↓
 
Home » Rittenhouse verdict watch

Rittenhouse verdict watch

The New Neo Posted on by

I’m going to be traveling most of today, and if a verdict comes down there’s a good chance I may be out of computer coverage. So I’m putting up this thread just in case.

Comments

Rittenhouse verdict watch — 37 Comments

  1. This is beginning to remind me of the Zimmerman trial, in which jurors took a very long time to return an acquittal which shouldn’t have taken very long.

  2. A court marshal reported that the jury was 10 to 2 for acquittal and the two holdouts for guilty gave the mob as their reason. Fear of violence. Valid fear in my opinion.

  3. I’d be somewhat skeptical of Posobiec’s account, in part because he makes reference to federal marshalls and not county bailiffs. Also, as of now, the jury has yet to send any notes to the judge indicating they are deadlocked. The jury asked for copies of a segment of the jury instructions and of a video entered into evidence. I’m out of my element, but I think had the foreman notified the judge that he had intimidated jurors on his hands, they could be subject to examination by the judge and replaced with alternates.

  4. Read this on the internet:
    “In order to be able to watch the videos the jury has been moved back into the courtroom to use the media player and TV there. The judge had the room checked for recording devices by the bailiffs. He ordered Court Tv to shut down their equipment. Everyone has left the courtroom.
    Any bets on whether this is getting recorded despite the Judge’s order?”

    Much discussion about whether jury is viewing the video provided to defense attorneys or the HD version held back be prosecutors.

  6. From what I now read, the drone footage business is much worse than I suspected. Instead of just doing dodgy manipulations of low-res footage, they withheld the hi-res footage from the defense, then intentionally degraded the hi-res footage with compression selected to convey a false impression to the jury.

    https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2021/11/17/withheld-evidence-in-rittenhouse-trial-prosecutors-kept-the-high-def-video-to-themselves-n1533827

    This is nothing less than the prosecution withholding evidence and tampering with evidence.

    I am not a lawyer and all that, but surely this should damage the prosecution’s case, if not result in a mistrial and perhaps even legal charges filed against the prosecution.

    Utterly outrageous.

  8. Hmm…if we are to believe this story from some comments:
    ___________________________________

    The video was originally airdropped to a detective’s iPhone. That puts it in his Photo Library.

    The detective EMAILED the video to the defense from his iPhone. The iPhone compresses the video from his Photo Library, and attaches it to the email.

    The prosecutor eventually admitted to it, after a break.

    Don’t interpret this as a defense of the prosecution. This was just one in a long string of violations, and it doesn’t matter whether it was intentional, or not.

    https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/victoria-taft/2021/11/17/breaking-rittenhouse-defense-moves-for-mistrial-on-hocus-pocus-out-of-focus-video-n1533994
    ___________________________________

    So, perhaps utterly incompetent.

    Is this how digital evidence is handled? Just airdrop a crucial video to a detective’s phone, then the detective emails the compressed file copy to the defense?

  9. I read somewhere that the prosecutors whined that the defense could have asked for it on a flash drive and their failure to do that is on them. They “didn’t mean to” withhold the high-definition version. Oh.

    I very much hope that the delay is because a juror needs to be convinced to acquit and that’s why they’re asking to see this video again. But if there’s a conviction, or a hung jury, the motion to dismiss charges becomes a live issue, it seems to me, and with prejudice would be appropriate. I don’t think this prosecution has been honest.

  10. Lately I’ve become unimpressed with the judge’s harrumphing over all of these icky-looking violations. So is the prosecution, I suspect. I doubt he’s going to really enforce consequences on the state at this point. Besides, have the ADAs not essentially called his bluff by now?

    It is curious how much attention this trial has received – perhaps comparable to the Chauvin one in that respect (and that of his three colleagues is still pending, no?). I’m just a little puzzled why no alpha-dog prosecutors seem to have been imported for the Rittenhouse case. I suppose that might indicate that from the point of view of that segment of the Establishment which serves the ‘Successor Ideology,’ this trial, while being indeed important, is perhaps somewhat second-tier. Or that bunch may feel it doesn’t want to press its luck at the moment.

  11. @Philip Sells:

    “It is curious how much attention this trial has received – perhaps comparable to the Chauvin one in that respect (and that of his three colleagues is still pending, no?). I’m just a little puzzled why no alpha-dog prosecutors seem to have been imported for the Rittenhouse case.”

    Perhaps the more more switched on guys higher up the food chain took a swerve on the option to participate in this judicial lynching with an eye to personal longevity in uncertain times.

    Pretty good odds on the Chauvin job despite the obscene injustice of his verdict and sentencing — there’s not much love for the police at either end of the spectrum… but Rittenhouse is a symbol. A very potent symbol. The nose to the ground big brain types nose it.

    PS: Kudos for giving ‘Successor Ideology’ an outing. This term needs to get about more.

  14. Powerline posted this today about the school boards attacking parents and pretending they are the victims – sound familiar?

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2021/11/a-defeat-for-the-loudoun-county-school-board.php

    I happened to spot a book in my library I hadn’t thought of for years, because it’s title grabbed my attention. So, I glanced through it kind of at random.

    Amazingly accurate descriptions of some of the insanity going on in America, driven by the demons of the Left.

    “The Devils of Loudun” by Alduous Huxley.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Devils_of_Loudun

    Yes, yes, the subject matter is not the same; I’m looking at the psycho-social similarities.

  15. Legal Insurrection post by Neo.

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/11/on-the-larger-goals-of-the-left-in-bringing-rittenhouse-to-trial/
    “Stamping out the right to self-defense”

    Commenters
    thalesofmiletus:

    We know their goals. The prosecutor said it openly in his closing arguments. This case is bigger than Kyle. They are trying to set the precedent that if you have a gun, you forfeit your right to self-defense. If they win and convict Kyle, they will run with that. Suddenly, you can’t use a gun for self-defense. So why would you even need a gun in the first place, unless you’re planning to overthrow the government. At which point, they can repeat that statement over and over and raise a generation of kids who believe guns are only evil insurrection tools. After that, it’s way easier to ban them.

    This is bigger than one boy who defended himself. They are playing the long game, and their end goal is banning guns.

    MajorWood:

    Five years ago I said that the entire Oberlin-Gibsons battle was about maintaining the right to use “racist” as their ultimate weapon. Why else spend $10M in lawfare. So it is perfectly consistent to say that the entire Rittenhouse “persecution, not prosecution” was about eliminating the practical concept of self-defense. I think that the libs are about to discover that it has the opposite effect, because the most dangerous person is the one who is backed into a corner. The end result might become pre-emptive self-defense.

  16. Awaiting a “They coulda been my sons”-type comment from “POTUS” regarding the saintly three (two of them alas deceased)—though in this case, Biden would have, most unusually for him, spouting truth….

    Regarding the saint who did survive, albeit, without one bicep—and, miraculously, with a disappeared DUI charge!…
    https://hotair.com/john-s-2/2021/11/17/this-dui-video-of-gaige-grosskreutz-is-pretty-interesting-n429845
    Key grafs:
    “…Just six days before he took the stand, Grosskreutz was before a judge himself at a hearing at which a pending DUI charge – a second offense that saw him three times over the legal limit – was dismissed on a technicality.
    “Grosskreutz’s attorney successfully filed a Motion to Suppress Evidence on the basis that the traffic stop from which it had been obtained had been unlawful….”

    Yep, a most “interesting” fellow….

  17. I think, from a comment the judge made, that he has the option of taking up the defense motions on improper prosecution after the verdict, and may do so, if the jury convicts, especially since they are paying considerable attention to the manipulated video. I’m hoping, and he may be hoping, an acquittal will make that moot.

  18. It’s hard to figure how self defense is disputed in this case, but was fully accepted for the Capitol Police officer who shot & killed the unarmed Ashli Babbit.

  19. I was shocked that so many big law bigwigs volunteered pro bono to support the government in the Chauvin prosecution. It made for awful optics, with Chauvin’s single attorney from the union pool versus the Minnesota AG’s office plus the pro bono attorneys. I always thought that the point of pro bono legal work was to make sure that everyone had quality representation. Volunteering for the state against a badly outgunned defense attorney is basically the anthesis of that.

    To Philip Sells point, I can’t speak to why the Wisconsin AG stayed out of the Rittenhouse case, but as for private practice attorneys, it really was unusual for them to get involved in the Chauvin case in behalf of the government. I’m happy that, so far, that phenomenon seems to have been a one time thing.

  20. “NY Post” on a roll:
    “Evil propaganda: 10 debunked heinous lies about Kyle Rittenhouse”—
    https://nypost.com/2021/11/17/10-debunked-heinous-lies-about-kyle-rittenhouse-devine/

    “School board bullies Twisted measure to silence voices of dissent— arrest them”—https://nypost.com/2021/11/17/twisted-measure-to-silence-voices-at-school-board-meetings-arrest-them/

    “Schumer, Biden offer utter bull to ‘fix’ the high gas prices they’ve intentionally given us”—
    https://nypost.com/2021/11/17/schumer-biden-offer-utter-bull-to-fix-the-high-gas-prices-theyve-intentionally-given-us/

    From the people who brought us “Hunter Biden” unplugged…

    File under: Paper of Record…well, together with the “Babylon Bee”…

  21. “…shocked…”

    But given the “progressive” twisted sense of ethics (AKA the lynch-gang, hang-’em-high morality of the Democrats and their supporters)
    it’s actually a good thing: “piling on” the pre-judged perp in the name of “virtue signaling”.

    Stigmatizing and black-balling HE who should be stigmatized and black-balled.

    IOW, scoring free brownie points for free!

    If only it were shocking….

  22. It’s hard to figure how self defense is disputed in this case, but was fully accepted for the Capitol Police officer who shot & killed the unarmed Ashli Babbit.

    It’s easy to figure. Three quarters of the lawyers in the United States are Democrats, and professional-managerial class Democrats fancy we live in a society of orders with different standards of conduct for each order. There’s their order, who make determinations of value, there’s they’re minions and clients (which include officer Byrd and BLM / Antifa thugs and thug wannabes), and there’s us peasants.

  25. Related (exposing the Cultist-in-Chief):
    “How will the president decide to value the prospects of the Iran deal against $6 per gallon gasoline? By blaming the Saudis.”
    https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/biden-middle-east-dilemma-saudis

    + Bonus:
    “Hannah Arendt on Anti-Racism as a Totalitarian Ideology”
    https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/hannah-arendt-antiracism-little-rock

    Which precisely describes “Biden”‘s strategy…

    Indeed, blamers gotta blame…as the planned destruction of the country by the Democratic Party continues apace.

  26. At least(!?) they’re consistent….
    “Banking industry sounds alarm about Soviet-educated comptroller pick with Marxist ties”
    https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/finance/thbanking-industry-sounds-alarm-about-soviet-educated-comptroller-pick

    (And boy are they ever quacking like ducks….)

    As far as “something_very_peculiar_is_happening” goes,
    here’s another contender:
    “The Number Of Americans On The Dole Mysteriously Jumps Back Above 3 Million”
    https://www.zerohedge.com/personal-finance/number-americans-dole-mysteriously-jumps-back-above-3-million
    Key graf:
    “…However, amid all that good news, something odd happened…”

    The gang that couldn’t destroy straight…?

  27. “Many top law firms donated 90% to Biden and Democrats”

    Here’s a legitimate exercise of power under the commerce clause. Have a federal statute which has these provisions:

    1. No law firm operating in the United States may include a partner or employ an associate licensed to practice in a foreign country, or have offices in a foreign country.

    2. Except as specified, no firm may encompass attorneys who are in sum admitted to more than one state or territorial bar except as provided explicitly in this statute.

    3. A firm may encompass attorneys admitted in as many as four state or territorial bars if the states / territories in question are Hawaii, Guam, Saipan, American Samoa and there offices confined to those territories.

    4. A firm may encompass attorneys admitted in three state bars if the states in question are one of three sets: Pennsylvania / New Jersey / Delaware with their offices limited to one or another of the following counties (list); Maryland / DC / Virginia with their offices limited to one or another of the following counties (list); West Virginia / Kentucky / Ohio with their offices limited to one or another of the following counties (list).

    5. A firm may encompass attorneys admitted in two states if the states in question are of one of the following pairs [list about 16 pairs] and their offices are limited to the following sets of counties [list a set of borderland counties for each].

    6. No attorney in these United States may be admitted to practice in a federal court if he is not also licensed to practice in a state whose geographic jurisdiction intersects with the geographic jurisdiction in the state in question. Ditto admission to practice in front of federal administrative tribunals.

    7. Interstate contracts and agreements between law schools and prospective law students must offer the following menu of options or a subset thereof, and no other. Note, offering a more time-consuming program would require one offer all the less time consuming options.

    a. Working lawyer’s degree (48 credits over a calendar year, course content sketched)

    b. Certificate and degree programs in specialized segments of law, some requiring a working lawyer’s degree, some not. These could range from a three week workshop to a calendar year in length. (List practice areas in question).

    c. Judge’s degrees; 36 credits with the prerequisite of a working lawyer’s degree.

    d. Legal scholar’s degree; some course work and a dissertation atop a judge’s degree.

    Add to that a model law on bar admissions which allows any aspirant to sit for the examination, not just those holding law degrees.

  29. MSNBC banned from the Kenosha courthouse for the duration of the trial, after an employee was stopped by police for following the jury bus.

  32. Kate: “MSNBC banned from Kenosha courthouse . . .”

    One does wonder just what were they thinking? Did they think they wouldn’t be noticed? What were they planning on doing with whatever information they got? Was it simply to see if something happened to the jury bus? (yea, I could see that as being newsworthy; but, they should report the news not be it!)

    And, yea, JimNorCal – way to “blend in” – run a red light!

    The sad part of this will be the broader scope of such an incident. Judge Schroeder has already stated that he will think twice about allowing TVs into his next trial because of this kind of nonsense. This might just cause him and other judges to say no more TVs in the trial.

    Which I think will be bad for everyone since we will then only get the “what’s happening?” from the MSM. I, for one, have appreciated that we have been able to watch this trial without the filter of the news media.

    So many times with this case I have watched the trial; then watched ABC World News Tonight and scratched my head thinking there is no way that they are talking about the same trial that I watched that day, is it? Their “interpretation” of the trial is so different from what I watched!

    Earlier in the trial someone was caught recording the jurors walking into the court house. I understood at that time they just made sure the video was deleted from his phone and he was let go. Now, are they going to let this guy go too? So, why aren’t these people who are doing these kinds of stupid things being charged with, at least, some sort of misdemeanor? Even if they don’t mean to intimidate the jury they cannot be so stupid as to think that it won’t come across that way. Perhaps, as seems to be common among members of the MSM, they have just a bad case of “tunnel vision” that they don’t see the broader picture?

  35. geoffb, that “excuse” means that the “news” people and activists have no commitment to a fair justice system. They know perfectly well that the threat that jurors will be doxxed is one of the reasons jurors are afraid to decide against the mob’s wishes.

  36. Jonathan Turley, on Twitter, calls this move by NBC “moronic.” He also says that in fact the judge can rule on the mistrial motions after the verdict is delivered. The judge, one of whose jobs is to defend the rights of the accused, could set aside a partial or even full conviction if necessary. An acquittal would be better for the defendant.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

↑