrong hand should be more properly decided.

[skeeter]

Not 100% sure, but the shots where the Judge and everyone else is huddled around the larger TV seemed to focus on a short few second video rather than one shot as admissable.  Was kind of shocked, since the Judge mostly has been pretty nastry to to the tactics of the prosecution.

it’s hard to believe that with the crystal clear video we have of rittenhouse being chased and attacked and shooting only in self defense determination of his guilt or innocence may hinge on grainy photos of exactly how he’s holding his gun beforehand.

As I said, through the looking glass

[Elderberry]

When the judge told Kyle that he had the power to have the "Lesser Included Offenses" Not Included, I believe that Kyle made a Big Mistake by Not Stating that he wanted to go "All or Nothing" and have no Lesser Included Offenses included.

[mystery-ak]

EXCLUSIVE: Potential Witness Tampering as Gaige Grosskreutz, the Felon Who Aimed His Gun at Kyle Rittenhouse, Had Two Prior Charges Dismissed by Prosecutors Only Days Before Trial
By Joe Hoft
Published November 12, 2021 at 9:21pm


Suspected witness tampering is uncovered in the Kyle Rittenhouse case as star witness Gaige Grosskreutz, who aimed his gun at Rittenhouse, had charges dropped by the prosecutor only days before being a witness in the case.

We reported on Gaige Grosskreutz multiple times since last August when he had his arm nearly blown off by Kyle Rittenhouse after he pointed his gun at Kyle.  For some reason, Grosskreutz has not been charged as a felon in possession of a firearm and attempting to kill Kyle Rittenhouse, even though at the time of the event, Grosskreutz was a felon.

But what we have found is that in his long list of violations, Grosskreutz was arrested with his second OWI (operating while intoxicated) and a case was filed on January 21, 2021.  This was only a couple of months after he attempted to kill Kyle Rittenhouse.

The unusual coincidence is that this case was dismissed only a couple of days before Grosskreutz gave his testimony in the Rittenhouse case on October 28, 2021.  See case data below:

more
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/breaking-exclusive-potential-witness-tampering-gaige-grosskreutz-felon-aimed-gun-kyle-rittenhouse-two-prior-charges-dismissed-prosecutors-days-trial/

[Elderberry]

EXCLUSIVE: Potential Witness Tampering as Gaige Grosskreutz, the Felon Who Aimed His Gun at Kyle Rittenhouse, Had Two Prior Charges Dismissed by Prosecutors Only Days Before Trial
By Joe Hoft
Published November 12, 2021 at 9:21pm


Suspected witness tampering is uncovered in the Kyle Rittenhouse case as star witness Gaige Grosskreutz, who aimed his gun at Rittenhouse, had charges dropped by the prosecutor only days before being a witness in the case.

We reported on Gaige Grosskreutz multiple times since last August when he had his arm nearly blown off by Kyle Rittenhouse after he pointed his gun at Kyle.  For some reason, Grosskreutz has not been charged as a felon in possession of a firearm and attempting to kill Kyle Rittenhouse, even though at the time of the event, Grosskreutz was a felon.

But what we have found is that in his long list of violations, Grosskreutz was arrested with his second OWI (operating while intoxicated) and a case was filed on January 21, 2021.  This was only a couple of months after he attempted to kill Kyle Rittenhouse.

The unusual coincidence is that this case was dismissed only a couple of days before Grosskreutz gave his testimony in the Rittenhouse case on October 28, 2021.  See case data below:

more
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/breaking-exclusive-potential-witness-tampering-gaige-grosskreutz-felon-aimed-gun-kyle-rittenhouse-two-prior-charges-dismissed-prosecutors-days-trial/

https://heavy.com/news/gaige-grosskreutz/

Gaige Grosskreutz: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

It was widely, and falsely, reported on social media that Gaige Grosskreutz is a felon. This is false. He is not a felon.

He does, however, have a prior misdemeanor conviction for intoxicated use of a firearm in Wisconsin, online records show. He received probation in that 2015 case, records reveal.

[catfish1957]

https://heavy.com/news/gaige-grosskreutz/

Gaige Grosskreutz: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

Wow...  any experts here on WI law?  Sounds like decent grounds for a mistrial.

[Fishrrman]

Catfish ponders:
"My real thinking is I wish we had 10,000-20,000 Kyles in the summer of 2020.  The BLM and Antifa terrorist would have been a lot less bold."

The time is coming -- perhaps soon -- when there will be more "Kyles".
Many more.

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1459609988805144577

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1459613066396585997

https://mobile.twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1459612726892838919

[240B]

Catfish ponders:
"My real thinking is I wish we had 10,000-20,000 Kyles in the summer of 2020.  The BLM and Antifa terrorist would have been a lot less bold."

The time is coming -- perhaps soon -- when there will be more "Kyles".
Many more.

Only after, Get the Hell out of Dodge. The last thing you should do is to call the Police. If you are White, you will be crucified by the politics based justice system today. If you are not White, you will not be charged with anything. And even if you are 'charged', you will be released in a couple of hours.

If you are White and shoot somebody ... RUN!! Get Away! Hide! Never call the Police.

[Elderberry]

Was the entire last-minute video admitted, or only the altered still photo?

The jurors watched it, so it must have been admitted.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/enhanced-drone-video-shows-first-155330597.html

A Wisconsin jury on Tuesday watched a high-definition drone video of the moments before Kyle Rittenhouse shot one of two men he killed in August 2020.

The enhanced video showed Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, apparently chasing Rittenhouse before Rittenhouse, 17 at the time, turned and opened fire at close range, killing Rosenbaum./quote]

[Smokin Joe]

@Hoodat

Not for long. Think my hip is blown out. Pain is unbearable. Washing pus-filled towels I normally park my left leg on so I won't have to deal with that smell when I get back home.

Will be calling the rescue squad and leaving as soon as they finish washing and drying.

Might be a while before I get back this time.

Hope you have good doctors and are on the mend soon.

[Elderberry]

Getting Jurors To Imagine “Provocation” In Blurry Photo And Video – Rittenhouse Prosecution Endgame

Legal Insurrection by Andrew Branca Saturday, November 13, 2021 at 08:30pm

Even if all the prosecution gets is a hung jury, that’s a “win” for the prosecution; re-trial would be certain.

https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/11/getting-jurors-to-imagine-provocation-in-blurry-photo-and-video-the-rittenhouse-prosecution-endgame/

The Kyle Rittenhouse trial is rapidly entering the end-game, with the jury to receive its instructions on the charges on Monday morning, followed by the closing arguments of the prosecution and defense, and finally the beginning of jury deliberations sometime in the afternoon.

Given the strength of Kyle’s core claim of self-defense, and the weakness of the State’s attacks on that legal defense, it seems worth taking a look at the last desperate effort the prosecution is making to try to drag something resembling a win out of this smoking pile of a trial–and that’s to sell an incredibly weakly supported argument of provocation to at least a single juror interested in accepting such nonsense.

Kyle’s Core Claim of Self-Defense Is Extremely Robust

Kyle Rittenhouse’s legal defense to the use-of-force charges against him is, of course, centered on the privilege of self-defense under Wisconsin law. Having properly raised this legal defense at the start of these proceedings, the burden is now on the State to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.  That doesn’t mean the State has to disprove self-defense in its entirety—it merely means the state has to disprove any one of the four required elements of self-defense.

There are four core elements of self-defense under Wisconsin law that are possible targets of attack by the prosecution:  Innocence, Imminence, Proportionality, and Reasonableness. I also mentioned that the fifth element of self-defense, Avoidance, does not generally apply in Wisconsin, in that there is no generalized legal duty to retreat before you can act in otherwise lawful self-defense.

Provocation: Last, Desperate Gasp of a Flailing Prosecution

There is, however, what might be thought of as a “back door” avenue of attack on self-defense, and that target becomes available where the defendant can be said to have provoked the attack against which he then defended himself.  Generally, I treat provocation as a facet of the element of Innocence, but Wisconsin law breaks it out as if it were a separate element, so that’s how I’ll treat it here.

If we had any doubt what the form of attack the prosecution will bring to bear in their closing argument on Monday, that was resolved during yesterday’s conference hearing—the meeting in court, outside the presence of the jury, in which the parties argue over the precise instructions that will be given to the jury for use in their deliberations.

The prosecution’s attack will come in the form of the legal doctrine of provocation.

It’s worth noting that the jury can effectively only find the defendant guilty based upon a jury instruction that they have received from the judge.  An instruction withheld from the jury necessarily withholds a path to conviction. Conversely, an instruction provided to the jury necessarily provides an additional path to conviction. (Obviously, I’m talking about criminal charge instructions here, not defense instructions.)

Provocation Upends the Trial Chessboard, Gives Prosecution Last Chance

Why? Because under the doctrine of provocation, the provocateur simply doesn’t qualify for the legal defense of self-defense at all.  And if they don’t qualify for self-defense in the first place, then the merits of those four elements of self-defense—Innocence, Imminence, Proportionality, and Reasonableness—simply become irrelevant.

If the prosecution can convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that Kyle was provoked the attacks upon him, then it simply doesn’t matter that those attacking him might have been the first to threaten or use force, that their attacks were actually in progress, that they were threatening him with deadly force, or that his perceptions of the nature of those attacks were subjectively and objectively reasonable.

More precisely, the provocateur can still physically defend himself against such attacks—one assumes one would—but he cannot later justify that defense as lawful and free of criminal liability.
Simple Provocation & Provocation with Intent

Importantly, there are two types of provocation under Wisconsin law, each with different conditions: 

simple provocation, and provocation with intent.

Simple provocation is engaging in unlawful conduct that would be reasonably likely to provoke a violent response.  If that occurs, the person who provoked the violent response does not have a legal privilege of justifying their use of force against that response as self-defense, unless they meet additional conditions not usually required for self-defense.

The second form of provocation is provocation with intent. This occurs when the defendant not only provoked a violent response but did so with the deliberate intent of then having an excuse to use deadly force against the person provoked.  Importantly, the provoker with intent cannot regain self-defense by withdrawal and communication—on the other hand, the State does acquire the burden prove that malicious intent, to provoke in order to have an excuse to use deadly force, beyond a reasonable doubt.

The jury instruction that addresses both simple provocation and provocation with intent under Wisconsin law is WCJI 815 Privilege: Self-Defense: Not Available to One Who Provokes an Attack: Regaining the Privilege, and it will be read to the jury Monday morning.

State: Simple Provocation Excludes Self-Defense for Every Felony Charge

The State has explicitly informed the court that it is the State’s intent to argue that every use-of-force for which Kyle has been charged was the downstream consequence of his initial purported provocation of Joseph Rosenbaum.  So, if the State can convict on the Rosenbaum charge on the basis of provocation, they believe all the rest of their charges will also result in convictions, like a series of fallen dominoes.

Pretend Kyle Actually Provoked Rosenbaum: Then What?

Now, if we assume for purposes of argument that what the State is saying is true (I know, I know!), and set aside for the moment any perfectly reasonable doubts about the evidence offered to support that claim, would Kyle purportedly pointing his rifle at Rosenbaum qualify as simple provocation?

WCJI 815 tells us that:

    A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack, and who does provoke an attack, is not allowed to use or threaten force in self‑defense against that attack.

The State’s argument is that Kyle’s purported pointing of his rifle at Ziminski was unjustified, therefore at least a misdemeanor offense, and therefore unlawful—so it would qualify as unlawful conduct for the purposes of simple provocation.

Provoker Regaining Innocence: Withdrawal & Communication

Even if Kyle was a simple provoker, it is possible for someone who has engaged in simple provocation to regain their privilege of self-defense.  How?

WCJI 815 tells us that:

    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.

(Emphasis added.)

So, even if Kyle was a simple provoker, he can regain his privilege of self-defense by withdrawal and communication.

Provoker Regaining Innocence: Exhausting Ever Other Means to Escape

There is a second way that a simple provoker can regain their privilege of self-defense, and that’s under circumstances where the provoked response comes in the form of a deadly force attack.  We know the State intends to argue that Rosenbaum’s fighting Kyle for his gun was purely defensive in nature, and not an attack at all—but the defense has argued that Rosenbaum’s attack was deadly in nature.

When the provoked attack is deadly in nature, WCJI 815 tells us that then the provoker:

    “ …may lawfully act in self‑defense.  But the person may not use or threaten force intended or likely to cause death unless he … reasonably believes he … has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm.

On this point, the State plans to argue that purported simple provoker Kyle cannot regain his privilege to self-defense under this provision, because although he fled a short distance to the spot where he ended up shooting the pursuing Rosenbaum, he had not actually “exhausted every other reasonable means to escape.”

Even Laughable Evidence Sends Issue to the Jury

Indeed, that’s the core problem for the defense on this provocation attack—the prosecution has been able to orchestrate—to the satisfaction of Judge Schroeder, in any case—a sufficient series of issues in dispute around the doctrine of simple provocation that the judge agreed to submit the provocation instruction to the jury.

It is notable that Judge Schroeder has a tremendous amount of respect of the province and prerogatives of the jury as the finder of fact.

The Danger of the “Interested Juror” Who Does Not Laugh

And there’s the great risk to the defense generally, and Kyle in particular: the jury may not laugh.

My sense is that even the prosecution doesn’t believe in the merits or truthfulness of the arguments they are putting forward here on provocation as a justified reason to deny Kyle the privilege of self-defense.

They are, however, determined to have him convicted, by any means necessary.  And these arguments on provocation appear to be the only means at hand—certainly an attack on the elements of Kyle’s claim of self-defense has no likelihood to any degree of reasonable certainty of being successful in meeting the State’s burden to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. It’s not even close.

Mistrial Normally a “Win” for the Defense, But Not This Time

Now, normally I would call a mistrial a win for the defense—but that’s normally because most defendants are guilty, so the mistrial is a gift that avoids an outright conviction.

In Kyle’s case, a mistrial is a win for the prosecution—because Kyle appears, by the overwhelming weight of the evidence, to be innocent, so the mistrial is a thief that takes from Kyle an outright acquittal.

[mystery-ak]

EXCLUSIVE: 'Under your black robes of justice you wear a white robe of the Klan.' DailyMail reveals vile emails sent to judge in Kyle Rittenhouse case including threats to 'spit directly into his face' and 'payback' against his children

    On Thursday Judge Bruce Schroeder revealed that he had been sent offensive emails during the trial, some calling him a racist
    DailyMail.com has reviewed the hundreds of offensive communications sent to  the judge presiding over the Kyle Rittenhouse case in Kenosha, Wisconsin 
    One email addressed to 'Your Honor' reads, 'I didn't know that under your black robes of justice you wear a white robe of the klan'
    Among the most disturbing is one that threatens the lives of the judge's children, promises 'pay back,' and states that Rittenhouse 'won't live long' if acquitted
    Another reads, 'Enjoy your term, judge, it's going to be your LAST. If I ever meet you in person, I fully intend to spit directly into your face'
    Numerous emails are sent anonymously or using pseudonyms
    Judge Schroeder promised he would 'deal with' the senders and said, 'I wouldn't want to be those people'

By Laura Collins, Chief Investigative Reporter In Kenosha, Wisconsin For Dailymail.Com

Published: 17:01 EST, 12 November 2021 | Updated: 18:04 EST, 13 November 2021

more
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10196397/Scathing-emails-sent-judge-Kyle-Rittenhouse-case-reveal-threats-brand-racist.html

[Right_in_Virginia]

This refers back to the central theme that Kyle shouldn't have crossed state lines to be in Kenosha .... that he was just looking for trouble:

Binger isn't from Kenosha either, he's from Racine. He only works in Kenosha - just like Kyle did https://t.co/kdT7QW4NDW— Jacek Posobiec 🇺🇸🇵🇱 (@JackPosobiec) November 14, 2021

Dinesh D'Souza
@DineshDSouza

Regarding the #Rittenhouse trial, I’ve never heard so much bloviation about “crossing state lines” from Beltway pundits who support a porous southern border and cross state lines in Virginia and Maryland to go to work every day

5:34 PM · Nov 13, 2021·Twitter for iPhone

[mystery-ak]

Legal Expert: Judge Should Not Allow Rittenhouse Jury to Consider Firearms Charge

AWR Hawkins 14 Nov 2021

George Washington University’s Jonathan Turley believes testimony and Judge Bruce Schroeder’s observations in Kyle Rittenhouse’s trial have undercut the firearms charge and that said charge ought not be heard by the jury.

On November 12, 2021, Breitbart News noted that Schroeder expressed skepticism about the state gun law and said he would let the charge go to the jury, but would allow the defense to include an instruction that pointed out the exceptions in the law — a hurdle that would make it more difficult for the prosecution to prove guilt.

On November 14, 2021, Turley wrote:

In covering the motions hearing last week in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, I noted a surprising comment from Judge Bruce Schroeder that he had “spent hours” with the Wisconsin gun law and could not state with certainty what it means in this case. The statement could effectively knock out the misdemeanor gun possession count — the one count that could still be in play for the jury after the prosecution’s case on the more serious offense appeared to collapse in court. A close examination of that provision reveals ample reason to question not just its meaning but its application to this case.

https://twitter.com/JonathanTurley/status/1459911025097068545

more
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/11/14/legal-expert-judge-should-not-allow-rittenhouse-jury-consider-firearms-charge/

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/barnes_law/status/1459721704763056128

[verga]

https://mobile.twitter.com/nypost/status/1458791418063949824

LeBron is the same P*$$Y that had to carried off the basketball court crying over a leg cramp.

[DCPatriot]