The best part of the defense was the video summation. Richards has the type of rough hewn style that can be appealing to a case with highly localized elements. He scored in calling Binger to account for his alleged misrepresentation of evidence...
...He also laid out an easy course for the jury to follow in its deliberation -- a road map that was missing with Binger. However, the greatest impact was likely the final video as he showed Rittenhouse refraining from using force and then responding to attacks...
Binger also set up Richards attack with the social media posting after he built up Grosskreutz as a heroic figure trying to stop an "active shooter."...
...Binger could have used the active shooter narrative (which I think was a good framing for the prosecution) without tying the credibility of the case to the character of some of these individuals.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Over in the Arbery trial, defense counsel has succeeded in a creative framing using alleged shooter Travis McMichael's Coast Guard training. Since he was trained in law enforcement, counsel is allowed to go through his training...
...The result is that McMichael almost sounds like an expert witness in front of the jury on when to properly use force etc. It is a very effective technique by Jason Sheffield.
...I am a little surprised by the laughing in the exchanges. That is never a good idea in a trial of this magnitude. Indeed, the prosecutor could make reference to the fact that the accused was laughing on the stand...
I previously said that we would not likely have a verdict before Wednesday. If there is a deadlock, we could also hear from the jury today since they are likely to have had multiple votes by this point... jonathanturley.org/2021/11/16/rit…
...If there is a deadlock, the jury would send a note to the judge. The judge would ordinarily then send back a note to ask the jury to continue to try to reach a verdict...
There is nothing unusual in the length of deliberations, however. It can be the result of simple due diligence rather than a deadlock.
With the end of closing arguments, the jury now has the case. I remain confused how the sixth count was ever adopted. Even without the grand jury/indictment process, the prosecutor still had to establish the crime in the preliminary examination (PE)...
...I still fail to see how Binger could represent that a crime was committed under the state governing the sixth count. I also fail to understand how a court could have found probable cause to believe a crime was committed on possession...
...Now the jury will consider five counts that are ridiculed with prosecutorial contradictions. I cannot imagine that the prosecution hold much credibility with the jury at this point.
Binger's closing argument had some strong points but he, again, took considerable risks with this jury by mocking the damage caused by Rosenbaum and others. ..
...He also referred to Rosenbaum as harmless and "all bark and no bite." That is glaringly disconnected with this conviction as a child molester and the scenes of him rioting...
...The narrative about the protesters were disconnected from the images that the jury was seeing. I am not sure why Binger felt that need to go as far as he did in his descriptive elements...
Judge Schroeder just dropped the sixth count. It collapsed on the basis previously discussed in the column. jonathanturley.org/2021/11/14/was…
...That is another blow to the prosecution. While only a misdemeanor, it shows the jury that what was promised as proof of the violation did not materialize at trial. There is a serious credibility crisis for the prosecution and this only magnifies any such doubts.
...The loss of the sixth count also removes a default option for the prosecution if the more serious counts collapse. This leaves (even with lesser counts considered) a high cliff for conviction.
...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.