Kyle Rittenhouse trial

Post Reply New Topic

Schroeder insisted to the prosecution and defense that over the last few weeks, he has heard a lot of chatter about the case and reports about how he “messed up” the 2008 murder trial of a man accused of poisoning his wife with antifreeze and smothering her. “Actually, I had it 100% correct in the first place,” Schroeder said, despite the state Supreme Court ruling he had improperly allowed evidence in that trial

Thank you for that - anyone who could make (or agree with) a statement such as that shows that they do not have much (if any) grasp of what is occurring with regards to this case, and so their analysis is of minimal value...

Given you have been provided with a list of the charges he faces (which are the only things he can be convicted on) on at least 3 occasions (and they are published and explained\described in many media publications), yet still assert he will be "obviously" convicted on something for which he is not charged (and so unable to be tried for, nor convicted on), leads to the question as to whether the comment was made through ignorance of the subject, or intent to misinform others.

To help you out once more - here is an overview with simple explanations of the charges he faces (and for which he could be convicted): https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/02/us/kyle-rittenhouse-charges.html

And here is the actual criminal complaint outlining the charges and reason for them being placed (anyone following the case would have been aware of the content of this): https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/7047765-Kyle-Rittenhouse-Criminal-Complaint.html

Of course, there is the possibility that I (and anyone else - media included - following the case) missed the charging of (and bringing to trial) a charge related to breaching curfew, so would appreciate you providing the details of the charge...

Another of your condescending posts where you make clear you don't understand what you're posting about ....

Why? Why?

Use google .. search on "Rittenhouse charges"

Wisconsin prosecutors add curfew charge against Rittenhouse
https://news.yahoo.com/wisconsin-prosec ... p_catchall

Wisconsin prosecutors add curfew charge against Rittenhouse
https://apnews.com/article/homicide-sho ... bc6233a5c6

He's being charged with ...
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH AN EMERGENCY ORDER FROM STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/exp ... e-80917080

"Kenosha officials imposed an 8 p.m. curfew the night of the shootings. Rittenhouse was still on the streets as midnight approached. The offense is punishable by up to $200 in forfeitures"

KENOSHA, WI — A judge on Tuesday dismissed curfew violation citations given to people protesting the police shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha in August 2020.

Kenosha Circuit Court Judge Jason Rossell dismissed the Kenosha County Sheriff's Department citations.

[...]

Rossell said that the crux of the decision surrounded the Kenosha County sheriff's authority to declare a curfew, the order said.

Beth had the authority to impose the curfew, but the power to issue the citations last summer rested with the governor and local government bodies, the order said.

"The Sheriff was not engaged in activities under [the cited ordinance] and therefore, the citation can not be sustained and must be dismissed," the order said.

The Kenosha Police Department issued the citations. It is working with the district attorney's office to decide whether to pursue new citations, Kenosha District Attorney Michael Gravely told the Kenosha News.

The Kenosha County Sheriff's Department was the legal authority for the curfew but the Kenosha Police Department was the agency enforcing it, Gravely told Patch.

Deja Vishny, a defense attorney who represented people contesting the citations, said that they were unconstitutional. She said she would continue fighting them if they are issued again under a different statute, Kenosha News reported.

A little additional information which you neglected to mention:
KENOSHA, WI — A judge on Tuesday dismissed curfew violation citations given to people protesting the police shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha in August 2020.

It seems like you're purposely being obfuscatory.

Here you cite a news article discussing August 2020, which is six months before prosecutors charged Rittenhouse with a curfew violation.

It seems irrelevant.

These media sources explain that Rittenhouse is being charged with a curfew violation ...

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/exp ... e-80917080
https://apnews.com/article/kyle-rittenh ... 53fe0b2a26
https://time.com/6112936/kyle-rittenhou ... l-charges/

Don't you agree that Rittenhouse will at least be convicted on curfew and *weapon possession as a minor* charges?

As to the "weapons possesion as a minor" charge - Why do I get the idea that I have to repeat everything (at least once) when attempting to have a discussion with you?

The documents point out that the curfew is legal.

The documents point out the citations were not legal, because they needed to come from a government body.

Perhaps, like the district attorney's office.

So, it appears like a curfew citation from the distinct attorney's office would be legal.

While you could be right, the documents do not get you there, and numerous media sources indicate Rittenhouse is being charged with a curfew violation.

I searched, and searched, and could not find the latest court documents.

Kenosha County has citied the above respondents with a violation of Wis. Stat. §
323.28. Wisconsin Statute Section 323.28 states:



This statute does not apply to the violation of the Sheriff’s curfew, the power
of the Sheriff to declare the curfew does not fall under the 323 chapter of the
Wisconsin Statutes and the penalty is limited to “emergency management activities
under this chapter.” As the Sheriff’s curfew was a lawful order any disobedience
of that order would be more property submitted under Wis. Stat. §946.47. The
Sheriff was not engaged in activities under 323 and therefore, the citation can not be
sustained and must be dismissed.

Richie McGinniss had come to Kenosha on Aug. 24, 2020, from Washington, D.C., to cover events for the news website, The Daily Caller.

The city had erupted in protests, violence and arson a day earlier, after the police shooting of a Black man, Jacob Blake Jr.

The next night, he interviewed Kyle Rittenhouse on camera as the teen cradled an AR-15-style rifle in front of a car shop he said he was there to protect. Fourteen minutes later, McGinniss was just 15 feet away when Rittenhouse fatally shot the first of two men.

One of the four shots almost hit him, McGinniss told jurors Thursday during Rittenhouse's homicide trial. He said he sensed something whiz by his lower leg. He stamped his feet to make sure he wasn't hit.

McGinniss had a hard time watching some of his own video, as well as footage captured by others that showed what happened in the minutes following the shooting. He and others tried to save Joseph Rosenbaum, 36.

McGinniss stripped off his shirt and held it to Rosenbaum's head, after he turned Rosenbaum from his stomach to his back.

His phone was recording as dozens of other people arrived amid screams and more gunshots. As that video played, McGinniss looked down a lot, or away, and drank water.

He helped carry Rosenbaum into a hospital vehicle across the street and rode with him the short way to the emergency room entrance on the other side of the building.

I told him we were going to have a beer afterward, that everything was going to be OK," McGinniss told jurors. "I'd like to think he could hear me," but he said Rosenbaum never really responded beyond rolling one eye.

He said a while after his initial interview with Rittenhouse, he noticed the 17-year-old running south on Sheridan Road with a fire extinguisher and ran after him. He assumed something "newsworthy" was happening or was about to.

He said Rittenhouse slowed near the corner of the Car Source lot at 63rd Street and was facing Rosenbaum, who had been acting aggressively among protesters all night. McGinniss said Rosenbaum ran at Rittenhouse, who kind of juked, or pivoted then bolted across the car lot.

By then, McGinniss was only a few feet behind Rosenbaum. He thought he was recording the whole time, but said his phone somehow had switched to still photo mode. Another person with a camera did capture McGinniss trailing Rosenbaum chasing Rittenhouse, and the shootings, from the far side of the car lot.

McGinniss said the only words he heard were Rosenbaum loudly, very angrily yell "F — you" at Rittenhouse just before he lunged toward his rifle. Rittenhouse had stopped between two cars and shot Rosenbaum there.

McGinniss said while focused on helping Rosenbaum, he didn't realize the two legs he later saw out the corner of his eye belonged to Rittenhouse, who had run south from the cars and circled back. He said he yelled "Call 911" and saw the person reach for a phone.

McGinniss, who has covered rioting in other cities, said he's seen a few other volunteer medics with handguns, never one with a rifle. Rittenhouse had told him he was out not only to protect Car Source, but to provide first aid to people injured during the protests.

On cross examination, defense attorney Mark Richards asked if McGinniss thought Rittenhouse saw him in those last seconds and perhaps felt he was being chased by two people. McGinniss said he was too focused on the gun barrel to see Rittenhouse's eyes.

At the beginning of the proceedings Thursday, the judge removed one of the jurors who apparently told a joke about the shooting of Jacob Blake.

The juror apparently made the joke to a bailiff while being escorted to his car. When brought before the judge Thursday, the juror declined to explain or re-tell the joke and the judge decided to dismiss him.

"It is clear that the appearance of bias is present and it would seriously undermine the outcome of the case," Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder said.

The direct questioning of STATE witness Richard McGinnis by ADA Binger was an absolute trainwreck for the prosecution–and, of course, the jury watched it all happen in real-time.

UPDATE: To provide some context, for more than 12 minutes ADA Binger tried to get McGinnis to testify that Rosenbaum was already falling to the ground when Rittenhouse began shooting him–in other words, that Rittenhouse simply executed Rosenbaum by shooting him in the back when he was helplessly falling.

The actual exchange is in the video, so you can watch it for yourself, but a reasonable paraphrase would go something like this:

Binger: So Rittenhouse shot Rosenbaum as he was falling, correct?

McGinnis: No, Rittenhouse didn’t fire until Rosenbaum charged and lunged at him.

Binger: So he shot him as he was falling?

McGinnis: No, not falling, lunging.

Binger: So you’re saying he shot him while he was falling?

McGinnis: No, that’s not my testimony. Lunging.

Video of the questioning being described is on the page.

I see the prosecutor isn't the only one reaching for the answer they want here.

I did not watch this not yet. Which side is winning the state or the defense?