Jury selection is finished late yesterday. Opening arguments will begin shortly.

Court TV stream



ETA: Another feed

Hawg,

first - love these threads. so much insight from you and the resident lawyers.

second - can you link in your OP the charges and any other relevant info?

third -

Recap of yesterday courtesy of Branca:

Quote:

---

Highlights of today's voir dire include:

• The defense voir dire suggesting that Kyle Rittenhouse might testify at trial
• Judge Schroeder contextualizing juror security concerns by noting that even judges hardly ever get assassinated
• A juror excused because Second Amendment beliefs would not allow impartiality
• A juror excused because hatred of AR rifles would not allow impartiality
• A juror excused because she understood "Thou shalt not kill" to be literal
• Judge Schroeder instructing jurors on "semi-automatic" versus "machine gun"
• And much, much more! So let's dive right in!

---

Quote:

---

Trial Judge Bruce Schroeder has decided that he wants to end up with a seated jury of 20, to include 12 jurors who will deliberate a verdict, and 8 alternates. Which specific jurors are alternates will not be determined until just before deliberations.

Judge Schroeder has also allowed each side to have 7 peremptory strikes, for a total of 14 strikes.

So, the Judge is looking to put together a group of 34 "qualified" jurors from which 14 can be struck, leaving the goal of 20 jurors to be seated.

---

Quote:

---

OUTLINING THE CHARGES AND GENERAL NARRATIVE OF EVENTS
Judge Schroeder welcomed the prospective jurors, actually starting the day with an impromptu game of Jeopardy as everybody got settled.
He then named the defendant, Kyle Rittenhouse, and read out the charges against him, with a brief factual description of each, carefully noting that each was at present merely an allegation by the state. These charges consisted of the six criminal charges I overviewed and analyzed in yesterday's post "Rittenhouse Trial: What to Expect As Trial Starts Monday" with an additional seventh charge of violating curfewthis last charge, however, appears non-criminal in nature, as the state is required to prove it only be clear and convincing evidence. Each criminal charge must, of course, be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, or the jury is obliged to acquit on that charge.

---

Quote:

---

Kyle is being tried on a variety of charges, including the felonies of intentional homicide, reckless homicide, attempted intentional homicide, two counts of reckless endangerment, as well as a misdemeanor charge of weapons possession by a minor. (Update: There is also a civil charge of violation of curfew, but this is not a criminal charge and is punishable by only a ticket, so we won't spend much time on it here.)

---

Quote:

---

On the night of August 25, 2020, 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse traveled from his hometown of Antioch IL to the neighboring border town of Kenosha WI, where he had worked as a lifeguard and spent considerable time.
Kyle's stated purpose was to help protect property from the riots, looting, and arson that had besieged the city since the lawful shooting of Jacob Blake by police two days earlier. (Blake, a 29-year-old black man, non-compliant with lawful arrest, wielding a knife in his hand, and was climbing into a car full of children when police shot him.)
Kyle, trained in medical care, also intended to provide such care to anyone injured that he might come across. For that purpose, he carried with him a sizable first-aid kit. In recognition of the violence rampaging through the city, Kyle also armed himself with an AR-15 pattern rifle (open carry of firearms is lawful in Wisconsin).

---

Quote:

---

Count 1. First degree reckless homicide (Rosenbaum). At approximately 11:45pm amidst the chaos of August 25, 2020, Kyle would shoot and kill Joseph Rosenbaum, in claimed self-defense. This would result in the first degree reckless homicide charge against Kyle, Count 1 in the criminal complaint, under 940.02(1) First-degree reckless homicide.. If convicted of this charge Kyle is looking at up to 60 years in prison, plus an additional 5 years for having used a dangerous weapon.

Count 2. First degree reckless endangering (McGinnis). Near to this scene was a reporter, Richard McGinnis, who had moments before been interviewing Kyle. McGinnis would later tell police that he did not think that Kyle was handing his rifle safely. This would result in the first degree reckless endangering charge against Kyle, Count 2 of the criminal complaint, under 941.30(1). Recklessly endangering safety. If convicted on this charge Kyle is looking at up to 12 years in prison, plus an additional 5 years for having used a dangerous weapon.

After shooting Rosenbaum, Kyle began to run towards a line of police officers who had created a vehicle barricade a short distance down the street. During this flight to police Kyle was pursued by angry members of the mob, during which he would fall to the street. Once fallen, Kyle was subject to violent attack by several men.

Count 3. First degree intentional homicide (Huber). One of the men who attacked Kyle was Anthony M. Huber. While Kyle was struggling to get up from where he had fallen, Huber struck at Kyle's head and neck with a heavy skateboard. Kyle shot Huber, with fatal results. This would result in the first degree intentional homicide charge against Kyle, Count 3 of the criminal complaint, under 940.01(1)(a). First degree intentional homicide If convicted on this charge Kyle is looking at life imprisonmentand, once again, an additional 5 years for having used a dangerous weapon.

Count 4. Attempted first degree intentional homicide (Grosskreutz). Another of the men who attacked Kyle was Gaige Grosskreutz. While Kyle was fighting off the other attackers as he struggled to rise from the street, Grosskreutz approached Kyle initially with his hands up in a peaceful gesture, but then swiftly presented a pistol and rapidly closed on Kyle. Kyle shot Grosskreutz, striking him in the right bicep, causing serious not but fatal injury. This would result in the attempted first degree intentional homicide charge against Kyle, Count 4 of the criminal complaint, under 940.01(1)(a). First degree intentional homicide. If convicted on this charge Kyle is looking 60 years in prison, plus an additional 5 years for having used a dangerous weapon.

Count 5. First degree reckless endangerment (unknown male). Another of the men who attacked Kyle was an unidentified male who attempted a flying drop kick onto Kyle as he lay in the street. Kyle shot at this attacker, but missed. This would result in the first degree reckless endangerment charge against Kyle, Count 5 in the criminal complaint, under 941.30(1). Recklessly endangering safety. If convicted on this charge Kyle is looking at up to 12 years in prison, plus an additional 5 years for having used a dangerous weapon.

Count 6. Unlawful Weapon Possession by Minor. Finally, Kyle also would be charged with unlawful possession of a weapon by a minor, Count 6 in the criminal complaint, under 948.60(2)(a). Possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18. This is the sole misdemeanor charge specified in the criminal complaint, and if convicted on this charge Kyle is looking at up to 9 months in prison.

---

Link

Here's another stream

In session, jury not in the court room. Counsel arguing over jury instructions right now.

This is an absolute **** show.

The Chauvin trial was so clean. Am I watching a clown show?

Kyle needs a Red Bull or something. He's making me sleepy watching him yawn over and over again.

Hawg, is McGinniss (the video reporter/videographer that was on the scene, had seen Kyle earlier, etc) supposed to testify?

Based on some of his writeups and video after the incident, it seemed like his testimony would potentially be favorable to Rittenhouse.

4stringAg said:

---

Hawg, is McGinniss (the video reporter/videographer that was on the scene, had seen Kyle earlier, etc) supposed to testify?

Based on some of his writeups and video after the incident, it seemed like his testimony would potentially be favorable to Rittenhouse.

---

Haven't seen a witness list yet but agree that McGinnis would be a good witness for the defense.

Jury about to be brought in

"respectful hand signals"

I have a feeling this will be another conviction of convenience

These charges are bogus, save for the last one which I could see sticking.

Seems like they would have gone over "the buttons" & how they related to audio with the judge before this started. I'm guessing that we might hear some stuff we;re not supposed to at some point.

Gentleman with the scooter, please report to courtroom a, gentleman with a scooter

The Judge looks like Grandpa on The Munsters

Following. Thanks for starting the thread.

Going to start answering Jeopardy questions in the thread.

NCNJ1217 said:

---

Following. Thanks for starting the thread.

---

Branca is live commenting at the bottom of this Link if you can't listen or need to step away for a bit.

Geez! Just give the jury a spreadsheet! I can't follow the judge's instruction and I know the charges.

This world would be a better place if we had more Rittenhouses. I'm pulling for the kid!

This is difficult to follow as an attorney. I am guessing lots of jury questions during deliberations.

ItsA&InotA&M said:

---

The Judge looks like Grandpa on The Munsters

---

I can see the resemblance...

Mr. AGSPRT04 said:

---

This is difficult to follow as an attorney. I am guessing lots of jury questions during deliberations.

---

Agree. This is a word salad and the judge doesn't read aloud very well. Very confusing. Even for us pros.

Now correcting himself on instructions. I'm lost.

Maybe he's building in reversible error with these instructions

Whoa! That statement about the laws of self-defense don't apply as to the charges as to McGinnis? It is the same shot and was not taken until McGinnis was clear, according to McGinnis himself. Very confusing.

Jury directions seem one sided favoring the state. Why no directions on self-defense?

Regarding the jury: I think a huge issue at play here is an understanding of human behavior. The Democrat world view largely does not account for the dark side of human behavior: criminals are "misunderstood," tyrants are "backed into a corner," capitalism "exploits" the less productive (who starve in most other systems), schools get "zero tolerance" policies, guns and not the gangbangers get blamed, etc.

That world view paints the aggressor as a victim of circumstance and not a human consciously engaging in hostility.

This world view also paints counter-action against the aggressor as unfounded (since the assailant is merely a cog in a societally staged conflict), and therefore demonizes those who stand up against evil (which they also refuse to see as such).

TLDR: any juror with the prevailing Democrat world view will be predisposed to fry Rittenhouse, while any juror whose world view accounts for malicious actors (and the corresponding need for good to rise up against evil) will be predisposed to acquit.