Kyle Rittenhouse trial set for early November .

[Metal god]

So bummed , missed opening statements . Testimony of Mr Black has been informative . there does not seem to be any question Kyle was there tending to injured protesters as well as putting out fires all while carrying a firearm . Another thing of note is that Kyle was directed to go down to the second location to help . Owners of property seem to of asked for them to be there , to the point of driving they to the locations . This blows big holes in the prosecutions idea that Kyle was there with out being asked and that even if he was asked Kyle was to stay in one location . Well that's been established not to be accurate .

I was listening to the commentator from Court tv and wow how it seems we are watching two different trials .

I will say the defense started out really off putting and feel he should have eased into treating Black as a hostel witness . Defense also seem surprised Blacks attorney never told Black they wanted to talk with him . Likely one reason he stated out so aggressive because he thought Black was blowing them off . Who knows maybe that's just another thing Black can't seem to remember

Interesting how Black can't seem to remember anything that implicates him or his father . ( not sure how Kyle found the gun down stairs , Didn't really notice Kyle had the gun when we left even though we went and bought slings for them earlier ) lol Wait there's more " I don't know which one is my gun , I think my scope is different " . Seems with all this memory loss maybe I didn't know what gun each of us was carrying when we left ? haha .

[Metal god]

Did the court mis speak when saying the next witness shall not be videoed or pic taken ? Where's the audio ??? Or did they mean no video or audio ?

[Metal god]

OMG , prosecution was trying to say Kyle and Rosenbaum were never in the same place that night until right before the shooting during pre trial motions , Reason being that they claim Kyle would not have known about Rosenbaums earlier state of mind . This was to denie the defense video of Rosembuam yelling at the guys with guns saying shoot me etc . This first video shows them in the same crowd in close proximity of each other . Clearly Kyle could have observed him at that time . I'm still watching maybe at the end of the video will be the first altercation .

EDIT - NOPE , Not sure the point of the video . I have no idea what the prosecutor is trying to establish with these first witnesses but all I see is him giving the defense everything they need later on to rebut what seemed was going to be there key points .

Even this documenter guy said he did not see fires etc that tues compared to previous nights . Then his very first video they show , has a fire burning across the street followed by a dumpster being set on fire twice lol . Nope nothing to see here .

[HiBC]

When someone is in Rittenhouses position,IMO,its good to remember the News is not concerned with Truth.The News media wanted to lynch KR. He is everything they hate.

We are in the position of "Mushrooms" Kept in the dark and fed....organic matter.

Which is why I prefer to say"Time will tell" and hang on to "Innocent till proven guilty"

I hope he gets a fair trial. If he is guilty,he'll be held accountable. I hope he is acquitted.
"Good Guy" Armed Citizen stories DO happen.

[zincwarrior]

Originally Posted by Metal god

So bummed , missed opening statements . Testimony of Mr Black has been informative . there does not seem to be any question Kyle was there tending to injured protesters as well as putting out fires all while carrying a firearm . Another thing of note is that Kyle was directed to go down to the second location to help . Owners of property seem to of asked for them to be there , to the point of driving they to the locations . This blows big holes in the prosecutions idea that Kyle was there with out being asked and that even if he was asked Kyle was to stay in one location . Well that's been established not to be accurate .

I was listening to the commentator from Court tv and wow how it seems we are watching two different trials .

I will say the defense started out really off putting and feel he should have eased into treating Black as a hostel witness . Defense also seem surprised Blacks attorney never told Black they wanted to talk with him . Likely one reason he stated out so aggressive because he thought Black was blowing them off . Who knows maybe that's just another thing Black can't seem to remember

Interesting how Black can't seem to remember anything that implicates him or his father . ( not sure how Kyle found the gun down stairs , Didn't really notice Kyle had the gun when we left even though we went and bought slings for them earlier ) lol Wait there's more " I don't know which one is my gun , I think my scope is different " . Seems with all this memory loss maybe I didn't know what gun each of us was carrying when we left ? haha .

Watch the opener. The defense mauled the prosecution. I say this as someone who strongly thought he should be guilty, but would vote unproven now.

Also yes next witness is not video d.

[Mainah]

I say this as someone who strongly thought he should be guilty, but would vote unproven now.

I'm in the same boat. I don't think he should have been there, and I hate the idea of him becoming some kind of cultural hero. However he was there, and I can see a case for self defense based on the conditions he was facing.

[Metal god]

I watched the opening arguments and at this point I have to just assume it’s my bias because I just can't get what the prosecutor is doing . The prosecution just keeps on offering reasons while it was self defense. He literally said Rosenbohm chased Kyle - Kyle then turned and pointed the gun at him which prompted Rosenbaum to stopped . Kyle then turned away and started running again at which time Rosenbohm continues chasing him and longed for him as Kyle shoots him .

So in opening arguments the prosecution concedes Rosenbaum was chasing Kyle. Rosenbaum saw the threat that Kyle posed as Kyle threatened him with a firearm by pointing it at him and Rosenbaum recognize the threat and stopped pursuit . Kyle then turned and tried to flee again and Rosenbohm re-institutes the chase for lack of a better term at which point a shot was fired from about 30 feet away ( not Kyle ) which appeared to have prompted Kyle to turn and shoot Rosenbohm who was now close enough to be lunging at him . To be clear this isn’t me guessing what happened or a news report of what happened . This is what the prosecutor said in his opening statement .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL06ZMd9fSQ

The defense then points out that Kyle had no legal duty to retreat and yet he did twice trying to get away . Based on this thread and what we’ve talked about earlier including the part of starting a fight and still being able to claiming self-defense . I don’t see how anybody can conclude Kyle was not trying to avoid conflict . He clearly had given up and was trying to retreat and both the prosecution and the defense do not disagree on that point .

I’m not sure if you guys remember the original charges or paperwork for arrest ( I forget what it’s called , the specific name) But in that statement the prosecution/district attorney or whoever it was that would be writing that type of thing up . Did the same thing that the prosecution did in his opening statement which was admit that Kyle was retreating and being attacked when he discharged his weapon. It almost seems as if The prosecution is self sabotaging and if not that , simply prosecuting because they have to knowing if they drop all charges that’ll cause a problem in itself .

[ghbucky]

I am extremely cynical. I do not believe that the jury's decision will be based on the evidence presented to them.

I think the jury will convict based on the fact that there will be extreme efforts brought to bear to identify them and pressure them to believe their safety, and that of their community, depends on a conviction.

We seem to be in an era where justice is defined by the mob.

[Metal god]

Criminal complaint is what it was called

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documen...-Complaint.pdf

Originally Posted by From link above

In the course of investigating this incident, law enforcement reviewed and shared with your
complainant multiple videos that appeared to be recorded on cell phones. In the first video, a male
who was later identified to be Kyle H. Rittenhouse, DOB: 01/03/03 (hereinafter “the defendant”), is
running southwest across the eastern portion of the Car Source parking lot. The defendant is a
resident of Antioch, IL. The defendant can clearly be seen holding a long gun, which was later
recovered by law enforcement and identified as a Smith & Wesson AR-15 style .223 rifle. The
recovered magazine for this rifle holds 30 rounds of ammunition. Following the defendant is
Rosenbaum and trailing behind the defendant and Rosenbaum is a male who was later identified
as Richard McGinnis, a reporter.
The video shows that as they cross the parking lot, Rosenbaum appears to throw an object at the
defendant. The object does not hit the defendant and a second video shows, based on where the
object landed, that it was a plastic bag. Rosenbaum appears to be unarmed for the duration of this
video. A review of the second video shows that the defendant and Rosenbaum continue to move
across the parking lot and approach the front of a black car parked in the lot. A loud bang is heard
on the video, then a male shouts, “████ you!”, then Rosenbaum appears to continue to approach
the defendant and gets in near proximity to the defendant when 4 more loud bangs are heard.
Rosenbaum then falls to the ground.
The defendant then circles behind the black car and approaches Rosenbaum. Rosenbaum
remains on the ground. McGinnis also approaches, removes his shirt, and attempts to render aid
to Rosenbaum. The defendant appears to run away from the scene. As the defendant is
running away, he can be heard saying on the phone, “I just killed somebody.”
Detective Cepress interviewed McGinnis and indicates the following: Before the shooting,
McGinnis was interviewing the defendant. The defendant told McGinnis that he was a trained
medic. McGinnis stated that he (McGinnis) has handled many ARs and that the defendant was not
handling the weapon very well. McGinnis said that as they were walking south another armed male
who appeared to be in his 30s joined them and said he was there to protect the defendant.
McGinnis stated that before the defendant reached the parking lot and ran across it, the defendant
had moved from the middle of Sheridan Road to the sidewalk and that is when McGinnis saw a
male (Rosenbaum) initially try to engage the defendant. McGinnis stated that as the defendant
was walking Rosenbaum was trying to get closer to the defendant. When Rosenbaum advanced,
the defendant did a “juke” move and started running. McGinnis stated that there were other people
that were moving very quickly. McGinnis stated that they were moving towards the defendant.
McGinnis said that according to what he saw the defendant was trying to evade these individuals.
McGinnis described the point where the defendant had reached the car. McGinnis described that
the defendant had the gun in a low ready position. Meaning that he had the gun raised but pointed
downward. The butt of the gun would have been at an angle downwards from the shoulder.
McGinnis stated that the defendant brought the gun up. McGinnis stated that he stepped back and he thinks the defendant fired 3 rounds in rapid succession. McGinnis said when the first round
went off, he thought it hit the pavement. McGinnis felt something on his leg and his first thought
was wondering whether he had gotten shot. McGinnis was behind and slightly to the right of
Rosenbaum, in the line of fire, when the defendant shot.
McGinnis stated that the first round went into the ground and when the second shot went off, the
defendant actually had the gun aimed at Rosenbaum. McGinnis stated he did not hear the two
exchange any words. McGinnis said that the unarmed guy (Rosenbaum) was trying to get the
defendant’s gun. McGinnis demonstrated by extending both of his hands in a quick grabbing
motion and did that as a visual on how Rosenbaum tried to reach for the defendant’s gun.
Detective Cepress indicates that he asked McGinnis if Rosenbaum had his hands on the gun when
the defendant shot. McGinnis said that he definitely made a motion that he was trying to grab the
barrel of the gun. McGinnis stated that the defendant pulled it away and then raised it. McGinnis
stated that right as they came together, the defendant fired. McGinnis said that when Rosenbaum
was shot, he had leaned in (towards the defendant).

[Aguila Blanca]

Analysis by attorney Andrew Branca:

https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/1...ess-testimony/

[KyJim]

I have not closely followed this case, but wanted to explain why the prosecution may have introduced evidence of Rittenhouse's retreat and Rosenbaum's pursuit, etc. Actually, there are two reasons.

1. Idealistically, prosecutors are "ministers of justice" who, IMO, have the responsibility to present uncontradicted evidence of what really happened when that evidence exists. We can look back at the extreme example of what can happen to a prosecutor who ignores this responsibility in the case of the wrongful prosecution of the Duke lacross students. Although, that case did not go to trial, the principle is the same.

2. More practically, it is almost always better for the prosecution (or the plaintiff in a civil case) to present "bad" evidence in their case, rather than letting the defense present it in their case. The thought is, first, the prosecution is fair, thus building credibility with the jury. Second, it keeps the defense from "scoring points" with the jury. That doesn't mean the prosecution puts on the defense's case.

[44 AMP]

idealistically is one thing, and a noble thing to aspire to. REALITY can be, and often is somewhat different.

There are prosecutors who appear to believe their job is to win their case, and nearly everything else takes a backseat to that.

There are also prosecutors who don't feel the case is valid, but bring charges anyway because the political and social pressure of not doing so would harm their careers.

And there are prosecutors who will not bring charges they don't feel valid, no matter what the political/public opinion might be.

And every possible variation of all of these is possible as well.

I don't know what we've got here. I'd like to think the prosecution is just "going through the motions" but only they know their intent and strategy.

As Mark Twain is reported to have said, "A jury is 12 people chosen to decide which side has the better liar..." or something to that effect...

[101combatvet]

Originally Posted by ghbucky

I am extremely cynical. I do not believe that the jury's decision will be based on the evidence presented to them.

I think the jury will convict based on the fact that there will be extreme efforts brought to bear to identify them and pressure them to believe their safety, and that of their community, depends on a conviction.

We seem to be in an era where justice is defined by the mob.

To say the least, they are waiting for Biden to chime in.

Seriously, I was on a jury, and the evidence was clear cut, but the jury wanted to acquit. I sat there and convinced everyone that they were going to convict or we would be there for a long time; I wasn't going to cave in on what was right. Within two hours, all charges were guilty.

Please put me on that jury!

[mehavey]

Please put me on that jury!

You'd be eliminated in 60 sec for cause.
Don't want no independent thinkers...

[101combatvet]

Originally Posted by mehavey

You'd be eliminated in 60 sec for cause.
Don't want no independent thinkers...

Trust me; I can act as stupid as any one of them until the day of deliberation.

[Metal god]

What I think is funny is some of the commentator on court tv . A couple are either stupid or were told this is the side you're going to advocate for so figure out how to put a positive spin on it . It's almost like watching the start of a sporting event . Each commentator has a team they will report about and they must say positive things even if that team has not won a game all year .

I get that may work in entertainment but not when comes to a court of law . Just say what you believe to be accurate , not what you think we or your boss wants to hear .

As far as I can tell this prosecutor is playing to the public , not the jury . He says they have clear FBI footage of Kyle chasing Rosenbaum . That testimony was secret and only those in the court room could see/hear it . yet today we get to see that footage on cross of the detective and it not only shows the opposite , it showed Rosenbaum hiding behind a car as Kyle passes then he comes out to chase Kyle as Kyle screams out FRIENDLY FRIENDY right away .

I think the prosecutor knew the FBI witness would not be seen or heard by the public . This way he can claim we don't have all the facts or simply knew this would cause doubt with the public . Also the judge told everyone there was not much time to go over the objection posed right before they adjourned . However right before leaving today he ( the prosecutor ) brought up the juror member telling a joke and want's him disqualified or what ever it's called . . The prosecutor knew there was no time for that but wanted that to be left hanging there for the public to think about over night .

Say or think what you want about Barnes but the more I see how this prosecutor works . I believe Barnes more and more on how he ( the prosecutor ) had been already trying this case in the court of public opinion for a year now . He (the prosecutor) knows this is a huge up hill battle to win and instead of doing what was right from the get go . He has decided to create confusion based on things he knows are not true . By the time he's done , there will be no doubt in the court but he will have completely confused the public . This will not be good for those that presumed Kyle guilty to begin with . I think the judge is wright in that it's important the public see and believe this was a fair trial , ( I don't think he should have said that in court for the media to feed on) . MSM has shown utter contempt for anyone that criticizes there work . Just ask Joe Rogan what happens when you shine a light on there misinformation . Huge mistake for the judge to call out the media this early , they will only double down on there lovely coverage .

[44 AMP]

I get that may work in entertainment but not when comes to a court of law .

Hate to have to be the one to break it to you Metal god, but "commentators" ARE entertainment.

[Aguila Blanca]

Andrew Branca's report on day 2:

https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/1...-entire-trial/

[Metal god]

AB , yeah that tracks exactly how I saw todays testimony . Also goes to my point of some court tv analyst thinking the prosecution had a good day or there was anything positive really for there side . The cross of the detective was devastating to there case IMHO . I know this is all way above my pay grade but I can't see where this prosecutor is going here . He MUST have a rabbit in a hat somewhere .

EDIT , Just saw part of a video of Barnes commenting on the trial today . He CLEARLY is still very upset with being kicked from the team . He had nothing good to say about the defense and pretty much is saying they are completely failing Kyle and Kyle is in big trouble . Thank god the prosecution is as bad as he is haha .

[stagpanther]

Rittenhouse is a killer.

[101combatvet]

Originally Posted by stagpanther

Rittenhouse is a killer.

Yeah, and some deserve it.

https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/20...-sex-offender/

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by stagpanther

Rittenhouse is a killer.

Yes, he is. He has admitted to killing two people. The question is whether he was justified in killing them in self-defense, or if he is a murderer. That is what this trial is about.

[stagpanther]

That is what this trial is about.

100% in agreement with you on that.

[Metal god]

Ok so I watched about 80% of the trial yesterday , Looking through comments on the net it almost seem universal the defense team had a bad day . Does anyone here that has actually watched yesterday feel the same way ? I'm trying to find my blind spot on this because I don't see it the same way . Maybe I'm comparing the two sides rather the grading each individually . IMHO when you compare the prosecution to the defense yesterday there is no way the prosecution had a better day .

[zukiphile]

I haven't seen more than a couple minutes of the opening arguments.

I'd put more stock in your instinct than I would in the conclusions of internet advocates. To the degree this will be resolved by the jury, people who know the whole story and are on the internet to convince you aren't reliable reflections of jury reactions.