Kyle Rittenhouse Trial

[Ernie]

This is a thread to discuss the Rittenhouse trial or ask questions about court proceedings, criminal law, etc.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/jury-r ... 021-11-17/

[Ernie]

I assume that the attorneys always show up in court every day that the jury deliberates?

While a jury is deliberating, does the defendant normally show up every day and stay there all day while waiting for the verdict? Does the defendant have a choice in this matter?

[HondurasKeiser]

I don’t think that’s the way it works but I could be wrong. I think that whilst the jury is deliberating everyone hangs near the courthouse, so that once the verdict comes in everyone can gather as quickly as possible.

[ken_sylvania]

I believe that HK is correct - that normally the attorneys and defendant would stay in the general vicinity so that they can assemble quickly if/when a verdict is reached.

[Haystack]

I think it was a mistake they didn't make the jurors anonymous for such a high profile case such as this.

[ken_sylvania]

I thought the prosecutors' attitude was an embarrassment to the government. They seemed to think that since Kyle was a "bad man" then it would be OK to convict him of anything they could, even if they knew he wasn't guilty of it.

What I'm thinking of in particular was an argument that occurred between the attorneys and the judge while hashing out the jury instructions. Mr. Rittenhouse was charged with possession of a dangerous weapon. The WI statute that defines and prohibits the possession of dangerous weapons by persons younger than 18 says that it does not apply to possession of a rifle or firearm unless it is a short-barreled shotgun or rifle, or if the person is not in compliance with certain regulations that apply to persons under the age of 16.

Everybody involved knew that Mr. Rittenhouse's rifle was not a short-barreled rifle, but the defense said that the defense had failed to measure the rifle in front of the jury. They more-or-less insisted that the rifle therefore ought to be treated as a short-barreled rifle because there was no evidence in the record to the contrary. In my opinion, that is despicable.

To be clear, I think it was morally wrong for Kyle to shoot anyone that night. I just think the state ought to confine itself to punishing conduct that is illegal rather than using legal maneuvers to convict people for crimes they didn't commit.

[Soloist]

Stupid? yeah... worth going to life in prison? I think thats really harsh.

[RZehr]

I don’t know all the charges and haven’t followed the trial. But I think he should be found innocent on all the charges, but thrown in jail for 30-300 days for making dumb decisions that resulted in people dead.

[Robert]

I don’t know all the charges and haven’t followed the trial. But I think he should be found innocent on all the charges, but thrown in jail for 30-300 days for making dumb decisions that resulted in people dead.

If you have not followed the trial, should you make judgments?

[steve-in-kville]

Everybody involved knew that Mr. Rittenhouse's rifle was not a short-barreled rifle, but the defense said that the defense had failed to measure the rifle in front of the jury. They more-or-less insisted that the rifle therefore ought to be treated as a short-barreled rifle because there was no evidence in the record to the contrary. In my opinion, that is despicable.

As an aside, the ATF's rules on SBR's has changed a lot in the past few years and depending how it was bought and registered plays a role.

Not gonna weigh in on the right and wrong of his actions, but does it matter if he used a Red Rider BB gun or a grenade launcher? He still acted in self defense.