19 Burst results for "Mister Rittenhouse"

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on The Eric Metaxas Show

The Eric Metaxas Show

02:37 min | 6 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on The Eric Metaxas Show

"That. Right now I want to talk to you, John, really about anything. You've got all these articles that stream dot org. But what do you want to start first? I mean, I haven't talked since Kyle rittenhouse was 100% vindicated of any criminal charges. And I'm proud to say that I'm one of the very first people commentators in America who came out two days after the shooting to say that Kyle rittenhouse appeared to me to be completely innocent and in fact an American hero. And all the facts, all the witnesses, all the testimony, all the video has confirmed my initial column from two days after the shooting. Mainstream media have ignored all of it. Right. Lied about all of it, have repeated entirely invented libelous statements about mister rittenhouse, saying that he was a white supremacist member of some white nationalist militia. Not that there's anything wrong with that because we are non judgmental. I want to be very, very clear. Our media almost universally reported false statements about Kyle rittenhouse, destructive, really destructive false statements. The most destructive thing you can say about someone in America is that he's a white nationalist. It's really more destructive than saying someone is a child pornographer. Actually, let me ask you a question because I have to always go to the roots why do we care if somebody's a white supremacist or whatever it isn't the issue is he a murderer? Isn't that the issue? Like if I kill you because I hate that you're black or I kill you 'cause I hate that you're white, or I kill you because you're not Greek, does it matter. If I murder you, it's called murder. So aren't we already, in other words, I don't want to go down this rabbit hole, but the reason we're in the mess that we're in is because we talk about things like why someone murdered someone rather than did someone murder someone problem Eric is that you're speaking like someone from the old America. The new America is in the grips of the imposition of a new official religion. Anti racism is the new official religion of America. And it's being imposed upon us the way Islam was imposed upon the Christians of Egypt after the conquest of that country.

Eric metaxas Steve Bannon Amazon Albin John Alban Tony Tucker Carlson soccer Eric
John Zmirak on Why Anti-Racism Is the New Religion

The Eric Metaxas Show

02:37 min | 6 months ago

John Zmirak on Why Anti-Racism Is the New Religion

"That. Right now I want to talk to you, John, really about anything. You've got all these articles that stream dot org. But what do you want to start first? I mean, I haven't talked since Kyle rittenhouse was 100% vindicated of any criminal charges. And I'm proud to say that I'm one of the very first people commentators in America who came out two days after the shooting to say that Kyle rittenhouse appeared to me to be completely innocent and in fact an American hero. And all the facts, all the witnesses, all the testimony, all the video has confirmed my initial column from two days after the shooting. Mainstream media have ignored all of it. Right. Lied about all of it, have repeated entirely invented libelous statements about mister rittenhouse, saying that he was a white supremacist member of some white nationalist militia. Not that there's anything wrong with that because we are non judgmental. I want to be very, very clear. Our media almost universally reported false statements about Kyle rittenhouse, destructive, really destructive false statements. The most destructive thing you can say about someone in America is that he's a white nationalist. It's really more destructive than saying someone is a child pornographer. Actually, let me ask you a question because I have to always go to the roots why do we care if somebody's a white supremacist or whatever it isn't the issue is he a murderer? Isn't that the issue? Like if I kill you because I hate that you're black or I kill you 'cause I hate that you're white, or I kill you because you're not Greek, does it matter. If I murder you, it's called murder. So aren't we already, in other words, I don't want to go down this rabbit hole, but the reason we're in the mess that we're in is because we talk about things like why someone murdered someone rather than did someone murder someone problem Eric is that you're speaking like someone from the old America. The new America is in the grips of the imposition of a new official religion. Anti racism is the new official religion of America. And it's being imposed upon us the way Islam was imposed upon the Christians of Egypt after the conquest of that country.

Kyle Rittenhouse Mister Rittenhouse America John New America Eric Egypt
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on WCPT 820

WCPT 820

05:49 min | 6 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on WCPT 820

"And see the most transformative legislation in our history with the thinnest of majorities in our history John and John Building blows up behind Nancy Pelosi in her red jacket at her shades for aviator glasses That was almost like a RomCom Fantastic I love you Love you too Love you too Love you too Oh look child poverty in half Insulin captain $35 Okay Yes we have one more Pelosi I love it I love that she treats with Kevin McCarthy like a nap Yeah You used to hold the record for the longest four speech How do you feel about that being broken and do you plan to try to make that back No I barely noticed but that's not what we're here to talk about This is about serious business here Yes S.W.A.T. Yeah S.W.A.T. Go away All right Anita and San Antonio hello Anita Good morning Good morning Hey do you remember during the protests in the summer of 2020 there was a protest in Portland a Black Lives Matter protest in Portland And somebody and one of the Black Lives Matter protesters ended up shooting and killing a white supremacist He was from the prayer patriot player group or something like that Right Remember that Yeah later on And this guy was armed and the guy came on He didn't interview the Black Lives Matter protesters said he was defending himself Because these guys were armed that okay and they were traveling around in a van advocating in different cities And we know for sure provoking in many cities the guy with the umbrella smash into Windows was a white supremacist The guy that fired into a police station yelling justice for George Floyd was a white supremacist trying to And by the way you needed we should be aware There's a lot of Russian bots after the rittenhouse project that are also stirring up this racial animosity and in fighting They know they're always yeah But this guy his name was Michael reinhold The Black Lives Matter protester He was gunned down by federal Marshals Remember that That was sent by Donald Trump He didn't get a trial He didn't get to say I was defending myself Make them a hero You know judge what you call Jerry Nadler is calling on the DOJ to review the rittenhouse shootings for potential federal charges I hope so He said justice can not tolerate armed persons crossing state lines looking for trouble while people engage in First Amendment protected protest And so they're saying there's a wide variety of federal charges could face that include civil rights violations and potential hate crimes I hope so The family is suing the city too because they have written house to walk around with that gun But there's just like a double standard okay Lawyer wouldn't have to boil with talking about suing Joe Biden Are you kidding me Trump was up there I don't know how many people he accused of crimes that didn't commit crimes And then he was the one who sent the federal Marshals to kill that guy Yeah exactly Thank you Yes I'm sorry to do this stupid apologize in advance And of course just the right wing celebration of vigilante killing It was a great decision I was surprised to go this far Somebody should have ended it earlier And frankly the case should have never been brought It was prosecutorial misconduct in my opinion and there's plenty of it going on in this country right now I had to make it about him Oh my God By the way the new SNL Trump Erie Erie And the judge I mean Cecily Strong I look at the treasure of the judge jeanine cold open fantastic They went from weekend update with her just being a regular drunk guest to just doing her own thing Yes The parents of Anthony huber denounced the unacceptable of rittenhouse verdict They said that left them heartbroken and angry It sends the unacceptable mission that armed civilians can show up in any town in sight violence then use the danger they have created to justify shooting people in the street Huber tried to disarm rittenhouse as he fled the scene after she had just shot and killed Joseph rosenbaum The defense attorney argued that rittenhouse's actions were defensible because huber had a skateboard in one hand While he reached for okay That's not a deadly weapon as far as I you know he was saying he reached first of all he reached for rittenhouse Well it's strapped to him So he's not going to disarm him I mean he only so that the second person he shot and killed that was unarmed And again what's this right winger on meet the press They were both violent criminal criminals that were also armed Really First guy that got shot to death had a plastic bag Yeah And rittenhouse didn't know that Yeah Concerned citizens confronted with a person shooting indiscriminately on the street stepped into the huber's indiscriminately on the streets stepped in to stop the violence Anthony was shot in the chest trying to disarm mister rittenhouse and stop the shooting spree It's just I just I can't Okay And the right wingers as we mentioned right os Paul gar go start threaten to arm wrestle Matt gates to get cow written house as an intern Marjorie trader green the mayor of crazy town said may Kyle and his family now live in peace Oh no thoughts for the hubers or the other or the rosenbaum who they will not be living in peace because their sons are dead Correct Right But it's Cal rittenhouse His family they can now live in peace Okay Those who help protect and defend our good guys Kyle is one of the good ones No No Oh and Josh mandel said Kyle rittenhouse save lives Really Because the only people dead that night were killed by.

John Building rittenhouse George Floyd Michael reinhold Jerry Nadler Portland Kevin McCarthy Nancy Pelosi federal Marshals Pelosi Anita Cecily Strong San Antonio Anthony huber Donald Trump DOJ Joseph rosenbaum Joe Biden John
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on The Eric Metaxas Show

The Eric Metaxas Show

02:00 min | 6 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on The Eric Metaxas Show

"I'm bringing in Kevin McCullough. Kevin, can I let you take it away? Hey, Alvin, good to talk to you. Well, I don't know what you want me to take away. We do have a verdict in the rittenhouse case. And I'm not terribly surprised at it. When you look at what happened in the courtroom when you look at the kind of tone and the general demeanor that the judge had over the course of time, you had a pretty good feeling that the prosecution had not put its best foot forward. And in similar fashion or in opposite fashion, actually, I think the jury did a lot of due diligence. They deliberated for over 30 hours asking for notes and questions from the judge from the testimony from the evidence that had been submitted, but I think there were a couple of things that they just couldn't get past. One is that one of the victims who did testify actually pointed a gun at mister rittenhouse. That's a pretty much a slam dunk on self defense cause. And the other piece that I think was really interesting in the last couple of days we learned that the prosecutors had not that they had they had made video available. To the rest of the court proceeding that was different than what they were using. And they depended on that video to make their case in very sharp contrast. And the video that they made available for everybody else was very fuzzy and very not clear, and they had an HD copy that they were working with that they never revealed. And then they said things about how the video operated and things that you supposedly saw. This was the drone footage. That's direct withholding of evidence. And that goes to the process that very easily for rittenhouse to ask the judge for mistrial on just that

Kevin McCullough Kenosha Salem news network Eric metaxas Alban sadar Kevin McCallum Chris heims rittenhouse mister rittenhouse Kyle rittenhouse Salem Kyle Alvin Alban America Kevin
Kevin McCullough Reacts to the Kyle Rittenhouse Verdict

The Eric Metaxas Show

02:00 min | 6 months ago

Kevin McCullough Reacts to the Kyle Rittenhouse Verdict

"I'm bringing in Kevin McCullough. Kevin, can I let you take it away? Hey, Alvin, good to talk to you. Well, I don't know what you want me to take away. We do have a verdict in the rittenhouse case. And I'm not terribly surprised at it. When you look at what happened in the courtroom when you look at the kind of tone and the general demeanor that the judge had over the course of time, you had a pretty good feeling that the prosecution had not put its best foot forward. And in similar fashion or in opposite fashion, actually, I think the jury did a lot of due diligence. They deliberated for over 30 hours asking for notes and questions from the judge from the testimony from the evidence that had been submitted, but I think there were a couple of things that they just couldn't get past. One is that one of the victims who did testify actually pointed a gun at mister rittenhouse. That's a pretty much a slam dunk on self defense cause. And the other piece that I think was really interesting in the last couple of days we learned that the prosecutors had not that they had they had made video available. To the rest of the court proceeding that was different than what they were using. And they depended on that video to make their case in very sharp contrast. And the video that they made available for everybody else was very fuzzy and very not clear, and they had an HD copy that they were working with that they never revealed. And then they said things about how the video operated and things that you supposedly saw. This was the drone footage. That's direct withholding of evidence. And that goes to the process that very easily for rittenhouse to ask the judge for mistrial on just that

Alvin Kevin Kevin Mccullough ONE Over 30 Hours Last Couple Of Days Rittenhouse
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on WCPT 820

WCPT 820

07:46 min | 6 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on WCPT 820

"Goes Friday whatever you'd like to talk about Kyle rittenhouse was just found not guilty on all counts Anthony huber was the second person that Kyle rittenhouse in my opinion murdered obviously not the jury's opinion but what can you say that he definitely killed And his fam excuse me his family just released a statement And a statement with which I agree just to put it on the record my position on this they wrote there is no justice today for Anthony or for mister rittenhouse's other victims Joseph rosenbaum engage gross Cray Gross crates This was from Karen bloom and John huber He was parents They continued to say today's verdict means there is no accountability for the person who murdered our son It sends the unacceptable measure message that armed civilians can show up in any town in sight violence and then use the danger they have created to justify shooting people in the street We hope that decent people will join us in forcefully rejecting that message and demanding more of our laws our officials and our justice system Bingo The one thing one other thing I wanted to just bring up and I'll do it relatively quickly here given everything that's going on and I know that a lot of us a lot of folks who like to just come on and talk about the news of the day But I had teased it as it were you know I mentioned it at the beginning of the show That I think that we've figured out now what Joe Manchin might have gotten in exchange for supporting assuming that this happens certainly supporting the biff the so called bipartisan infrastructure framework but also the build back better Bill And that has to do with a young man by the name of Brad crabtree This came out of apparently a meeting between Joe Manchin and president Joe Biden A crabtree is from North Dakota He started the great plains institute back in 2002 on behalf of the big oil companies push and in his state coal big big coal lignite coal To push the idea that the government needs to be subsidizing these companies in developing carbon capture and storage technology to take carbon out of the air Now just for the record with the single exception of this plant that's operating in Iceland that's running off volcanic power Nowhere on earth has carbon capture and storage been demonstrated to work Because it requires so much energy to pull the carbon out of the out of the atmosphere and store it that you have to use more energy producing more carbon to get it than you get If you understand what I'm saying But the utility companies have made substantial donations to politicians who are promoting this idea that the federal government should be subsidizing Now let me just say if we can effectively decarbonize the atmosphere I'm all in favor of that And I'm not saying that we shouldn't be funding this kind of research But I think that we need to go into an eyes wide open realizing that this is the Hail Mary for the fossil fuel industry And this over at the daily poster dot com David Schroeder's article or website This one is actually by Walter bragman and Julia roc who work on the daily poster They note this and they talk about Brad crabtree And then they say the Wall Street friendly think tank third way was elated at the news that crab tree would be taken a prominent position within the Biden administration And that's what I think Joe Manchin got out of this He's now in charge of the clean electricity Excuse me He's now in charge of where to go He will be the Department of Energy's assistant secretary for fossil energy and carbon management So you know crabtree has served as an adviser to the national coal council since 2014 He's vice president for fossil energy of the great plains institute and opaque pro fossil fuel group that has been lobbying in D.C. for funding carbon capture technology Grabbed he is also the director of the D.C. based carbon capture coalition whose members include fossil fuel companies like Shell and our G energy in Valero and incidentally the third way which is this group that came out of Wall Street that sponsors or helped create the so called corporate problem solvers caucus in the House and Senate Utility companies have made substantial donations to the third way just between 2015 and 2019 enter G gave them a 125,000 to the third way Public Service Enterprise Group gave them 50,000 PG&E a 175,000 And Congress had set aside in the bipartisan in the biff the bipartisan structure Bill 8 and a half $1 billion To fund this to subsidize and fund this carbon capture and sequestration So you know we'll see where this goes Like I said I don't think this is outrageous I think this is kind of falls into the category of this is the sausage being made And you get to see okay you know Joe Manchin wanted something Joe Biden wanted something mansion got something relatively small 8 billion bucks for a subsidy for the fossil fuel industry Joe Manchin Joe Biden President Biden gets something really big His mansion's vote on this thing on the so called biff We'll see how it shakes out But anyhow that's my take on that So let's pick up some of your phone calls and actually a lot to talk about today in addition to the written house verdict So let's see here and in Sarasota Florida hey and what's up Yes so Tom have you heard about the more than doubling of the Medicare part D premium for Medicare recipients and go into effect next year Yeah and also the core the part B just went up about 14% And the CMS is saying that in particular the part D increase is because of this drug for Alzheimer's that was unanimously rejected by the independent scientific commission but the FDA for some reason put on the market anyway And it's like 50,000 bucks a year as I recall 56,000 Thank you And many of the scientists on the board quit because they said this is not been clinically proven Plus what they're saying is that it may or may not be proven and yet we're still going to get charged for this That doesn't make any sense Yeah No I'm with you There's something rotten in Denmark here I don't know specifically what it is I don't know if it's Trump holdovers if the FDA or somebody who's expecting to get a $1 million a year job with the big pharma once they leave the FDA or maybe there's something about this drug that we don't know But I think the process was fairly transparent And another thing the same subject I heard that President Biden is considering somebody who is a big pharma lobbyist to be the head of the new head of the FDA did you hear anything about that I haven't But you know it wouldn't surprise me There's a long tradition particularly going back to the 1980s in America of bringing people.

Kyle rittenhouse Joe Manchin Brad crabtree great plains institute Anthony huber mister rittenhouse Joseph rosenbaum gross Cray Karen bloom John huber president Joe Biden crabtree David Schroeder Walter bragman Julia roc Biden administration national coal council carbon capture coalition Public Service Enterprise Grou Anthony
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on WLS-AM 890

WLS-AM 890

01:36 min | 6 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on WLS-AM 890

"Folks there's no one no one better than Sean to kind of use the prosecutor in Wisconsin As Shaun is a lawyer himself shaam as a congressman in Wisconsin nobody knows the environment Shawn my first question this was clearly correcting an injustice You are a very good lawyer The elements of the crime were never met I argued to Jenna Ellis before who agreed with me that there wasn't even reasonable suspicion of a crime here in that hierarchy of evidentiary standards Forget about probable cause or beyond the reasonable doubt This is a correcting and injustice this young man should have never been in court in the first place No he shouldn't have been charged but to be fair did he shoot and kill three individuals or shoot to kill to injure another Yes they had him on that And Colin admitted that But then he came around to the second portion which was was this self defense And this was the key of the whole trial Dan that we had so much video of what happened that you get these variant stories in a shady set of prosecutors who are pushing one narrative but the jury was able to go back to the video and say well let's look at what happened was Kyle rittenhouse and aggressor Was he was he a guy that was going through and chasing protesters with the old placards up and razzing protesters No he was there to help people And when he was confronted can I rittenhouse ran away In the video showed all that Dan And that's why I think this journey came back With the not guilty verdict and thank God for the video or I think there could have been a different result here and in justice would have

Joe Biden Pino mister rittenhouse rittenhouse White House House ayanna Pressley Ilhan Omar
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

05:10 min | 6 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"We have breaking news right now the jury has rendered a verdict of not guilty on all cones in the Kyle rittenhouse trial out in Kenosha Wisconsin You remember this was the instance where the young man who traveled up and shot three people two of whom died He was charged with intentional as well as reckless Homicide in the case And I'm joined now by our in-house legal expert She is June grass so great to have you back with us June Give us your sense of what led up to this not guilty verdict You know I have to say David that even though it was predicted that this might come out not guilty it was still stunning to hear not guilty on all the charges that there was no distinction The journey made no distinction between the first victim and the second victim the second victim in the third victim So basically they've been out for three days and I think it came down to confusion with the jury instructions because one of the jurors last night said can we take the instructions home So we'll find out afterwards if there was any kind of rigorous debate but it was an uphill battle for the prosecution because of the self defense laws in Wisconsin And because of the video that showed a lot and confirmed a lot of what rittenhouse said on the stand And that's one of the things I found interesting People I think we're surprised that he took the stand typically in these cases you don't take the stand at all He did he gave a very tearful very emotional testimony that was very controversial It was controversial because the way he cried at the beginning and then stopped crying and the way it looked But his testimony was very solid He was prepared so well He's 18 years old now defending something he did when he was 17 And yet the prosecutor really wasn't able to lay a glove on him during cross examination Now a lot of this the judge has gained a lot of attention for some of his drama and some of the rulings that he's made very anti prosecution And that probably came across to the jury and you know David that the jury gets their signals from the judge even if it's not overt It's how he acts toward the prosecution And there was such antagonism between the judge and the prosecution here but you have to give it to rittenhouse He was stellar on the stand Yeah no no question about it And one of the questions people ask is is this the end of it I mean this is a state prosecution correct me if I'm wrong but there is the possibility of federal prosecution or civil action for deprivation of civil rights Now I assume that there will be a federal action Remember in the Derek Chauvin case the man convicted of killing George Floyd even though there was a conviction at the state level the feds are still going for civil rights charges And so what they could do is file civil rights charges against rittenhouse based on the same factors Also there are going to be civil claims I assume from the families of the victims here So he's going to be in court quite a while And I would suspect that if there are federal charges and federal case I think they'll be ready with some of the to avoid some of the things the prosecution did here and of course they won't have the judge and I just want to say something people go well the judge you know it doesn't matter how he rules If he rules against the prosecution as you know the prosecution can't appeal So if he had ruled as he ruled against the defense and the defense lost they could take it to an appellate court The prosecution can't once the case is over jeopardy applies And so we'll never hear anything about the strange rulings that he made and the sort of the histrionics in the courtroom It's a really good point Really good point I mean this obviously is a very high profile legal case It also has profound potential racial overtones We have to remember the events that triggered mister rittenhouse going up there supposedly to defend property came out of the Shooting of Jacob Blake who was a paralyzed and a police shooting And so there are substantial racial overtones to this There are and the governor has put the National Guard on call I heard and read that there was silence outside the courthouse when this came in People were just stunned looking at this verdict Because I think a lot of people after all these days expected something of a split verdict something in the middle or at least that some of that he would be found guilty on some of the charges regarding the second victim who died And the third victim who was injured So yes and also at the same time remember what's happening the Ahmad Arbery trial is happening And one of the people who shot him took the stand yesterday that was quite a different story though that was a classic cross examination by the prosecution where she basically tore his story apart But so there are these two trials on different parts of the country and they both have racial overtones so we'll see what happens here Yeah especially also I want to go back for a moment This really does put a spotlight potentially on the attorney.

rittenhouse Kyle rittenhouse Wisconsin Kenosha Derek Chauvin George Floyd David confusion mister rittenhouse Jacob Blake Ahmad Arbery National Guard
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on WLS-AM 890

WLS-AM 890

03:02 min | 6 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on WLS-AM 890

"Right folks Wow You know that was a judge there Just the thanking the jury and instructing them if they get any requests for media to handle it however they they feel But we've been on the air only 20 plus weeks I don't even know There's been a lot of breaking news that we've been on the air but that is one moment I think Jim me and Mike will never ever forget Kyle rittenhouse Not guilty on all charges The young man broke down crying immediately afterwards I can't imagine what he's been through But finally there's name is dragged through the mud He was violently attacked if there is reputation was destroyed After his family's reputation were attacked after people who tried to support him or attacked I want you to reestablish your faith in and again in the American experiment and the constitutional republic that I assure you just this was served today If you believe in justice you just saw it Not guilty an old charges Thank you to all the legal analysts throughout the week Jenna Ellis Leo Terrell and others came on the show Jenna allis had said they were probably going to be a verdict You remember Jim just a few days ago on a Friday my friend Chris just reached out to and said hat tipped to Jenna Not guilty On all charges I encourage everyone out there including the maniacs who want to go out there and start street fires and riots over this that that's justice That's the process They had a chance to prove their case in court given all the opportunities and assets of the state to go out there and convict this young man and you did not When everybody was under oath swearing to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth all of a sudden the stories you've been told in the media by people who never tell the truth the whole truth or anything but a lie all of a sudden those stories changed That's the process That's how the process works And when the whole truth came out an independent group of jurors Agreed to by both the prosecution and defense A jury of mister rittenhouse's peers said that he is not guilty Not guilty on all counts That's the process It would be no further trials on this We don't have double jeopardy in the United States That's the process All charges not guilty Jim I think we need to take a break I'm sorry but I got to digest all this too Let's take a break and let's come right back on the other side of this right.

Kyle rittenhouse Jenna Ellis Leo Terrell Jenna allis Jim Mike Jenna Chris mister rittenhouse United States
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast

America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast

06:43 min | 6 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast

"Sebastian gorka. Thank you. Hold on. That's right, run. Anyway. Footage that is still very, very hard to watch Kyle rittenhouse. The young boy who was 17 years old when he defended himself against a serial rapist and also a wife beater who were bearing down on him and a third man who held a Glock to his head, the rittenhouse trial has become sadly National Theater for the nation. We're going to dissect what it means for America with somebody who is so trusted by patriots across the nation for his legal and political analysis. He is the author of the Russia hoax and witch hunt a great friend of America first. Greg Jarrod, welcome back to one on one. Great to be with you. Greg, you you've been in this tour tree business of the intersection of law and politics for a while, let's just put it a while. Is this I'm not a lawyer? Greg, and I come to this as somebody who sat in the back of a court once. When I got a speed, I was driving too fast and I had to go to a court salmons and I thought I've never been to a court. So I went in three hours early and I sat in the back just to look at what a county court was like as a newly minted American citizen. And it was fascinating. But it wasn't what we witnessing on TV screens across the nation for the last week. Is this a normal trial? Is this witness badgering is the judge saying, don't you be brazen with me? Is this par for the course? Give us your expert opinion on what we are seeing. Well, courtrooms can be high drama and, you know, centuries ago before television before the Internet before core TV where I worked for 8 years. You know, people would flock to courthouses in courtrooms in some ways it was their source of information, but it was also their source of entertainment and this certainly has not been entertaining, but it has been riveting to watch this unfold. And you see on the screen, Kyle rittenhouse made a compelling witness. He broke down. He sobbed. You know, I really hate to see somebody like LeBron James mock it with laughing emojis if LeBron James had actually watched much of the trial. He wouldn't have made such a stupid comment. This is a young man who broke down because he was reliving the trauma of what happened to him that terrible night in August of 2020. He was chased down by an angry mob who threatened to kill him. One man was trying to bludgeon him with a heavy skateboard. Another man pointed a loaded pistol at him. He defended himself. He claims in self defense. I think from my viewpoint and look, I've been a lawyer for more than 40 years. I used to be a defense attorney, a trial lawyer. He struck me as credible and candid and sincere, but it's folly to predict what a jury will do. We'll have to wait and see. But yeah, I mean, this was high drama as far as the scolding is concerned. I mean, I have seen a lot of angry judges. Yeah. I mean, the judge, there you see it, you know, sort of yelling at the prosecutor in this case. There's the prosecutor. And I've seen a lot of tongue lashings and scoldings in my day from the bench. This is right up there. It's one of the most severe. And I don't blame the judge one bit the judge who is 100% correct. I mean, this is a prosecutor who either recklessly or ineptly or intentionally violated the constitutional rights that are sacred of the accused. Explaining this because not everybody has been watching day in day out all the footage, but this idea that the deputy DA says, well, mister rittenhouse, you're giving your version of events now as if that's outrageous. For the first time. Yeah. You know, it's sacrosanct. It's sacred, that Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination that you can not be forced to be a witness against yourself. And this is a prosecutor who decided to frame it in a way that suggested that his right to remain silent was incriminating guilt. That is absolute grounds for a mistrial. But then he doubled down and he violated another sacred constitutional principle. And that is the right of an accused to face his accusers. He commented on the fact that he sat there the defense table and listened to the witnessing witnesses who testified before him and can now tailor his testimony to conform with theirs. Again, that's an inappropriate wrongful, unconstitutional violation of somebody who is simply exercising his rights under the constitution. And the third violation was that this judge had made a pretrial order saying you are not mister prosecutor to comment on any remark that the defendant may to his friend or friends about the use of his weapon. It's irrelevant. It's immaterial and it's highly prejudicial, don't utter a word about it. What are the prosecutor do? He uttered a lot of words about it..

Kyle rittenhouse Sebastian gorka Greg Jarrod Greg National Theater LeBron James mock rittenhouse America salmons patriots Russia LeBron James mister rittenhouse
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

05:16 min | 7 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"Prepared for it You thought it was gonna happen No I didn't That's the whole reason you brought the gun Isn't it I brought that guy to protect myself My guest is John gross a professor at the university of Wisconsin law school and director of the public defender project Explain why rittenhouse is lawyers asked the judge for a mistrial Well the request for a mistrial was based on the fact that the prosecutor made some commentary or asked some questions about the fact that Kyle rittenhouse did not talk to the police officers who took him into custody and first interviewed him And the problem with that is that there is a long-standing constitutional rule against prosecutors commenting on the fact that it chose to remain silent when questioned by law enforcement because that is a constitutional right that we all have Mister rittenhouse doesn't have to talk to law enforcement He doesn't have to take the stand at his own trial even though he did And so prosecutors who suggest or question a defendant about why they didn't talk to police why they didn't offer some type of exculpatory testimony why in this case mister rittenhouse didn't say I fired in self defense That would be improper for them to do They're asking essentially the jury to infer that their failure to talk to the police suggested that they were guilty That was the basis of the defense motion yesterday On a more basic level on this trial occurs when something about the proceedings because of some highly prejudicial and improper evidence that was introduced that the proceedings themselves become sort of fundamentally unfair and it requires a new trial Now in this case they were asking for a mistrial with prejudice so that rittenhouse couldn't be tried again That's pretty unusual for a judge to grant isn't it Yes miss trials in general aside from trials where there is a hung jury which also results in a mistrial But the granting of a mistrial during the trial is very rare and the granting of one with prejudice is even rarer still Throughout the course of his trial sometimes witnesses make statements that are not admissible questions are asked that are improper But judges simply give an instruction to the jury They uphold an objection and they tell the jury that they should disregard the question or witness says something that's irrelevant in the judge says don't pay any attention to that And so usually judges have these curative instructions that they give throughout the trial and that's sufficient and they judge doesn't need to say what we have to start all over again This is a mistrial The root of the argument the defense was making the mistrial with prejudice that can be granted when a judge believes the prosecutor intentionally caused the mistrial So the prosecutor knew the evidence was improper new that the questions they were asking were improper But did it anyway and did it intentionally to create a situation where the trial became fundamentally unfair And if they do that on purpose then there is the possibility of the judge can say double jeopardy Does apply here And you can't retry the defendant In this case the prosecutor told the judge he'd been acting in good faith The judge said I don't believe that There seems to be a very antagonistic relationship between the judge and the prosecutor He even yelled at him I'm just wondering how that affects the jury when they see the judge and the prosecutor not behaving properly Well part of the initial jury instructions that jurors get is that they shouldn't draw any inferences from the fact that a judge may uphold an objection or chastise one of the attorneys in the course of the case Basically the judge gives them an instruction to say that the jury should infer anything from this It's not personal lawyers have an obligation to make objections They have obligations to make arguments the judge has an obligation to rule on those and to keep order in the courtroom And that the advocates are going to make passionate arguments for their cause and that that's okay It does become problematic if a jury starts to perceive that the judge is hostile to one parties point of view or one parties case or has a dislike for one of the litigants and is demonstrating that through the language they use or the way that they're referring to them or treat them throughout the trial I don't see anything that rises to that level in this case The prosecution here has kind of a challenging case to make out Coming up next on the Bloomberg law show I'll continue this conversation with professor John gross of the university of Wisconsin law school and will talk about rittenhouse's testimony Did it help or did it hurt his case I'm June grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg The.

John gross rittenhouse Kyle rittenhouse Mister rittenhouse mister rittenhouse university of Wisconsin law sc
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Mike Gallagher Podcast

Mike Gallagher Podcast

09:47 min | 7 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Mike Gallagher Podcast

"Christmas from all of us at the Mike Gallagher show and the one and only. Promo code Mike G there's been a lot of bad actors in this Kyle rittenhouse case. I played the Montage yesterday of all the media folks over at MSNBC trying and convicting Kyle rittenhouse before the trial even began. Even Joe Biden got in the act. Remember when he was a candidate? And he called Kyle rittenhouse a white supremacist? How did that work out? As this trial is unfolding. Yesterday, our last night, Laura Ingraham on Fox News had a Kyle rittenhouse spokesperson, David Hancock, who remembers what Joe Biden once did. But don't forget the candidate for the U.S. presidency himself last year prior to the election called Kyle rittenhouse a white supremacist. Joe Biden called the him a white supremacist. That is a calling, I can't even gauge how wrong that is. Julie is in Columbus, Ohio. Hey Julie, welcome to the Mike Gallagher show. Julie, you there? All right, let's try John in Greer, South Carolina line two, hey John welcome to the show. John, hey, good morning, Mike. Hi, John. Today, Mike. Good day. Good day. Hey, I'm here with you in South Carolina. I just want you to know that these kind of perpetrators of so called peaceful protesting would never be able to get away what they did in Wisconsin and South Carolina. South Carolina has full of patriots that love America that love the truth and we will defend and protect our communities and our businesses and we would do it with our miners as well. Mister rittenhouse was a minor, but, you know, he was doing what he believed was right. He was in a bad situation. Everybody there was in a bad situation. But it's obvious that this kid cared about his community and that he had some training and that he was going to go and defend and protect his community. And that same thing would happen here in South Carolina. So I don't think these protesters would ever get away with it here in South Carolina because we're patriots and we want the truth. You make a great point about how things wouldn't happen. They wouldn't fly at a great state like South Carolina. Things like that are happening in states like Illinois, New York, California would never happen in a place like Florida. Ron DeSantis is despised by the left. Every time I see Ron DeSantis say something, I start thinking about him more and more as a presidential candidate. And I don't know what president Trump is going to decide to do. I know that Chris Christie, who we interviewed last week on the show, sat down with axios and he seems willing to take on Donald Trump. In 2024, I don't know how that will work out for governor Christie. President Trump reacted pointing out that Chris Christie left office with like a 19% approval rating as New Jersey governor. But Chris Christie's a fighter, you know? And there's a lot of things that we don't know what's going to happen how this is going to unfold, but I like Ron DeSantis on the national stage. Listen to what he said about the news that Biden was flying illegals into Florida. This is governor desantis. This is why so many people like this guy's message. You know, my view would be, why don't we if they're going to come here? We'll provide buses and provide them. I will send them to Delaware and do that. I mean, if he's not going to support the border being secured, then he should be able to have everyone there. So we will do whatever we can in that regard. And we are absolutely going to do everything we can. That's a good idea, governor desantis, if Biden is flying illegals into Florida in the middle of the night, on these planes full of ship them back to Delaware. Let them go to Wilmington. Let them camp out at Joe Biden's house. The nerve of this guy, the nerve of this president standing up there yesterday said could you can you believe gas prices are so high? This guy is one of the worst presidents this country has ever suffered through. I mean, I thought he'd be bad. I didn't think he'd be this bad. I don't think anybody believed he'd be this bad. Did you see that? Yes, he's giving some speech at some porch somewhere. I think in Baltimore, was unbelievable. He stood there and said, can you believe the clip guys of Biden? Acting surprised at the price of gas. Do you ever think you would pay this much for gag gallon the gas? In some parts of California that fan four of dollars 50 cents a gallon. Like he's surprised. It's your it's your policies. It's your economy. This is your inflation. I mean, Biden inflation as the Washington examiner claims the phrase is shedding new records. Inflation has hit 6.2% year over year, faster pace than 31 years. To counter the public's justifiable fear of inflation eating away at their wealth, The White House, The White House has well put its head in the sand, deny that inflation is a problem. Have you ever seen a president? Take so little accountability for anything? He doesn't. He doesn't take accountability. He doesn't own anything. Everything is somebody else's fault. Everything. You're the reason for the supply side. The supply chain problem because you're buying too much stuff. It's your fault. Oh, and you're too stupid to understand how the supply chain problem works. He did it again. He once again disparages the American people. Man, I get so fired up. I hate to make you suffer through a minute of Biden's awful speech yesterday, but you got to hear this. He did this the other day. Remember he said something about the American people are essentially too dumb to figure out how supply chain issues work? The way the left condescends to the rest of the world is amazing to me. Here's Biden yesterday, doubling down on his assertion that the only reason we're upset about all these ships stuck out in the port of Los Angeles and out to sea and not being able to get the goods and services to the shelves is because we don't have master's degrees. Listen to this. You hear a lot about the supply chains in the news, but frankly, not a lot of people are clear, have a clear understanding whether they have a PhD or they didn't go to school about how a supply chain works. It says easy to talk about. Turn it off. I can't listen to it. I can not let this this guy talk down to millions and millions of Americans. Not one more word. Yeah, if you don't have a PhD, you didn't go to school, you don't know how this works. Well, you don't have to have a PhD to know that you are wrecking this economy. And your policies are preventing budge from reaching the American people. Doctor Biden, did you go talk to doctor Biden your wife? And maybe she could tell you to stop insulting the American people. Colleen is in Illinois. Hey Colleen, in Antioch, Illinois, right? How are you? Yes. Yes. Hi, I'm good. And did all to everything that preceded me here? I really remarks and the callers. But Andy and Kenosha, our kiss and cousins, they're right across the line from each other. They got both being competition for small town USA. There is no way that they were had the ability to deal with this violence. And that kid wouldn't have been put in that situation where it would be thought to be in need. Had their Democrat governor of Wisconsin called in the National Guard, but no. Just like a lower light head here in Chicago didn't call in the National Guard here and look at what happened. Look at what happened. Look at what's happening with the results of these horrific Democrat leaders and what they're doing to this country. Thanks so much, Colleen. Here's Kevin and Pittsburgh. Hey Kevin, thanks for joining us. How are you? Hey, Mike. I just wanted to say that they're handing everything over to the Chinese surpasses it all along and they're trying to destroy the dollar and everything. It's disgusting. And you know, I really believe that I'm ashamed for feeling this way, but I do think Kevin and I want to see if you agree with me. This is deliberate. This is not accidental. They're not. They're not stumbling bumbling fools. They're doing this deliberately. Oh, yes, this is like every little step is one big step to something larger than they're not for the good of America in no way. I'm a veteran and I'm disgusted by this guy. And I can't believe the people voted for him. And I do believe they cheated and I know you kind of disagree with that, but.

Kyle rittenhouse South Carolina Ron DeSantis Joe Biden Biden Mike Gallagher governor desantis Chris Christie Julie David Hancock John Mister rittenhouse president Trump patriots governor Christie President Trump Mike G Laura Ingraham Florida
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Mike Gallagher Podcast

Mike Gallagher Podcast

01:36 min | 7 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Mike Gallagher Podcast

"You know what they're doing in New York City? You know what Black Lives Matter founders are threatening? The leaders of New York's Black Lives Matter movement threatened riot and bloodshed in the streets if the mayor elect in New York Eric Adams reverses the abolition of the NYPD's controversial anti crime units. Now this is as described in the New York Daily News, the liberal tabloid in New York. Eric Adams is a pro police guy. The new mayor of New York is a former police officer. And he is pro Law & Order. It's a small miracle that this guy got elected. Now, he's still a radical leftist, but coming from a law enforcement background at least he's pro police and pro law enforcement law enforcement. The cofounder of Black Lives Matter of greater New York said, if Eric Adams thinks that they're going to go back to the old ways of policing, then we are going to take to the streets again, there will be riots. There will be fire and there will be bloodshed. Because we believe in defending our people, shed the founder of Black Lives Matter New York. Um. Well, that sounds about right. Threatening mash violence if a new mayor who's black, by the way, doesn't obey your policy demands Black Lives Matter. Yeah, that's great. That sounds totally normal.

Kyle rittenhouse South Carolina Ron DeSantis Joe Biden Biden Mike Gallagher governor desantis Chris Christie Julie David Hancock John Mister rittenhouse president Trump patriots governor Christie President Trump Mike G Laura Ingraham Florida
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on WLS-AM 890

WLS-AM 890

03:34 min | 7 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on WLS-AM 890

"Understanding at that time was that Wisconsin law prohibited you as a 17 year old from possessing a pistol but you could have an AR-15 Yes What was that understanding based on The understanding was based on when we would go up north we were able to meet Dominic and my sister and we were allowed to carry the rifles around and the officers over there said it was fine I'm gonna move to strike this hearsay What officers would have told you It's not admissible And none of this is frankly And that's why I interrupted before What the defendant believes the law to be What the district attorney believes the law to be What the defense believes a lot to be are irrelevant I will tell you when I instruct you what the law of Wisconsin is pertaining to the possession of a firearm by a person under 18 And that will be the source of your knowledge And allowing the testimony right now because it bears on There's an old maxim under the ignorance of your exquisite Ignorance of the law is not an excuse Ignorance of the criminal law is not an excuse If you commit a wrong criminal act whether you know it's criminal or not you're responsible for your conduct And because you're responsible to know the law It's not relevant except in this case There are specific issues about his awareness and knowledge about certain conduct that is relevant on some issues So it's quite complicated hopefully it'll sort out when I instruct you at the end But that's why I'm allowing the questions And the answers but do not be confused about what anything that these people say is in that necessarily accurate as to the state of Wisconsin law any question about that Okay thanks Go ahead Oh my gosh Jim I mean listen you are an extremely talented You know more about radio and audio production You're not You aren't in law enforcement You're really I know you're a smart guy I met you personally You don't have to say yes I know sell price things The engine rule You're never in law enforcement correct but have you ever seen a prosecution fold so badly Is this I mean you've seen trials You're a bright guy This is just the most incompetent prosecution I have ever seen This is bordering on malicious prosecution at this point and how this case is wasn't thrown out before it made it into court I have no idea I have Sean Duffy coming up next I'm going to play a couple of pieces of audio from the trial over the last few days including one of the prosecution of mister rittenhouse's star witnesses who you know there were allegations He was assaulted by mister rittenhouse who amazingly in the trial says yes mister rittenhouse did not fire his weapon until I pointed a gun at him That this was the prosecution's witness not the defense I've got that and I've also got another one of their witnesses of prosecution puts up there who seems confused about who told him.

Wisconsin Dominic mister rittenhouse Sean Duffy Jim
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on WLS-AM 890

WLS-AM 890

04:37 min | 7 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on WLS-AM 890

"Seem to comport with the cancerous rot of a media in this country's narrative that this was a murderous serial killing white supremacist savage hellbent on traveling to Wisconsin to murder people in cold blood does it Sounds kind of like that that may have been yet another media hoax Listen folks I don't have any easy answers about what should have happened here okay I certainly don't wish death or injury on anyone I don't This is a serious time I can laugh on the show a lot but this isn't that time You know on my faith matters to me I know we have a particularly aggressive tone on the show sometimes and I'm not claiming I'm not claiming to not be a sinner I am myself I've had a temper for a long time I don't run from that But I say to you with all candor that's a really tough situation Some of you may I don't know it isn't ran at him with a pistol No it is a tough situation And you can tell by the reaction of mister rittenhouse You know I spent my entire life trying to read people's emotions and what they're saying and criminal interviews I can't get in his head but I'm reasonably confident that that reaction is beyond sincere I don't believe for a moment that this young man went to Kenosha with the intent to do anything other than help He found himself in a situation where he was forced to take someone's life And the emotional way to that is something I wouldn't wish on anyone You know for those of you listening and you know I strongly encourage you to do there's a book out there It's by lieutenant colonel Dave Grossman It's an older book But it's worth your time the book is called on killing He's obviously a military man with deep experience who did an entire book in a body of research On the history of the horrors of trying to train men in the military to in fact and act violence and sometimes kill other men And he makes the point throughout the book that thankfully it's not easy to do that Thankfully you don't want that to be easy to do No one wants that But the book talks about the emotional toll Having to enact violence whether it's through the military or self defense on others the emotional toll it takes on the people who have to engage in violence for the preservation of their own life with the preservation of their country in some kind of a nationally sponsored war event or state violence action And the gravity of that he's described throughout the book the pole of it on people is overwhelming I believe that's what you just heard Listen I've got no dog in this fight other than the dog adjust justice And I've got no dog in this fight other than telling you that the media many not all but many in the media exist for one purpose and one person purpose only That's the poor gasoline on a national fire of rage because chaos is their currency chaos is their coin of the realm they need chaos Chaos is always always been their weapon of choice There is nothing the status loves more than a sense of fear A sense of fear imbues in people a sense of necessity to get away from the fear And isn't it convenient how the socialist and the big government liberal always comes in and claims to save the day afterwards No one gives up their freedom voluntarily They only give it when they're in a state of flux and chaos and fear that they just want to go away People who voluntarily walk into a prison if they think they can save him from the chaos on the outside And the media is third this pot and told you a story about this young man That doesn't seem to comport at all What this young man just has said and did on the stand John David was a prosecutor in Wisconsin And a good friend of mine He is a colleague at Fox He'll be joining us at 1230 to discuss this case and some of the critical moments in it so far I'm there much you know we'll be.

mister rittenhouse lieutenant colonel Dave Grossm Kenosha Wisconsin John David Fox
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

05:52 min | 7 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"Is 18 year old Kyle rittenhouse a hero defending Law & Order or a vigilante taking the law into his own hands The jury will hear starkly different port trials of rittenhouse at his trial for killing two unarmed protesters and injuring a third during a turbulent protest against racial injustice in Kenosha Wisconsin last August Here are the prosecutor Thomas binger and the defense attorney Mark Richards The evidence will show that hundreds of people were out on the street experiencing chaos and violence and the only person who killed anyone was the defendant Kyle rittenhouse It isn't a whodunit when did it happen or anything like that It is was Kyle rittenhouse's actions privileged under the law of self defense The jury may also hear rittenhouse's own words to a reporter on the night of the shooting Our job to protect this business and part of my job is to help there's somebody hurt I'm running into harm's way Joining me is Stephen Wright a professor at the university of Wisconsin law school So a 17 year old drives half an hour from home across state lines to Kenosha with an illegal weapon a military style semi automatic rifle and joins a group of armed people He shot and killed two men within hours What are the different narratives that were going to hear I think there are two narratives that have already started to play out The prosecution makes the argument that mister rittenhouse traveled across state line that he obtained a weapon that he stayed out past curfew and that he was basically here to cause trouble The defense began their opening statements by showing lots of pictures of the protest or as they say the losing and riding that were happening And they want to portray a young man that was very much concerned about the Kenosha community with which he had some ties You know and many people who support him want to portray him and some ways as the hero that he's a young man exercising his Second Amendment right to bear arms and that he was defending property when the local government when the police failed to do so So is the question going to be purely whether he fired in self defense That's largely going to be the question You know there's no question that he fired the shot The defense showed the jury several photographs And these photographs portrayed mister rittenhouse as a peaceful young man who ultimately was chased down and attacked The question basically is who starred at this fight There's a big debate about what happened before the chase What's also in dispute is how much danger mister ridden House should have felt during the chain Should he have felt that his life was in danger to the point where he needed to use lethal force to defend himself Those are sort of the core questions at the self defense argument especially that relates to the first man that was shot and killed What is the law in Wisconsin on the use of deadly force So what's causing in some ways that's a very traditional self defense statute that somebody can use lethal force if they believe that it is reasonable to do so to protect their lives or someone else A large part of what we're going to ask the jury is whether mister rittenhouse had a reasonable fear that his life was in danger and whether using that semi automatic weapon to kill two people was reasonable earned of the circumstances Wisconsin does not have a standard ground law but one of the things the jury can consider when determining the reasonableness of mister rittenhouse's fear and the reasonableness of the amount of force that he used was whether he could have led whether this death ultimately could have been avoided Well the jury hear that video of rittenhouse explaining why he was there on the night of the shooting So it will probably come in but you know it may actually come in for the defense Mister rittenhouse says a couple things but he's basically says I'm here to defend property and to defend human lives But he also makes clear that he brought a med kit with him And so that's been part of the defense narrative the entire time that he was actually there to help to do good In the video mister rittenhouse suggests that he brought the man kit specifically need to help anyone who had been hurt And he sort of says at the end I've also have a gun in case I need to defend myself while I'm helping So you know I think for many people that videos actually evidence that he came here to do good and to help others Let's talk about rittenhouse's appearance The jury is going to be staring at this teenager He has a baby face He doesn't look much like a killer That's obviously to his benefit One of the things that I think a lot of people have been paying attention to is you know he's a baby faced young white man And the jury here I think is predominantly if not overwhelmingly white So I do think that there's a possibility that some jurors will see themselves as see their children in him Thanks so much That's professor Steven Wright of the university of Wisconsin law school Coming up next on the Bloomberg law show justice is express skepticism about Texas controversial abortion law I'm June.

Kyle rittenhouse mister rittenhouse rittenhouse Kenosha Thomas binger Wisconsin Mark Richards university of Wisconsin law sc Stephen Wright mister ridden House Mister rittenhouse Steven Wright Texas
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

04:50 min | 7 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"Me is Stephen Wright a professor at the university of Wisconsin law school So a 17 year old drives half an hour from home across state lines to Kenosha with an illegal weapon a military style semi automatic rifle and joins a group of armed people He shot and killed two men within hours What are the different narratives that were going here I think there are two narratives that have already started to play out The prosecution makes the argument that mister rittenhouse traveled across state line that he obtained a weapon that he stayed out past curfew and that he was basically here to cause trouble The defense began their opening statements by showing lots of pictures of the protest or as they say the losing and riding that were happening And they want to portray a young man that was very much concerned about the Kenosha community with which he had some ties You know and many people who support him want to portray him and in some ways as a hero that he's a young man exercising his Second Amendment right to bear arm and that he was defending property when the local government when the police failed to do so So is the question going to be purely whether he fired in self defense That's largely going to be the question You know there's no question that he fired the shot The defense showed the jury several photographs And these photographs portrayed mister rittenhouse as a peaceful young man who ultimately was chased down and attacked The question basically is who started this fight There's a big debate about what happened before the chase What's also in dispute is how much danger mister ridden House should have felt during the chain Should he have felt that his life was in danger to the point where he needed to use lethal force to defend himself Those are sort of the core questions at the self defense argument especially that relates to the first man that was shot and killed What is the law in Wisconsin on the use of deadly force So with confidence in some ways that's a very traditional self defense statute that somebody can use lethal force if they believe that it is reasonable to do so to protect their lives or someone else A large part of what we're going to have the jury is whether mister rittenhouse had a reasonable fear that his life was in danger and whether using that semi automatic weapon to kill two people was reasonable earned of the circumstances Wisconsin does not have a standard ground law but one of the things the jury can consider when determining the reasonableness of mister rittenhouse's fear and the reasonableness of the amount of force that he use was whether he could have led whether this death ultimately could have been avoided Well the jury hear that video of rittenhouse explaining why he was there on the night of the shooting So it will probably come in but you know it may actually come in for the defense Mister ridden House says a couple things but he's basically says I'm here to defend property and to defend human lives But he also makes clear that he brought a med kit with him And so that's been part of the defense narrative the entire time but he was actually there to help to do good In the video mister rittenhouse suggests that he brought the man kit specifically need to help anyone who had been hurt And he sort of says at the end I've also have a gun in case I need to defend myself while I'm helping So you know I think for many people that videos actually evidence that he came here to do good and to help others Let's talk about rittenhouse's appearance The jury is going to be staring at this teenager He has a baby face He doesn't look much like a killer That's obviously to his benefit One of the things that I think a lot of people have been paying attention to is you know he's a baby faced young white man And the jury here I think is predominantly if not overwhelmingly white So I do think that there's a possibility that some jurors will see themselves as see their children in him Thanks so much That's professor Steven Wright of the university of Wisconsin law school Coming up next on the Bloomberg law show justice is express skepticism about Texas controversial abortion law I'm June grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg Everybody.

mister rittenhouse Kenosha university of Wisconsin law sc Stephen Wright mister ridden House Wisconsin Mister ridden House rittenhouse Steven Wright Texas
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

04:42 min | 7 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"Things are a lot better And the wages have gone up faster than inflation And we have generated real economic growth He said inflation has been fueled by global supply chain issues linked to the COVID pandemic I'm Brian shook This is Bloomberg law with June Grosjean from Bloomberg radio I've been talking to professor Stephen Wright at the university of Wisconsin law school about the Kyle rittenhouse trial which started today in Kenosha What about the fact that the first victims he shot four times In any self defense case the jury's going to consider the reasonableness of the defendant response And so in this case you know the jury will consider whether firing that many times from a semi automatic weapon was necessary But you know as a general rule juries tend to be barely forgiving once they've determined that a defendant's life was in danger In my experience they don't make a lot of differentiation between firing one time versus fire four times when somebody really feels that their life is in danger There is a lot of video of that night and some video of him is that going to be a large part of the either prosecution or defense case I think it's going to be an essential part of the defense Today the parties gave opening statements The defense wanted to show several pictures and videos of what was going on that night In particular they selected some pictures and videos that they say suggest the mister rittenhouse was in danger that he was being chased by people I know among the more provocative photos or some of the photos of individuals with skateboards winging or trying to hit mister ridden house The state very much objected to those being included in the opening but the defense was very out of him So as rittenhouse ran away from the scene a criminal complaint states that he told someone on the phone I just killed somebody Does that have any impact It could you know once again it could be evidence of what his state of mind was around the time of the shooting You're absolutely right I believe after the shooting of the first deceit mister ridden got on the phone and called and told somebody that he had shot somebody You know that will be evidence to what his state of mind was at that time around when he pulled the trigger But it won't necessarily be dispositive of one issue Also I saw video someone asked him what he was doing there and there was some video of him saying I'm here my job is to defend Was kind of odd Will that come in So it will probably come in but you know it may actually come in for the defense When you watch the full video mister rittenhouse says a couple things but he's basically says I'm here to defend property and to defend human lives But he also makes clear that he brought a med kit with him And so that's been part of the defense narrative the entire time But he was actually there to help to do good in the video mister rittenhouse suggests that he brought the man kit specifically to help anyone who had been hurt And he sort of said that the end I've also have a gun in case I need to defend myself while I'm helping So you know I think for many people that videos actually evidence that he came here to do good and to help others The biggest question in a defense is whether or not the defendant is going to testify Do you think in this case in order to show that he really feared for his life that he should take the stand In the United States the defendant almost always is the person who testifies laugh They're the closing act And so generally defensive attorneys don't make up their mind about whether defendant will testify until relatively late into the trial You know there's always tremendous risk of putting your client on the stand I suspect if the defense feels fairly confident based upon their witnesses and based upon the pictures and videos that they've shown that they've got a sympathetic jury he probably will not testify But you can imagine there's tremendous risk about putting a 17 year old on the stand in this type of cave You know the prosecutor I'm sure would be chomping at the bit for the opportunity to cross examine.

mister rittenhouse Brian shook June Grosjean Bloomberg radio Kyle rittenhouse university of Wisconsin law sc Stephen Wright Kenosha rittenhouse United States
"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

06:51 min | 7 months ago

"mister rittenhouse" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"What the judge said was, he can demonize them if he wants if he thinks it will win points with the jury. Right. And that's just a way of a 75 year old judge who's presided over an awful lot of criminal trials, including high profile murder and homicide cases saying it would be kind of weird to spend your closing arguments demonizing the victims here. But hey, if he's going to do that and he's proven that they were arsonist Ryan rioters and looters, I'm not going to exclude that right now in limiting. By the way, you may see this motion renewed based on what actually comes out during the trial. Keep an eye on. But at the moment that that was denied, it prompted a really, really good lawyerly argument from binger. And he said, your honor, this seems to me like a double standard. He said, quote, if I were to count the number of times that you've admonished me not to call someone a victim during a trial. It would be in the thousands. And remember, right? He's the assistant district attorney. Yeah, he practices in front of this judge all the time, right? He's like, the terms that I'm identifying here, such as rioters, looters, arsonists, are as loaded, if not more loaded than the term victim. So good lawyerly argument that says, hey, if I can't call them a victim, they shouldn't be able to call them. Rioters, looters, arsonists. And that's when the judge said, no, that's not. I reject that comparison. The word victim is a loaded loaded word that got covered in the press, that sort of thing. Really, that would have been a good time to say the question is what level of proof comes out throughout the trial as to whether they were actually involved in these things? Instead, the judge was just like, yeah, yeah. I get it. Nice try, but I don't think this is a double standard. Victim is out because victim is always out and rider Luger arsonist can be in if that's proven at the trial. Would I have preferred at the other shore? I would have preferred a ruling the other way. But but I think once you understand that, all of a sudden, now the stories kind of fit into a pattern that makes some more sense. I want to talk about something that was also a part of the motion eliminate that has not been covered anywhere because I find this very, very puzzling. And it has to do with the video, the Facebook video that, you know, I might call the the we appreciate you or the bottle video, right, that shows the cops throwing water bottles to Kyle rittenhouse and say, hey, we appreciate you guys. Yeah. The prosecutor, binger, moved in lemonade to exclude that video in its entirety. He gave this justification. He said, I'm concerned that this is going to be turned into a trial over what law enforcement should or shouldn't have done that night, and I don't think that's what this court or this trial should be deciding. Now, that's interesting, right? Again, he's a career prosecutor of crimes like this. I'm a civil lawyer who talks into a microphone. So maybe his judgment is way better than mine. But I would think that being able to show that video would be relevant to proving the elements of the first degree reckless homicide. Because remember, you have to show that he had circumstances which show utter disregard for human life. Well, one of the ways in which you might show his utter disregard for human life is, if everyone around him is sort of egging him on and saying, oh yeah, good thing you're here to help us clean up the streets. I don't know. So I don't know. I think I maybe see the logic here and again, there's no disputing that he killed two people injured a third. That's obviously not up for debate. It's just a typical like, well, was it a self defense thing? Or was it not? And I wonder if the prosecutor is thinking, I don't want that video where the police are kind of siding with it. I don't want to make him seem like he's on the side of justice, you know? Because that might make you feel like it's more of a self defense thing if you're a juror. Interestingly enough your ruling is rather similar to what judge Schroeder said. He said, I'm not going to allow you to admit the video for the substance of it. Here was this really, quote, I would not let it that the video. Be used to prove that the entire police presence on that evening appreciated mister rittenhouse's behavior, or his presence. Relevance is another matter. If police tell him, it's a good thing you people are here, given the state of lawlessness that's existing, is that something that's influencing the defendant and emboldening him in his behavior, that would seem to me to be an argument for relevance. So yeah, you can use that to probe into written house's mindset, but you can't use it to say the police approved of his actions. Okay. Then I decided I would pull up everything I could find. About this judge, Bruce Schroeder, right? Just try and figure out because this is kind of ambiguous. And I would like to know, right? Like does he have this thumb on the scale one way or the other? And again, you know, notice, particularly among, you know, sort of our left are left leaning audience, right? Like all cops are bastards and all prosecutors are cops up until it's, you know, somebody you actually want prosecutor. Yeah. So Schroeder was appointed by a democratic governor in 1983. He's 75, right? So yes, obviously one young judge compared to all the other ones. Right. You know, you'd love this to be in the hands of a 30 year old African American woman. It's the hands of an old white guy. That's a minus. But appointed by a democratic governor in 83. He was then elected in 84, reelected in 2014, ran unopposed. His term expires 2026. In reading local Wisconsin newspapers, the best that I can find is I'm going to share a couple of these. He's referred to as no nonsense. And there's a sense that he is kind of prosecution. So I'm going to walk through both of those. And I've got the links that put in the show notes. But this is from Wisconsin tribune. Schroeder's no nonsense reputation is well known of criminal defense attorneys. He's not intimidated by the spectacle in the media involvement in this case or the high stakes. He's essentially denied almost every pre trial motion by both sides and really focusing the parties on what happened the night of the shootings that came from local criminal defense attorney Dan Adams. Prior to the rittenhouse trial, the most high profile trial that judge Schroeder had was the Mark Jensen homicide trial in 2008..

binger Kyle rittenhouse Luger mister rittenhouse Ryan Schroeder Bruce Schroeder Facebook Wisconsin tribune Wisconsin Dan Adams rittenhouse judge Schroeder Mark Jensen