The defense just turned over Rittenhouse to the prosecutors for cross examination. The cross began by confronting him that he wanted to kill these people.
...Rittenhouse admitted that he used deadly force but refused to say that he wanted to kill them. He insisted he was trying to stop attacks upon him.
The judge just stopped the questioning. The judge just warned that the prosecutor is "right on the borderline and better stop." That admonishment may be due to the prosecutor referring to Rittenhouse not previously giving his story.
... The prosecutor is still stumbling in asking questions that he did not know the answer to. He misstated the Illinois law and repeatedly stated false factual assertions that Rittenhouse corrected. This is a continuation of a poor performance on direct.
...The prosecutor just blew another question on why he arranged for the purchase of an AR-15 rather than a pistol or a shotgun.
...The judge just slapped down the prosecutor correctly for his questioning on the law etc. The prosecutor just moved to strike the answer to his own question based on hearsay. However, the judge admonished him that his questioning is eliciting irrelevant answers.
... The prosecutor now seems to be putting Call of Duty on trial. It is a bad thing when the witness seems more focus than the prosecutor. I do not understand why the questioning seems so improvisational and casual. He could be far more effective by getting to the shootings IMO.
...The prosecutor is hitting him on the TikTok image with his gun, which was a stronger exhibit given the posting "I am just trying to be famous."
...The judge just stopped the questioning again. The prosecutor did better when he got to the shooting but he is still being imprecise and the defense has objected to these questions. The prosecutor just blew up at the prosecutor again for good reason.
...The prosecutor has been crossing the line on existing court orders. The judge is right that the prosecutor should not have just introduce questions that the court previously declined to allow (and held the issue in abeyance).
...The prosecutor is insisting that he is given this license under an impeachment theory. The prosecutor seems to be admonishing the judge now. This is perfectly bizarre. The court's point was simply that he should have asked in advance, which the prosecutor just acknowledged.
...The judge just said that he is also concerned with a mistrial given the prosecutor's comments on pre-trial silence which was outrageous.
...Quite frankly, this rivals the prosecution in the O.J. Simpson case in unrelenting self-inflicted wounds.
...The prosecutor just elicited a series of answers that benefit the defendant like the fact that he did not buy the bullets, load the gun, or rack the bullet. While the judge is enraged, I expect the jury is just confused...and the defense should be delighted so far
...There are much stronger points of attack for the prosecution, but like a bad gambler at Vegas, the prosecutor keep coming back. Now the judge has again had to intervene to challenge that the prosecutor has been effectively testifying. They just broke for lunch.
...This has been painful to watch. Binger at points seems to be chastising Rittenhouse for not listening to the protesters or mocking the notion that throwing bricks at police heavy vehicles are ever going to do real harm...
...The prosecution seems to be shrinking the spectrum of possibilities from a hung jury to an acquittal. If Binger continues on this path, he risks narrowing it further to a spectrum from acquittal to quick acquittal...
...As a criminal defense attorney, I simply do not see the logic in this line of questioning. You can attack his claim that he was really there to render aid, but it is hardly compelling to attack the notion of seeking to render aid in an angry mob.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
