Kyle Rittenhouse, previous owner of a Smith & Wesson M&P15

[RVInit]

For the record, I AM NOT GETTING MY TAKES IN THIS CASE FROM TWITTER! I don’t know why anyone thought that. And I am concerned.

I'm so sorry I put that as a response to your post. I should have posted it as a new comment because I wasn't actually responding specifically to you. I sincerely apologize for that! I'm usually better about making a new post.

[Foggy]

Defense calling Kyle Rittenhouse!

srsly?

[RVInit]

I just wandered into my bedroom where the TV is on. Defendant is on the stand. Holy crap. He lied all night long, I am surprised they are putting him on. They are probably relying on no predominantly white jury is going to want to put a baby faced white boy away. I guess that is good strategy. I have to get back to work now and have to watch later.

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

I watched the Daily Caller videographer’s testimony. It was emotionally difficult for him. Rittenhouse did not look at the video portions which showed Rosenbaum being helped by the videographer. Rittenhouse looked somber throughout this testimony.

I agree with RVInit’s new assessment: Guilty on Rosenbaum, Not guilty on skateboarder, guilty on Grosskreutz, guilty on weapons charge.

[June bug]

For the record, I AM NOT GETTING MY TAKES IN THIS CASE FROM TWITTER! I don’t know why anyone thought that. And I am concerned.

Me too, filly.

[Kendra]

Are those crocodile tears I'm seeing?

[Foggy]

There's only one thing a prosecutor wants if Kyle testifies - you want him to lose his temper and show some real anger in front of the jury. It's psychological warfare in court, and that is your goal, because the jury needs to see just how much of an angry little self-important punk ass he really is.

I would piss him off from the very first question.

He [will] lose his temper in five minutes and you [will] see the real Kyle, the murderer, in the room.

And remember ... angry people make mistakes. It is ALWAYS, INVARIABLY, 1000% INCREDIBLY TRUE that you are better off when the other guy gets angry and you keep your cool.

How to do cross-examination on a murderer. Make him lose his temper in front of the jury and the verdict becomes a slam dunk.

[raison de arizona]

[Dr. Ken]

Weird bit of side eye to the jury at 41 seconds in. "Are they buying this?"

[The Montananist]

I would never have put an accused murderer on the stand. However, it is their call and I always had to respect that even when it was very strongly against my advice. I think every defense attorney has been in this situation where the client insists on testifying. It rarely went well in my experience. A good prosecutor will get them riled up early.

[Dr. Ken]

So if Kyle was there for "first aid" as he claims at what point did he perform any first aid on those he shot?

[Suranis]

Either I'm a very cruel person, or I just didn't buy that performance for a second. Completely dry eyed crying.

[Dr. Ken]

Either I'm a very cruel person, or I just didn't buy that performance for a second. Completely dry eyed crying.

Reminded me of the fake crying in Tropic Thunder

[raison de arizona]

[Foggy]

Werd.

[Maybenaut]

So if Kyle was there for "first aid" as he claims at what point did he perform any first aid on those he shot?

Or on anyone else, at all?

[Maybenaut]

Defense motion to reconsider the ruling on minor gun possession charge was curtly denied "for the reasons in ADA Kraus' brief".



At the pre-trial hearing, the denial of the initial motion was a tad tentative -- "I'm going to deny it for now, but that's no guarantee I won't re-examine this" followed by remarks on how statutes have to be clear enough for people of ordinary intelligence to understand "so I'm going to deny the motion subject to reconsideration without motion, I want to give more study to this, and believe me, its not because I haven't looked at it extensively at this point".

Color me shocked. If he’s convicted on the gun charge he can appeal, and if the appellate court decides the law doesn’t apply to 17 year olds, it can explain why this case is distinguishable from Marcus Fultz’s.

► Show Spoiler

It’s not, except in ways that make this case more aggravated.

[raison de arizona]

grain of salt, consider the source, but


Better source? (@UALawSchool Prof |Legal analyst @MSNBC @NBCNews |Podcasts #SistersInLaw & Cafe Insider|Obama US Atty |25 year fed'l prosecutor)

Joyce Alene
@JoyceWhiteVance
·
Nov 10, 2021
Rittenhouse: that question about the defendants silence was awfully close to a mistrial.
Joyce Alene
@JoyceWhiteVance
Although, if you’re the defense, you may be happy enough with how this trial is going, that you don’t want a mistrial

[pipistrelle]

I watched without sound. That was faker crying than I’ve seen on some toddlers.

[Suranis]

I watched without sound. That was faker crying than I’ve seen on some toddlers.

Pretty pathetic even with sound, believe me.

[raison de arizona]

Haven't found a video source without the moron crew commenting yet, but here is the admonishment.

[Dr. Ken]

I watched without sound. That was faker crying than I’ve seen on some toddlers.

Reminds me of my ex. When she was on the stand she cried up a storm. Then on recess she was laughing it up with her lawyer

[pipistrelle]

I need help on this from a IAAL.

[andersweinstein]

Boy judge is absolutely reaming Binger for trying to question about the CVS video without asking the judge in advance, after an admonition for starting cross examination with questions about defendants post-arrest silence. He is angry. Still ongoing.

[neeneko]

So, if I am understanding that clip correctly, the prosecutor commented about Rittenhouse tailoring his story after other things were introduced, and the judge feels this bumps up agains the 5th amendment?