Lawyer Poll - Did Rittenhouse Prosecutor Try for a Mistrial Today?

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

Yesterday, the living survivor testified that Rittenhouse only shot him after he pointed his weapon at Rittenhouse.

Today the prosecutor apparently commented on Rittenhouse’s execution of his right to remain silent after arrest IN FRONT OF THE JURY. It was such a plain violation the judge yelled at the prosecutor.

The defense has moved for a mistrial (Not sure they should after yesterday), but my question s - do you think the prosecutor did it on purpose? To force a mistrial after yesterday’s case-damning testimony?

PS - if you’ve never been yelled at by a judge, explain yourself!

 

[Univee2]

Yesterday, the living survivor testified that Rittenhouse only shot him after he pointed his weapon at Rittenhouse.

Today the prosecutor apparently commented on Rittenhouse’s execution of his right to remain silent after arrest IN FRONT OF THE JURY. It was such a plain violation the judge yelled at the prosecutor.

The defense has moved for a mistrial (Not sure they should after yesterday), but my question s - do you think the prosecutor did it on purpose? To force a mistrial after yesterday’s case-damning testimony?

PS - if you’ve never been yelled at by a judge, explain yourself!

Do umpires count? They judge balls and strikes. I was a bit mouthy behind the plate. Got some laughs, though, so I had that going for me.

 

[UncleMark]

The defense has moved for a mistrial (Not sure they should after yesterday), but my question s - do you think the prosecutor did it on purpose? To force a mistrial after yesterday’s case-damning testimony?

NBC reported they asked for a mistrial with prejudice. I didn't even know that was a thing. Sounds like the functional equivalent to a directed verdict. Seems not right to me, but of course IANAL.

 

[mcmurtry66]

NBC reported they asked for a mistrial with prejudice. I didn't even know that was a thing. Sounds like the functional equivalent to a directed verdict. Seems not right to me, but of course IANAL.

When the ****up is so bad it causes irreparable damage to the D's case. State can't refile

 

[UncleMark]

When the ****up is so bad it causes irreparable damage to the D's case. State can't refile

I know what it is. I'd just never heard of the state not being able to refile. That's equivalent to a directed verdict of not guilty.

 

[mcmurtry66]

I know what it is. I'd just never heard of the state not being able to refile. That's equivalent to a directed verdict of not guilty.

Directed verdict is insufficient evidence. This is usually conduct.

 

[UncleMark]

Directed verdict is insufficient evidence. This is usually conduct.

I take it there would have to be some kind of finding of intentionality, rather than a plain old bungle of some sort.

 

[mcmurtry66]

I take it there would have to be some kind of finding of intentionality, rather than a plain old bungle of some sort.

Bad faith presumably but I would defer to anyone who knows more crim.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Bad faith presumably but I would defer to anyone who knows more crim.

Based upon the D’s argument, it appears the relevant issue is the amount of prejudice to the defendant flowing from the trial defect. I would think the prosecutor’s comment on D’s silence would be pretty close to the tipping point given how the judge went bananas.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

Based upon the D’s argument, it appears the relevant issue is the amount of prejudice to the defendant flowing from the trial defect. I would think the prosecutor’s comment on D’s silence would be pretty close to the tipping point given how the judge went bananas.

I don’t know because I haven’t followed the case, but I’d bet the court already denied a motion to change venue and now the prosecution was on live TV commenting on the defendants exercising his right to remain silent and poisoning the jury pool on the day after a victim basically testified on live tv that the defendant was reasonably in fear of his life.

if I’m the judge I enter a directed verdict on both grounds and let the court of appeals work it out. and I’d sanction sua sponte the prosecutor who ignored the Constitution in my court And let the locals fry him in the press.

But I’m an asshole who doesn’t run for election.

 

[DANC]

Yesterday, the living survivor testified that Rittenhouse only shot him after he pointed his weapon at Rittenhouse.

Today the prosecutor apparently commented on Rittenhouse’s execution of his right to remain silent after arrest IN FRONT OF THE JURY. It was such a plain violation the judge yelled at the prosecutor.

The defense has moved for a mistrial (Not sure they should after yesterday), but my question s - do you think the prosecutor did it on purpose? To force a mistrial after yesterday’s case-damning testimony?

PS - if you’ve never been yelled at by a judge, explain yourself!

I told my lawyer friend that today - that the Prosecutor was hoping for a mistrial, because he knew his case was lost.

I'm not a lawyer, but I like to play one in my mind.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

I told my lawyer friend that today - that the Prosecutor was hoping for a mistrial, because he knew his case was lost.

I'm not a lawyer, but I like to play one in my mind.

It’s a mess

I‘m constantly shocked here at how often prosecutors get caught withholding exculpatory evidence.

This is a different issue, but prosecutors need to be good enough to dot all the i’s and cross all the t’s.

 

[DANC]

It’s a mess

I‘m constantly shocked here at how often prosecutors get caught withholding exculpatory evidence.

This is a different issue, but prosecutors need to be good enough to dot all the i’s and cross all the t’s.

I think this Prosecutor knew what he was doing. I'll say this - he played the part of a typical weasel lawyer. He just seems to be a person you instantly dislike.

Even the judge said he didn't believe he did what he did in good faith.

Rittenhouse is one helluva witness. Stuck to his story and didn't get rattled. He did break down when describing beins attacked, but that only helped his case, imo. At 18, he seemed pretty mature, while appearing innocenct and rather naive at the same time. Kid's got a helluva future if he plays his cards right.

 

[mrhighlife]

Kid is a punk. Needs to get his ass kicked severely. However he clearly acted in defense. He should only be charged with misdemeanor weapons charges. Should never have been there.

When he gets home his father should belt him good though. ****ing idiot.

 

[EarlTubbs]

When he gets home his father should belt him good though. ****ing idiot.

Which could be how we got to this point to begin with.

 

[mrhighlife]

Which could be how we got to this point to begin with.

His father didn't hit him hard enough? Probably right.

 

[Joe_Hoopsier]

Needs to get his ass kicked severely.

I nominate you for this job, maybe you could even use a skateboard to do it.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

Kid is a punk. Needs to get his ass kicked severely. However he clearly acted in defense. He should only be charged with misdemeanor weapons charges. Should never have been there.

When he gets home his father should belt him good though. ****ing idiot.

I don’t know if he’s a punk or not but he clearly got in over his head that night.

IANAL but I really don’t understand why they charged him with murder in the first place. What he did was clearly not premeditated murder. Manslaughter would even be a stretch, imo. Looked like a clear case of self defense.

Seems like a lot of political motivations in bringing murder charges.

 

[DANC]

Kid is a punk. Needs to get his ass kicked severely. However he clearly acted in defense. He should only be charged with misdemeanor weapons charges. Should never have been there.

When he gets home his father should belt him good though. ****ing idiot.

People tried to kick his ass. They're dead now.

As you people are fond of saying, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

 

[DANC]

His father didn't hit him hard enough? Probably right.

So we have you down for approval of child abuse.

 

[UncleMark]

Even the judge said he didn't believe he did what he did in good faith.

Wouldn't that be grounds for a mistrial in and of itself?

 

[DANC]

Wouldn't that be grounds for a mistrial in and of itself?

No idea. I'm not a lawyer.

But it's not unusual for a judge to admonish a lawyer. So I doubt it.

 

[mrhighlife]

So we have you down for approval of child abuse.

So we have you down for being a pussy. Ok.

Did I say child abuse? No. But if my kid was ever caught doing some shit like that punk. He'd want the cops to come get him. Like I said it was self defense. However he should have never been there.

 

[HooDatGuy]

Kid is a punk. Needs to get his ass kicked severely. However he clearly acted in defense. He should only be charged with misdemeanor weapons charges. Should never have been there.

When he gets home his father should belt him good though. ****ing idiot.

I don't think his father is in the picture. Which is the root of the problem.

edit: A lot of societies problems.

 

[DANC]

So we have you down for being a pussy. Ok.

Did I say child abuse? No. But if my kid was ever caught doing some shit like that punk. He'd want the cops to come get him. Like I said it was self defense. However he should have never been there.

Yeah, "severly" kicking a child's ass is not child abuse.....

Whatever makes you feel better.

How about the wife? If they get too mouthy, I bet a slap upside the head would cure that, eh?

 

[mrhighlife]

Yeah, "severly" kicking a child's ass is not child abuse.....

Whatever makes you feel better.

How about the wife? If they get too mouthy, I bet a slap upside the head would cure that, eh?

I don't think his father is in the picture. Which is the root of the problem.

edit: A lot of societies problems.

I didnt know that but it makes sense. And yes it's a well documented problem with society. Children need strong male roles models in their life. (Also strong female role models). You can tell with certain posters here who for some reason thinks it's ok for a 17 year old kid to be across state lines, with a firearm, at god knows what time at night, and playing army.

And before the local gravy Seals here change the subject. It's not ok to riot and loot either.

 

[mrhighlife]

People tried to kick his ass. They're dead now.

As you people are fond of saying, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

You guys talk about the pussification of America. I agree its happening. Part of the consequences of that was on display in Kenosha that night. A fat, out of shape, noodle armed punks only option at defense was to shoot and kill someone.

He should have never been there.

 

[IUJIM]

You guys talk about the pussification of America. I agree its happening. Part of the consequences of that was on display in Kenosha that night. A fat, out of shape, noodle armed punks only option at defense was to shoot and kill someone.

He should have never been there.

I happen to agree with you that a 17 year old should not be walking up and down the street with an assault rifle. Interesting though, that if you say a 17 year old female should not be walking up to Mike Tyson's hotel room at 2 in the morning, you would get absolutely destroyed.

 

[HooDatGuy]

I didnt know that but it makes sense. And yes it's a well documented problem with society. Children need strong male roles models in their life. (Also strong female role models). You can tell with certain posters here who for some reason thinks it's ok for a 17 year old kid to be across state lines, with a firearm, at god knows what time at night, and playing army.

And before the local gravy Seals here change the subject. It's not ok to riot and loot either.

I think there's broad agreement that he shouldn't have been there. That's immaterial as to whether he should be charged with murder (he shouldn't).

 

[outside shooter]

"defending yourself" with an AR15, from an unarmed person weilding... what... a skateboard?

Some of you are as gullible to the the same extent that the proscecution is inept.

 

[twenty02]

People tried to kick his ass. They're dead now.

As you people are fond of saying, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

That goes for Rittenhouse as well. A cosplay idiot. There are no good guys here, only losers.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

"defending yourself" with an AR15, from an unarmed person weilding... what... a skateboard?

Some of you are as gullible to the the same extent that the proscecution is inept.

You are uninformed.

The prosecution witness testified he pointed his GUN at the defendant. Sorry for your luck.

Others used rocks and a skateboard to assault him.

One threatened to kill him AND later threatened to “cut his heart out.”

As usual, the Looney Left simply ignores facts that are inconsistent with their hate speech goals, or just lies to get their way.

Try being informed BEFORE you open your Hate Hole next time.

 

[IUINSB]

"defending yourself" with an AR15, from an unarmed person weilding... what... a skateboard?

Some of you are as gullible to the the same extent that the proscecution is inept.

1) Go get some asshole to beat you with a skateboard around the head and neck area.
2) Let us know how much you enjoyed the experience.

 

[The Vid]

You are uninformed.

The prosecution witness testified he pointed his GUN at the defendant. Sorry for your luck.

Others used rocks and a skateboard to assault him.

One threatened to kill him AND later threatened to “cut his heart out.”

As usual, the Looney Left simply ignores facts that are inconsistent with their hate speech goals, or just lies to get their way.

Try being informed BEFORE you open your Hate Hole next time.

Teenager and his gravy seal mom drive across state lines to defend… Kenosha Wisconsin with AR15’s. Grown adults defend this behavior. Only in America.

 

[HooDatGuy]

1) Go get some asshole to beat you with a skateboard around the head and neck area.
2) Let us know how much you enjoyed the experience.

3) Please video for the rest of us to enjoy.

 

[The Vid]

I think this Prosecutor knew what he was doing. I'll say this - he played the part of a typical weasel lawyer. He just seems to be a person you instantly dislike.

Even the judge said he didn't believe he did what he did in good faith.

Rittenhouse is one helluva witness. Stuck to his story and didn't get rattled. He did break down when describing beins attacked, but that only helped his case, imo. At 18, he seemed pretty mature, while appearing innocenct and rather naive at the same time. Kid's got a helluva future if he plays his cards right.

He’s “got a helluva of a future” because idiots like you will pay attention to him and gas up the fire.

He will find himself on the wrong end of something in the future because he’s a f’ing idiot.

 

[toastedbread]

Yesterday, the living survivor testified that Rittenhouse only shot him after he pointed his weapon at Rittenhouse.

Today the prosecutor apparently commented on Rittenhouse’s execution of his right to remain silent after arrest IN FRONT OF THE JURY. It was such a plain violation the judge yelled at the prosecutor.

The defense has moved for a mistrial (Not sure they should after yesterday), but my question s - do you think the prosecutor did it on purpose? To force a mistrial after yesterday’s case-damning testimony?

PS - if you’ve never been yelled at by a judge, explain yourself!

Sounds like he will get off. I don't think he should be rewarded for his stupidity, as in why should he become successful simply because he was immature enough to show up with a firearm at a riot?

As to the judge, my inclination is that judges should be like referees in that the focus should not be on them. A bad referee puts the focus on themselves instead of the game. I feel this judge has done the same. I thought his ruling about the apple video was very odd and baseless. I do feel that he appears to have a bias toward the defendant. This is my non-legal opinion. Again, I think the prosecution's case appears weak, but the judge should appear to be as impartial as possible. Let the facts or lack of speak for themselves.

 

[IUINSB]

Teenager and his gravy seal mom drive across state lines to defend… Kenosha Wisconsin with AR15’s. Grown adults defend this behavior. Only in America.

I don't see many defending his actions. He is clearly an idiot John Wayne wannabe.
But being an idiot is not a felony offense.* Murder is. If found guilty he will pay the price.

* If it were, 90% of us would be in prison for life.

 

[HooDatGuy]

Sounds like he will get off. I don't think he should be rewarded for his stupidity, as in why should he become successful simply because he was immature enough to show up with a firearm at a riot?

As to the judge, my inclination is that judges should be like referees in that the focus should not be on them. A bad referee puts the focus on themselves instead of the game. I feel this judge has done the same. I thought his ruling about the apple video was very odd and baseless. I do feel that he appears to have a bias toward the defendant. This is my non-legal opinion. Again, I think the prosecution's case appears weak, but the judge should appear to be as impartial as possible. Let the facts or lack of speak for themselves.

The prosecutor in this case has been worthy of every reprimand he’s gotten from the judge, likely because the prosecutions case is so thin, he’s had to resort to the tactics that earned him the reprimand. And I also think it was right of the judge to make sure people don’t videotape the jury.

 

[toastedbread]

I don't see many defending his actions. He is clearly an idiot John Wayne wannabe.
But being an idiot is not a felony offense.* Murder is. If found guilty he will pay the price.

* If it were, 90% of us would be in prison for life.

I've done some pretty stupid stuff in my life, but I'm pretty sure my worst offense pales in comparison to showing up armed to a riot. I think that's a whole different level of stupidity.