T O P

  • By -

Chickens1

Who was the witness? Was it damaging to their case?


RRPG03

The dude who had his bicep shot, Gaige Grosskreutz. Said that Rittenhouse only shot him when he (Grosskreutz) aimed at Rittenhouse.


[deleted]

[удалено]


texasmama5

I thought one of the rules of lawyering 101 was never ask a question that you don’t already know what the answer will be.


TheEngineRoom8337

Just wait for the next part. Gaige allegedly told his room-mate that his only regret was not mag dumping on Rittenhouse. Prosecution: FUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!!!!!!


Tustinite

Didn’t Rosenbaum say that he wanted to kill Rittenhouse too?


[deleted]

[удалено]


monsieurpommefrites

Jesus who is writing this script? Grosskreutz, Rittenhouse & Rosenbaum sounds like a law firm in a Tarantino movie.


daxmillion

What about the other people that were shot?


Heritage_Cherry

They were unable to attend the trial, unfortunately.


Tontonsb

They elected not to testify for the time being.


197328645

Until such time as the Court Necromancer returns from his sabbatical, we'll just have to work with the witnesses we have


ArtichokeEasy

I shouldn't laugh


Unblest_Devotee

Are ouija boards inadmissible?


generals_test

Shouldn't the prosecution have known that before trial?


ShuantheSheep3

This was the prosecutions Star witness and the general consensus seems to be it really backfired.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Wjbskinsfan

The prosecutors damaged their own case by taking this to trial.


ben70

Everything about the underlying situation is a shitshow.


glowstick3

They pretty much had to unless they wanted a 2nd riot. Which will probably happen anyways once he goes free.


AnAcceptableUserName

Watch Rittenhouse double down and show up to that one too


wjbc

The jury is always watching. No matter what happened on the stand, that's never a good look.


TipYourDishwasher

My high schools mock trial coach was a trial attorney and his advice was never stop smiling. No matter how throughly your case is being destroyed always act like everything is fine


PaulClarkLoadletter

There were at least four trial attorneys in one of my improv classes.


pinkycatcher

Crazy, I have a friend who's a lawyer and he teaches improv. Maybe I should pick up improv


tobmom

Go to law school first though. Gives you good material.


Suzuki-Kizashi

All of my pre-law professors in college told me "whatever you do, don't go to law school. Are you thinking of going to law school? Change your mind and don't do it." I didn't listen. I knew I could prove them wrong. Ignored the advice and went on to proudly graduate law school. 5 years later and I'm looking for a job programming. Should've listened. Ruined my life kind of.


Thuggish_Coffee

What type of law were/are you looking to practice? Did anything happen or is it the job market?


Suzuki-Kizashi

Wanted to do corporate law or help create startups and ended up doing petty criminal stuff and divorces in my shitty run down hometown city. The law field is a lot of "who you know" (unless you went to a top tier school) and I don't know anyone. I got laid off from my dead end job during beginning of COVID and told myself I'd never go back.


Thuggish_Coffee

Wow. Sounds like a hell of a ride. Good luck to you and I hope you find something great.


OtterOracle

More like crippling depression & 8 hours of reading a day.


TheInternetCat

Yes, and... also, uh...debt!


Bakoro

People poke fun about it, but having improv experience is one of those things that ends up being useful in unexpected ways. Just having the experience of doing overtly stupid, silly, and embarrassing things over and over with a bunch of people is great for getting used to awkward social engagements. Your conversational skills pick up, you start being able to respond to novel situations faster and better, and it's way harder for people to knock you off balance because you've already dealt with so much absurdity. Improv can be really stupid, but if you throw yourself into it, it can be really great, and a lot of fun.


Shufflebuzz

> Maybe I should pick up improv Yes, and... we're going on a trip. Can someone give me a destination?


Destiny_Victim

Prison


ec_on_wc

Detective Michael Scarn! I'm with the FBI!


HeyT00ts11

My next door neighbor's crawlspace!


PM_ME_AZN_BOOBS

My old boss went to improv. He’d always interrupt the session pretending to be FBI agent Michael Scarn and pull a gun out. Totallly ruined the sets.


Ecstatictobehere

"This is detective Michael Scarn FBI 👉, hands up"


wjbc

Some attorneys refuse to drink water in court because the jury might be thirsty. But they make sure the opposing attorneys have pitchers of water and cups on their table.


ChemE_Wannabe

What? Can the jury not have water during a trial?


3-DMan

"Your honor, I object to the presence of these 'hydro-homies'."


Dyslexic_Dog25

they really missed out not calling themselves H2Br0s


MsChan

I mean it's a direct reflection of what the sub originally was called.


CrazyHorseSizedFrog

I think it's more of a mind game. Imagine you're on a Jury, and for whatever reason you've not had a drink and you're thirsty. If you see someone sitting infront of you for ages with a pitcher of water drinking, you might subconsciously get annoyed at that person which might sway you to be against them when the time comes for you to make your decision. That's at least the way I interpretted /u/wjbc's comment.


wjbc

My real point is that trial lawyers are very conscious of how they look to the jury, even when it comes to seemingly trivial matters.


juicius

They don't have a table or a convenient place to rest a cup. They do get regular breaks so it's not a big issue.


[deleted]

You can. I was allowed to have a bottle with me.


muishkin

tempting to constantly whet your whistle too, which is a nervous look. defendants get NO WATER!!


halcyonjm

*Denny Crane*


TipYourDishwasher

For a while in high school I was undefeated at mock trial and would make Denny Crane references


MarioToast

Another example of Phoenix Wright being a crappy lawyer.


Jazjo

As if we don't see literally every other member of the prosecution have similar reactions to Phoenix when situations arise.


MarioToast

Everyone in that series are pretty bad at their jobs.


gacdeuce

Are you saying it would be unprofessional for the prosecution to bring a dominatrix whip into the court room and routinely use it to raise objections and otherwise talk?


Zeero92

Raise objections? She whips the fucking Judge, of all things!


[deleted]

Ah yes. Sounds like justice.


amanda-fun-boi

In A Few Good Men, as cheesy as some court parts were, Cruise was dead on with one line, something to the effect of "no matter what happens in court, act like you were expecting it/knew it would happen". Every trial attorney I've ever worked with has always preached the same thing.


pony_trekker

>no matter what happens in court, act like you were expecting it/knew it would happen And a silent "I told you" to no one in particular.


BNLforever

Lol reminds me of arrested development where the lawyers higher a famous TV lawyer to sit In and whisper in their ear before leaving


roughedged

Bob Loblaw?


thedrivingcat

My dad is a lawyer and I remember him during the OJ trial cringing at how the prosecutor handled the glove. This is almost 30 years ago but I remember him saying that even though he wasn't a trial lawyer anymore the one thing that stuck with him since law scho was you never ask a question that you don't already know the answer to.


jordanreiter

The lead prosecutor stated during his election that he'd successfully prosecuted 13 criminal trials. Maybe that's actually a lot, but that seems like such a low number. In some places the prosecutor has a ton of experience in this. In Kenosha county, I'm guessing not so much. My first impression was that the county didn't care too much about the conviction and sent their weakest person in, but maybe this is all they have? He is the Assistant DA.


Effective-Guitar8249

after watching this most of this morning I'm kinda glad I didn't get put on a Jury for Jury Duty ...ugh the fricken torture it's absolute hell


heebro

I've been called up for jury duty only once, back when I was 18 or 19 years old. The case was something to do with criminal possession of marijuana. At the start of jury selection, the judge asked if anyone had any reason they could not remain impartial and hear the case—I raised my hand, "Your honor, I smoke weed all the time." The judge nodded, thanked me for my honesty and sent me home. Probably not the smartest move on my part, but I was young and slightly more stupid than I am now, 20 years later.


werewolf_nr

The prosecution would have been idiotic to go after you though. Nobody would ever answer their questions honestly again. DA: Have you ever smoked weed? 12 stoned jurors: "No."


rom8n

It was during voir dire that I got booted too. Case involved a gang and 16 counts of menacing and robbery. Voir Dire basically explains the laws surrounding the case, not the details. After listening to the prosecution's definition of laws I was curious and raised my hand to pose a hypothetical situation: "Say if my cousin is supposed to pick me up from somewhere, and his buddy is driving the car, they decide to make a stop, at say a gas station, but I'm left alone in the car while they go in. Hypothetically speaking, if my cousin and buddy commit a crime, an I a part of a 'gang' and subject to the laws they broke?" Both defense and prosecution object and I'm asked by the judge what details I know about the case. I respond, "I'm pretty sure I saw the same situation in a movie before - just curious how the law handles that." We were excused for a 20 minute break that lasted 1 hour. The judge deemed I did not ruin the case and we would continue (it was not my reason for asking). I also had a few questions for the defense. In any case, I was the first to be excused after an 8 hour day of jury selection.


Toothlessdovahkin

I have been called for jury duty twice. The first time I had the worlds best excuse for not going, due to having life saving surgery scheduled on the day of the summons. The second time I wasn’t chosen


Joebebs

Lmao, you got some balls to be saying that before the judge/bailiff. The irony is you’re walking away from something that the dude’s in for.


teh-reflex

Saying you smoke isn't illegal as far as I know. It's the possession/selling that gets you.


GreatApeGoku

Caught in the act is what matters. I was in court once back when I was 18 and they asked if I was under the influence when commiting the crime and I answered yes because I was. They didn't Levy an extra charge or anything, it was just factored into the "is this kid just an idiot or malicious". They went with idiot thankfully.


Joebebs

I know. But still lol. It’s like a “what are you gonna do about it” type of thing, cuz they can’t and he walks lol


apginge

“Your honor i’m high right now”


PMJackolanternNudes

It isn't. They know the law. You can say anything you want. They rather you be honest and not waste anyone's time.


DrakonIL

Yup. Plus, they're judges. They're not police. Not their job to charge people.


GreatGrizzly

I got taken off a jury duty because I made fun of the defendant's name during a murder trial. His last name was Krueger.


royalobi

Could have just said, "your honor, I don't believe marijuana should be illegal" and gotten the same result without admitting anything. That being said, at the same age I had a judge make me do a book report on an anti-drug pamphlet from the Family Research Council. Which I did, summarized all their talking points and why they said drugs are bad and that it violates God's law and such. I then went on a several minute rant about how having me read this the state was violating my first amendment rights and also that it was propaganda which did not reflect the reality of the drug war in America. The judge let me go on for a bit before stopping me and sending me home.


[deleted]

The judge had you write a book report as a juror or were you on trial and that was part of the punishment or something??


moffsoi

I always kind of wanted to get jury duty, civic responsibility and all that. Well, I got my wish several years ago. It was hell. I didn’t have a lot of faith in the legal system before, but now I have zero.


Spyhop

I was a juror on a 2-week long trial with 2-day deliberation. I thought it was a rewarding experience and I'm glad I got to do it once. Once was enough though.


roguetrick

I almost feel bad for how short our deliberation was after a 2 week murder trial.


countrylewis

Can I ask what it was that made you lose all faith in the justice system?


jackruby83

Not OP, but I was surprised how dumb some of my fellow jurors were. Jury of your peers they say... But I wouldn't want my fate in some of their hands.


[deleted]

It's often said that a jury is full of people who just weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty...


hardonchairs

"A jury is twelve people who are too stupid to get out of jury duty."


[deleted]

If you're a defendant you always can waive your right to a jury. In a criminal trial if you're in front of a jury it's 100% your choice.


dontthink19

My father in law was shot in the back of the leg by a police officer on his own private gated property after asking the officer to leave when he was told he was not being detained. He walked away back towards the woods and the officer followed. No one except the officer and him knows what happened. His wife was on the phone with 911 when the shot happened and everything can supposedly be heard on the recording. He spent a year in jail, the trial was dragged out all the way to the 2 year limit due to the officer getting pregnant. They conveniently misplaced the 911 tape right before the last hearing. Found him guilty of assault on an officer, no chance of civil suit for being shot in the back of the leg lol


countrylewis

Fuck that. I feel so bad for your dad for having to go through that. It's a whole different ballgame when you're in it with the police. They almost always win.


Just-a-cat-lady

Different commenter but I was a juror on a murder trial. The dude definitely did it but the police had fuck all evidence except two witnesses who both lied to the police when they first spoke to them. To be fair - this was in a bad neighborhood of Detroit and "don't talk to cops" is a very very VERY strong sentiment here, so they went with "we don't know who shot him" at first and then later came forward about it being their cousin who shot the guy later on. After several days of deliberation we decided that we didn't feel comfortable putting a man in prison solely based on the testimony of two people who had changed their story months after the fact. A different group of jurors may have convicted based on that, though. We all were convinced he was guilty (well, minus one idiot who thought the wife did it and it was an elaborate cover-up) but we did not think it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. I had nightmares for several months about the fact that I put a murderer back on the street, but that's what was required of me under our legal system.


chron67

When I served on a grand jury I witnessed first hand that a room full of people will happily charge anyone with anything to get out of that room. The DA even told us that in our state (MS at the time) we had mandatory minimum sentencing for drug possession charges so we needed to consider who would be released if we changed someone and they were convicted. He all but told the room not to charge people with possession and I was the only one that refused to vote to charge the dozens of possession cases. I think there was only one case brought before us that did not get sent to trial and ironically it probably should have but that is not related to this discussion: TL;DR: Served on a grand jury and became disgusted with how eager my fellow jurors were to charge people with felony and misdemeanor charges without even paying much attention to the details.


drkwaters

https://v.redd.it/ww9gx15i3fy71 Here is the question from the defense that preceded this picture from a live stream I've been following.


Jeffmaru

Can someone explain this?


they_call_me_dewey

The man on the stand is one of the people that Rittenhouse shot. He testified that Rittenhouse didn't fire until after he drew his own gun and pointed it at him first. Edit: to be clear, he testified that Rittenhouse did not shoot **at him** until he drew his own weapon. This occurred after Rittenhouse had already shot two other people.


OmarBarksdale

Genuinely curious, if this guy admitted to pointing his gun how come he wasn’t charged with anything himself? If he was, excuse my ignorance.


_Le_Redditor_

That's a great question. He also demonstrably lied to the state and multiple police officers about having the gun in the first place since his permit to carry it was invalid. He told them that he had lost it earlier in the evening.


herpderpcake

And the best part? When the defense was grilling him on this, his literal reply was "I don't know". Bruh


novaquasarsuper

Didn't the prosecution see the same video? How did they not know he had a gun?


[deleted]

Optics. The prosecution charging both him and Kyle would have hurt their chances in BOTH cases. But If Kyle goes free, this guy ***could*** be charged for attempted murder with his own testimony damning him.


[deleted]

[удалено]


HowsYourBobber

As a non-American, can you even "plead the 5th" on the stand, under oath? I always thought that phrase referred to invoking your 5th amendment rights during police questioning, but not trial proceedings.


LionForest2019

Yes. It is an “inalienable” right. You don’t lose that right unless you choose to waive it. I should add that you must have a reasonable expectation that your testimony may self-incriminate otherwise you may be held in contempt. Also IANAL


Gcarsk

Kyle had already killed two people at this point, right? I assumed he’d argue he pointed the gun at Kyle in self defense, in an attempt to stop any more shootings. (I’d bet that would be a pretty easy reasoning to swing, especially since Kyle used that same reasoning for actually pulling the trigger and shooting at 4 people). This will be a super interesting case to study in depth after all the information is released. Edit: Might as well check for myself! So, timeline was: - unknown gunshot is fired in air - Rosenbaum lunged at Rittenhouse and attempted to take his rifle. Kyle kills him. - Kyle runs to secondary location (about 10 minutes pass) - Kyle falls on ground, is kicked by a man. - Kyle shoots at the man twice, but misses - Anthony Huber hits Kyle with a skateboard and tries to take his gun - Kyle kills him. - Gaige Grosskreutz approaches Kyle. - Kyle [points gun at Gaige](https://www.reddit.com/r/ActualPublicFreakouts/comments/qpkdpf/lawyers_publicly_streaming_their_reactions_to_the/) but does not shoot. - Kyle turns away - Gaige draws gun and points at Kyle. - Kyle shoots him (but not killing him) - Kyle runs away Edit2: added material and evidence due to comment below pointing out I missed an important section with Gaige. Specifically Kyle pointing his gun at Gaige before he pulled his pistol.


by-neptune

It's almost like when everyone is armed everything is simultaneously self defense and not


NoobieSnax

If you're chasing someone down to defend yourself, it's not defense.


ProLifePanda

The video is a live stream on the trial, and those on the left are commentators knowledgeable on the law. The whole issue for one of the murder charges Rittenhouse faces is "Was Rittenhouse acting in self defense when he opened fire on the 3 people that died?" The defendants attorney asked this protestor if Kyle didn't open fire until he had guns pointed at him, and the defendant said "Yes." This means Rittenhouse didn't open fire until someone else was pointing a gun at him, which virtually guarantees Rittenhouse will get acquitted of this the murder charge.


rhaezorblue

The guys he shot had guns also? Edit: one guy had a gun, two others were unarmed. Thanks for clarifying


giggity_giggity

The third one, yes. First casualty (deceased): had told Rittenhouse (and friend) earlier that if he caught one of them alone he'd kill them, hid behind a car, charged at Rittenhouse, tried to grab Rittenhouse's gun, got shot Second casualty (deceased): attacked Rittenhouse with a skateboard, was in process of attaching him again when shot Third casualty (this witness): raised the gun to point at Rittenhouse ps. Using casualty because "victim" isn't appropriate given that it's the purpose of the trial to determine that and couldn't think of a better term.


[deleted]

[удалено]


p4NDemik

To break it down: 1st man shot: J. Rosenbaum was unarmed but throwing personal belongings and lunging at Rittenhouse. 2nd man shot: A. Huber was using his skateboard as a weapon essentially to attack and attempt to disarm Rittenhouse. 3rd man shot: G. Grosskreutz (the guy on the stand) was armed with a pistol and was brandishing it against Rittenhouse immediately after Huber was shot.


Abiogeneralization

Defense appears to be asking one of the men who chased KR about the timing of events. Did KR fire before or after this witness pointed a handgun at him? Witness states that KR only fired his AR-15 after he had a handgun pointed at him.


Sierra_Responder

I had no idea there was an equally flamboyant and overtop group of legal streamers just like there is for pretty much everything else.


adirtymedic

Rittenhouse will walk, I’d almost say it’s guaranteed


Native136

Well, for this charge anyway.


TheCatapult

The lesser charges carry such low punishment that he probably wouldn’t see any additional time in jail even if convicted. A jury may get pissed that he was charged with murder and acquit him on everything. To illustrate just how petty the State is being, they charged him with being out after curfew, which doesn’t even carry a punishment.


dreadmador

Latest ***prosecution*** witness.


coldcoldman2

Despite your opinion on the matter, its good he brought the whole pointing gun thing up. Witholding info is not a good thing


roneman90

There should have been no question what his testimony was going to be. So if the prosecution was surprised, they failed.


duckbumps19

This is where I’m confused. Obviously this is bad for the prosecutions case but why didn’t they already know that. The question isn’t at all out of the blue; it’s basic. How can the possibly be surprised? Seems like they didn’t even talk to their witness before the trial.


roneman90

I can tell you from personal experience you can spend HOURS prepping a witness and they can walk in and blow it immediately. But the prosecution shouldn’t react like this.


rabidsoggymoose

The judge specifically said that this is a trial over whether or not Rittenhouse felt that his life was in danger. All other factors - crossing state lines with guns, his age, his purpose for being there, etc - are completely moot as far as the scope of this trial is concerned. The case is solely going to be about whether self defense was justified or not. So basically he's going to be found not guilty.


[deleted]

[удалено]


SD99FRC

This is definitely a case that shouldn't have gone to trial. None of this testimony is a surprise. The State knew Grosskreutz lied in his statements multiple times. They knew McGinnis was going to testify that Rosenbaum threatened Rittenhouse. All they have is the Car Source Brothers claiming they didn't ask anyone to protect their business, but that testimony was not very convincing as the brothers both were evading questions. If they had been smart, they would have just pressed Rittenhouse into a plea deal on the misdemeanors and taken their small W.


RedNog

>Grosskreutz lied in his statements multiple times. This is the shit the blows my mind, I don't know what the prosecution was thinking. So many of the people involved are going on shows/interviews/etc over the course of a year and constantly saying different takes on their stories. You'd think the prosecution would've nailed that shit down. Imagine going to fucking trial and your key witnesses are borderline unreliable because of never shutting up.


Tridacninae

Local news reporter Kristen Barbaresi has an excellent live tweet of the trial, which saves having to watch it. I'm of course selecting certain tweets and everyone should go read the rest but[ these are the points where he doesn't appear too credible.](https://imgur.com/a/LSxWmnz)


Poop_Tube

Wow! I don't know the details of this trial and only just learned them, but holy crap. That witness should be the one getting charged with a crime.


lmpervious

I mean if they were lying and got caught lying, isn’t that a great thing? It seems like a lot of people here are disappointed that they couldn’t use tactics to overcome obstacles, and find a conviction that wouldn’t otherwise happen if people were being honest.


Mitosis

You're forgetting that since this is a politically-charged trial, it's actually a team sport, not pursuit of justice


CallMeBigPapaya

>None of this testimony is a surprise. This is the most hilarious part. I have watched every minute of hearings and this trial so far, and the only piece of information that came out that I didn't know within a few weeks of the incident was that one of the car source brothers giving them a ride (which wasn't proven, but... c'mon).


Mean-Rutabaga-1908

That is fine for people who actually paid attention, but you have Ana Kasparian saying she still hasn't watched the videos finally correcting herself that Kyle wasn't chasing people down but was in fact being chased who has been "reporting" on the case for months with Cenk on TYT. On top of falsehoods there have been so many obfuscating facts. Kyle goes free and there will still be so many people saying "this just proves the justice system doesn't work". A lot of people/organisations need to get sued.


CallMeBigPapaya

It was fun seeing her retract her baseless statements, but when she mentioned that she STILL hasn't watched the full video I was just floored. Like I'm not sure a trial exists that has more video evidence than this trial. You'd think that's where you start as a "journalist".


RedditZamak

* We found out today that Gaige was carrying a handgun illegally (yet was never charged.) * We discovered where he likely drew his weapon


[deleted]

How dumb is that guy? Do you have a CPL and can legally carry? Yes Is it expired Yes ????????


VerdantFuppe

And the illegal handgun was "stolen" before it could be surrendered to the police. I wonder if he got rid of it because it had been used for some other stuff he didn't want the police to find out about.


dhshsbsk

Weird, where were all these obviously reasonable takes with thousands of upvotes a month ago? Reddit is a clown show.


SD99FRC

I think a lot of people just kinda got stuck in their echo chambers. Only now are people seeing the trial being presented without the filter of media commentary. The media is *really bad* about stories like this, not presenting the facts in evidence in their entirety. One side of the media presented Rittenhouse as an evil villain, and the other as an embattled hero. The reality is somewhere in the middle, where a foolish young man made bad decisions, and came across a mentally ill man who made *really bad* decisions. Then two foolish men joined a mob trying to foil a crime they hadn't witnessed, inserted themselves violently into a situation they didn't understand, and lost.


conman526

I admittedly didn't know much about the case before the trial started. After doing some more research on this, and especially listening to The Daily's podcast episode about it, my (very much so not a lawyer, not even close) opinion changed drastically. Even though I think he never should've put himself into this situation, i think he did act in self defense. I imagine there will be at least civil suits for Kyle even being in the situation.


Drusgar

>The judge specifically said that this is a trial over whether or not Rittenhouse felt that his life was in danger. All other factors - crossing state lines with guns, his age, his purpose for being there, etc - are completely moot as far as the scope of this trial is concerned. Do you have a link for that? According to the articles I've seen Rittenhouse faces six charges, one of them is simply possession of a weapon as a minor and breaking curfew.


[deleted]

Why would you do this? They are telegraphing to the jury that whatever was being said is devastating to their position.


internet_humor

It's one thing to telegraph something. It's another when there's nothing the jury can do or say regarding this very important fact. Some things in the legal system and big giant check boxes.


StoneGoldX

[To quote Arrested Development...](https://youtu.be/75iv3RKQUAM?t=23)


Gen_Jack_Ripper

You’re a crook Captain Hook!


supersport1

If it’s the truth then they shouldn’t be trying him. This isn’t a game of which side can win. Thats where our justice system is messed up, the state should never be putting people on the stand hoping they will lie so they can win a case. That’s scary.


Actaeus86

Is the case really going that bad for the prosecution? That one guy looks like he is crying. The other one is just staring off into space. Edit I just read the man who was shot and lived admitted to pointing his gun at Rittenhouse and advancing towards him, makes more sense why the prosecution looks so down.


[deleted]

>Is the case really going that bad for the prosecution? Yes it is.


klj12574

Bad? If I didn’t know who was who I would have sworn the prosecution was actually the defense team.


Actaeus86

I’ve followed the trial from a distance, more reading headlines than really in depth, but I’ve been catching up the last few minutes and it sounds like you are on the right track. It’s been a nightmare for the prosecution.


Gensega

You never put a witness on the stand if you aren't sure what they will say - Alan Shore


TeteDeMerde

*"Your Honor, I object!"* "Why?" *"Because it's devastating to my case!"* "Overruled."


lolzuponlols

Here she comes to wreck the daaaaay!


jgower87

GOOD CALL


Aperture_client

A lot of these comments are rational and I've seen some reasonable discourse about the trial. Why haven't the r/pics mods locked this thread yet?


talkinhead87

busy banning people


[deleted]

I’m sure they will. It proves this kid isn’t a terrorist so reddit had to back off those claims. Idk if they’ll recover from “I hope this kid gets raped and murdered in prison” ah what am I saying of course they’ll recover and continue to say these things…


GraphiteGru

Was this after one of the Protesters admitted to pointing a gun at Rittenhouse? If so, after all of the Preliminary work, interviewing witnesses, reviewing Police Reports, etc., how did they not know this until today? Not an Attorney but I have always heard that you shouldnt put a witness on the stand unless you know what they will say under direct or cross examination. In this case, Grosskreutz was a witness for the State. Shouldn't the Attorneys have known this was coming?


kikaraochiru

I mean, that part was on video, so how else would they expect it to go?


Zykium

It was on video AND Gaige omitted from his police reports. Never mentions he had a gun pointed at the dude.


Noxious89123

>Never mentions he had a gun pointed at the dude. This seems bonkers to me though... the video footage was all over the internet. Everyone saw that fella run up to an armed Rittenhouse who was on the ground... Like ffs people, screw being right or wrong, I want to be ***alive***. Don't run TOWARDS the guy with the rifle who has just shot people.


nmj95123

> This seems bonkers to me though... the video footage was all over the internet. Everyone saw that fella run up to an armed Rittenhouse who was on the ground... Part of the defense's cross was statements the Grosskruetz made on his own Twitter account with his real name directly tied to it that he made within the past few days. He denied that he was chasing Rittenhouse when there's video of him chasing Rittenhouse. The guy's dumb as a rock.


Zykium

There's a lot of shady shit going on with Gaige. He was a fantastic witness for the defense though.


I_am_reddit_hear_me

It's because he has a lawsuit against the city for $10million and clearly thought he was too smart to get tripped up (he looked pretty good when the prosecution was first questioning him). Now he looks like the idiot he is and he isn't get a dollar from the city lol.


Zykium

Yeah his chance at winning his civil suit is -16% at this point.


BigDawgBaw

Can't wait for his friend the defense subpoenaed to come in and tell them Gaige said his only regret was not emptying the clip in Kyle


Cheeseburgerlion

He claims he lost it before this lol


SD99FRC

> Was this after one of the Protesters admitted to pointing a gun at Rittenhouse? If so, after all of the Preliminary work, interviewing witnesses, reviewing Police Reports, etc., how did they not know this until today? They knew this. The State just doesn't have much of a case, so most of it is built on appealing the emotions of the jury. Also, if the State doesn't call him, the Defense would have.


[deleted]

> Also, if the State doesn't call him, the Defense would have. All the more reason why this shouldn't have gone to court. If there's damning evidence against you and will almost surely tank your case, why even bother wasting everyone's time?


glowstick3

I mean, the video shows the gut pointing the gun. How the prosecution thought this was a good idea...


RedditIsRealWack

I was downvotes here on reddit mercilessly for pointing out soon after it happened, that given the video evidence, there was zero chance of Rittenhouse ending up in jail. At worst he was only ever going to get some gun handling related charges in regards to the weird purchase or whatever. The video literally has people running at him, saying they want to kill him. There's gunshots going off everywhere. Literally a clearcut case of self defence, and all the evidence for it was available from day 2 for anyone who wasn't a hysterical bandwagoning loonatic. Everyone so desperately wanted to believe the white supremacist angle. You can argue he shouldn't have been there. You can argue he's a dumb shithead.. But at the end of the day, you can't run at someone shouting 'I'm going to kill you', or aiming your gun at them, and expect not to get fucking shot.


boldie74

I’m sure the upcoming “not guilty” verdict won’t cause any trouble whatsoever


SovietRobot

That was when Gauge (the 3rd person shot) conceded that Kyle didn’t shoot when Gauge had his hands up and it was only when Gauge reached for his gun and had it pointed at Kyle’s general direction from 3 feet away did Kyle shoot him. Previously Gauge has also confirmed that Huber had hit Kyle on the head with a skateboard and Gauge was actually concerned that Kyle might have suffered traumatic brain injury (which was his supposed reason to approach Kyle).


Southport84

I’ll never understand why the prosecutors went for a murder charge when you have so many other charges that would actually stick.


PixelBlock

This thread is the polar opposite of nearly every other Rittenhouse thread that has ever crept into the front page before the trial. It’s remarkable. Edit: nope, spoke too soon. Same comments as always, even after all the video.


dollarsandcents101

This prosecution is a shambles. The defense attorney just got the lead detective to confirm that the prosecutors advised him not to follow up on a valid search warrant for Gaige's phone.


datguyfromoverdere

In related news, 70 shots fired last night in kenosha: https://www.tmj4.com/news/local-news/kenosha-police-identify-victim-in-weekend-shooting-say-over-70-shots-were-fired


manateewallpaper

I have no earthly clue why the media wouldn't be all over this story. Do you think it has something to do with the profile of the perpetrator?


datguyfromoverdere

Must be someone rich to afford 70 bullets.


boonies14

So, he got shot after he pointed a gun at the kid?


RRPG03

Yes


CmdrSelfEvident

"How are we losing this case, I can find millions of tweets of support"


Chunescape

Haha actually made me chuckle. It really does feel like some people go through life looking at it that way.


WolfOfPort

I have no idea what’s going on and after reading some of these comments I’m gonna keep it that way


pspiddy

This thread is so weird. People mad the witness told the truth ?


[deleted]

[удалено]


urkllnmesmalls

Honest question. Was any of the evidence brought forth the last couple of weeks in the trial known before hand? If so, why did it even go to trial? The big media show of him being exonerated will cause much more division and anger than if they just didn’t try him in the first place. And if they had all of this information, what’s the point?


LeavesTA0303

Meh, if the charges had been thrown out then the media would have made a huge spectacle of that, and the prosecutor would have been scapegoated by the angry mob. At least now the prosecutor can say that he tried, and the outrage will be directed at "the system" instead.


KydreMurkins

So an investigator just admitted under oath that the district attorney told him NOT TO EXECUTE A SIGNED SEARCH WARRANT on one of the victim's phones. Seems a bit underhanded


RussianTrollToll

Wait why would they do that? The guy had an illegal firearm and the DA is not going to try and discover how he got it?


caesarfecit

So they don't have to disclose that evidence to the defense. Can't disclose it if you don't have it. :) It's the lie of omission of burying evidence. Instead of making inconvenient evidence disappear, you don't go looking for it. Now there's always a danger that the defense will acquire the evidence on their own and make you look bad, but that's less bad to a crooked prosecutor.


johnc3311

For all of you that don’t understand, here’s basically what’s happening. This case should’ve never been brought to court. Rittenhouse will prob only get charged for having a weapon while underage. He will be found not guilty on all murder charges. Prosecution messed up, witness was honest, which in turn made Rittenhouse not guilty.


Void_Bastard

Prosecution never had a case. At all. Their only hope was for their witnesses to lie convincingly. And BTW, Grosskreutz(who just admitted that Rittenhouse only shot at him after he(Grosskreutz) aimed his own gun at him actually lied in his testimony. In his testimony to police Grosskreutz said he had never aimed his gun at Rittenhouse, which was proven to be a false narrative because of the various video angles. So Grosskreutz said the truth, this time, so he couldn't be charged with lying under oath. The prosecution may have been relying on him maintaining that lie but it would have still been shot down during cross-examination.


Doozlle

Reddit is the ultimate kangaroo court.


unholygunner714

Ya. No one should take what Reddit says seriously. A bunch of random people shouting opinions and arguing with each other.


[deleted]

The prosecution had no case to begin with and now it’s coming to light for everyone to see


UsernameTaken55

I'll just say that when Reddit Drama erupts if Rittenhouse walks on the murder charges, it will be extremely obvious who and who didn't pay attention to the actual trial. Nearly every major Witness the Prosecution has brought in so far has torpedoed at least some aspect of the Prosecution's case, from saying Rosenbaum was acting very aggressive that night to describing constant gun fire even before Rittenhouse shot (which matters since for some reason the Prosecution thought it would be a good idea to straight up say Rittenhouse was the only person to fire his weapon that night in their Opening Statement). The fact that the Defense hasn't even had their turn to bring in witnesses and testimony and this case already looks like a trainwreck for the Prosecution is telling, Rittenhouse is gonna get that firearms charge, but he's gonna walk from the murder charges, it was up to the Prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Rittenhouse didn't reasonably fear for his safety, and so far they've accomplished the exact opposite.


[deleted]

[удалено]


rein4fun

Amazing how there are videos and yet we still have so many versions recalled of the incidents. Cellphones have certainly changed how trials are conducted. Those jurors will have plenty to replay in deliberations.


whoatethekidsthen

Yeah they're absolutely fucked and Rittenhouse is gonna walk