‘An Absolute Train Wreck’: Rittenhouse Prosecutors Left Scrambling After Their Own Witness Ruins Their Narrative

[The Purge]

Richard “Richie” McGinniss, chief video director for The Daily Caller, testifies in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial at the Kenosha County Courthouse on Thursday in Kenosha, Wisconsin. A key prosecution witness in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse on Thursday indicated that a man Rittenhouse shot was aggressive and reaching for the then-17-year-old when the shooting took place.

Testimony from a prosecution witness that painted Rittenhouse as responding to aggressions rather than being the aggressor was characterized by the website Legal Insurrection as an “absolute train wreck” for the prosecution’s case against Rittenhouse. “This is NOT how it’s supposed to be done,” author Andrew Branca noted.

Richard McGinniss — who was recording video on a cell phone for The Daily Caller on the night of the shootings with which Rittenhouse is charged — indicated Joseph Rosenbaum, the first man Rittenhouse shot, tried to grab the rifle the teen was holding.

Rittenhouse had gone to Kenosha in response to rioting that took place in the Wisconsin community.

“So your interpretation of what [Rosenbaum] was trying to do … is complete guesswork,” prosecutor Thomas Binger said at one point when questioning McGinniss, according to a video posted on Twitter .

“Well, […]

-----------

READ THE WHOLE STORY AT : THE WESTERN JOURNAL

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Rittenhouse was being hunted down by a mob of dangerous left wing fanatics and he had a good reason to fear for his life.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

How is this a conspiracy theory?

WTF, staff?

 

[Oddball]

Q: What's the difference between Jacob Blake and Kyle Rittenhouse?

A: Rittenhouse is going to walk.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Q: What's the difference between Jacob Blake and Kyle Rittenhouse?

A: Rittenhouse is going to walk.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Even Vinnie Politan on Court TV is saying the prosecution is having one hell of a time with this case and its looking very bad for the state.

 

[2aguy]

Even Vinnie Politan on Court TV is saying the prosecution is having one hell of a time with this case and its looking very bad for the state.

The state isn't interested in the actual case...they just hope the jury doesn't like that he was carrying an AR-15 rifle, and the state hopes that will be enough to convict him....

 

[airplanemechanic]

The state isn't interested in the actual case...they just hope the jury doesn't like that he was carrying an AR-15 rifle, and the state hopes that will be enough to convict him....

Yep, but he wasn't charged with illegally carrying a gun, he was charged with murder. So illegally carrying a gun does not equal murder. They're trying to find him guilty of apples but using oranges to do it.

The problem is, even the judge agrees, Wisconsin law is very unclear for 17yo kids. It has clear laws for 13 and under, and for 18 and over, but not 17. When even the judge agrees the laws are unclear, there is no way he can be convicted of murder based on him carrying an AR when the law doesn't even make THAT illegal.

 

[Flash]

Even Vinnie Politan on Court TV is saying the prosecution is having one hell of a time with this case and its looking very bad for the state.

I hope the jury does the right thing and Kyle walks free.

However, I remember the Casey Anthony trial. It was very clear to me after watching most of the trial that she was guilty as fuck of killing her little girl but the jury let her go.

You can never trust a jury especially if there is a political agenda attached.

 

[Flash]

I was the Jury Foreman on a murder trial back in the 1980s. I had just turned 40 and that was my first jury duty.

The first vote we had myself and another guy voted guilty. The rest of the jury voted to convict him on a much lesser charge. Three days later we returned a guilty verdict. He could very well have got off lightly had it not been for the other guy and me being adamant in our deliberations with the other jury members.

The point I am making is that the dynamics within a jury can often turn the tide. If there is some filthy ass Moon Bat on the jury that adamantly wants to convict Kyle for political reasons he/she may very well be able to turn the vote.

 

[Turtlesoup]

I hope the jury does the right thing and Kyle walks free.

However, I remember the Casey Anthony trial. It was very clear to me after watching most of the trial that she was guilty as fuck of killing her little girl but the jury let her go.

You can never trust a jury especially if there is a political agenda attached.

Most trials are won and lost by who is chosen on the jury--they have psychology specialists help the defense and prosecution chose jurist based on how they can be manipulated one way or the other. The juries now aren't a jury of your peers, but a jury that fits a psychological profile.

 

[JohnDB]

Most trials are won and lost by who is chosen on the jury--they have psychology specialists help the defense and prosecution chose jurist based on how they can be manipulated one way or the other. The juries now aren't a jury of your peers, but a jury that fits a psychological profile.

They had a quick and dirty jury selection process....the jurors filled out a questionnaire and either were chosen or dismissed by those answers they gave. None had true interviews to see if they gave truthful answers or not.

 

[the other mike]

Even Vinnie Politan on Court TV is saying the prosecution is having one hell of a time with this case and its looking very bad for the state.

He's a good kid. I'm really praying for him.
Someday there will be a children's pop-up book for Kyle right next to the black lives matter one with George Floyd in it.

 

[Rigby5]

Rittenhouse was being hunted down by a mob of dangerous left wing fanatics and he had a good reason to fear for his life.

Except that he deserved to be hunted down due to the deadly provocation he caused by being armed.
He could have stayed by the police and been perfectly safe.
But instead he deliberately chose to walk among the demonstrators, attempting to intimidate them with his rifle, one at a time.

 

[JohnDB]

Except that he deserved to be hunted down due to the deadly provocation he caused by being armed.
He could have stayed by the police and been perfectly safe.
But instead he deliberately chose to walk among the demonstrators, attempting to intimidate them, one at a time.

You have absolutely no clue as to what you are talking about.

 

[2aguy]

Except that he deserved to be hunted down due to the deadly provocation he caused by being armed.
He could have stayed by the police and been perfectly safe.
But instead he deliberately chose to walk among the demonstrators, attempting to intimidate them with his rifle, one at a time.

Are you really this dumb? He was out there to out iut the fire that the violent criminals had started

 

[Abatis]

The state isn't interested in the actual case...they just hope the jury doesn't like that he was carrying an AR-15 rifle, and the state hopes that will be enough to convict him....

We must listen to the anti-gunners, especially those in the medical field on the topic of AR-15's and their incredible, devastating dangerousness . . .

(screengrab in case she deletes it LOL)

 

[Turtlesoup]

Except that he deserved to be hunted down due to the deadly provocation he caused by being armed.
He could have stayed by the police and been perfectly safe.
But instead he deliberately chose to walk among the demonstrators, attempting to intimidate them with his rifle, one at a time.

You think this 17 year old has an intimidating sight?

 

[Soupnazi630]

Except that he deserved to be hunted down due to the deadly provocation he caused by being armed.
He could have stayed by the police and been perfectly safe.
But instead he deliberately chose to walk among the demonstrators, attempting to intimidate them with his rifle, one at a time.

Which does not give them the right to attack him which they did. Carrying a weapon is not a deadly provocation

 

[Cecilie1200]

The state isn't interested in the actual case...they just hope the jury doesn't like that he was carrying an AR-15 rifle, and the state hopes that will be enough to convict him....

I think the prosecution is hoping the jury will be too intimidated by the possibility of rioting and retaliation to render a just verdict, which is reprehensible.