The defense just called Black, a self-defense and use of force expert. It is a wise choice.Keep in mind that Wisconsin has a very favorable self-defense standard for the defense. Once Rittenhouse claims that he acted to repel an attack, they have the burden to disprove that claim
...Black can reinforce Rittenhouse's subjective testimony with objective standards that apply to law enforcement and private citizens in the use of force.
...Frankly, the prosecutors must feel like they are feverishly moving around the deck chairs on the Titanic. This prosecution began to sink when it collided with its first key witness who contradicted their theory of the case.
...There is a break as prosecutors object to Black videography evidence. I am surprised that the prosecution waited to object to the testimony in front of the jury. It can make the jurors wonder why the prosecutors do not want them to see the evidence...
...it is always better to raise such objections before the testimony or outside of the jury. The prosecution is raising a notice objection that the testimony is beyond the scope.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
...They are turning to the provocation instruction. The prosecution is arguing that Rittenhouse was not provoking by being at the scene with a gun but that the provocation was raising his weapon. That is an interesting distinction...
...Many in the media have argued that the provocation was appearing at the protests with a gun but the prosecutors just confirmed that they are not arguing that.
...The prosecution is making a strong case that it should be able to argue provocation with an instruction. They are right to note that they have evidence that can be argued as provocation and should be able to argue that interpretation of the evidence.
The judge in the Rittenhouse case is weighing a critical question of the misdemeanor charge on possessing a dangerous weapon. He is suggesting that the law is vague and may have to be construed strictly...
...He is saying that he has been "wrestling" with the language and cannot say with certainty what is prohibited. He is noting that an "ordinary citizen" would have trouble understanding who is prohibited from possession under the Wisconsin law.
...At this point, the misdemeanor may be the only count that is still alive in the trial after a disastrous trial. usatoday.com/story/opinion/…
...Binger just objected to the court that he was the "target of your ire" yesterday for ignoring a court order. Now he is maintaining the defense is violating the order on scope. It is a different in magnitude. Binger yesterday violated a core constitutional protection.
...This is a debate over just 4 minutes of tape, which the court noted has been the focused already of extensive testimony. The court just delivered the tough question in asking what is the prejudice to the state in allowing the jury to hear the evidence...
...The court appears willing to let it in so the jury will hear evidence under the impression that the prosecution fought to keep from them.
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.
Kyle Rittenhouse just broke down on the stand. The defense has done a strong job on direct. Defense attorneys often do not want to risk such testimony. However, this is clearly a strategy for acquittal not just a hung jury...
...Prosecution witnesses imploded earlier. It would have been tempting to just minimize risk and not put Rittenhouse on the stand. However, such a move could left lingering doubts in jurors if you want to nail an acquittal...
...As a criminal defense attorney, I have been critical of the tendency to hold back defendants in high-profile cases. jonathanturley.org/2018/08/15/man…
The indictment circles around an unnamed figure called PR-Executive-1 who was a close Clinton adviser who held high positions in the Democratic party and prior Clinton campaigns...
...Most embarrassing are references to the Clinton adviser meeting with possible Russian intelligence figures and other Russian sources, including this line...:
...PR Executive-! gifted to
Russian Sub-Source-1 an autobiography of Hillary Clinton, which he signed and inscribed with
the handwritten message, "To my good friend [first name of Russian Sub-Source-1], A Great
Democrat."