Eyewitnesses on the court steps watched as the verdict was read during the Kyle Rittenhouse trial. Legal experts say Rittenhouse’s self-defence claim was strong from the start.
Nathan Howard / Getty Images
hide captions
switch captions
Nathan Howard / Getty Images
Eyewitnesses on the court steps watched as the verdict was read during the Kyle Rittenhouse trial. Legal experts say Rittenhouse’s self-defence claim was strong from the start.
Nathan Howard / Getty Images
After 27 hours of deliberation over four days, a jury found Kyle Rittenhouse not guilty of the five counts he faced after fatally shooting two people and wounding a third during a night of unrest. in Kenosha, Wis., last year.
Rittenhouse trembled as the verdict was read, counted the numbers one by one, then collapsed in sobs.
Mark Richards, Rittenhouse’s top defense attorney, told reporters outside court after the verdict was read: “There were times when we doubted the case. There were times when we were confident.”
Rittenhouse faces five counts after he fatally shot Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, and wounded Gaige Grosskreutz, then 26, the most serious count, attempted murder of first degree. one, carries a mandatory sentence of life in prison.
Although jurors did not speak to the media to explain their decision, legal experts contacted by NPR during the trial said the acquittal was not surprising.
“I think anyone looking at the evidence can see that the jury can have a hard time reaching a decision,” said Julius Kim, defense attorney and former prosecutor based in the Milwaukee area. agreed that Kyle Rittenhouse did not defend himself.
Rittenhouse had a strong case of self-defense
Prosecutors allege that Rittenhouse put himself in danger through a series of reckless choices: He arrived in Kenosha during a time of brutal riots and destruction; he armed himself with an AR-15-style rifle; he was still there before curfew and after separating from his group. They insisted that he was the only one there who shot someone.
But self-defense laws in Wisconsin allow someone to use deadly force if they believe they are in immediate danger of death or major bodily harm.
“And if so, he is authorized to use force that is essentially necessary to contain the threat,” Kim said.
Rosenbaum, the first person Rittenhouse shot, acted aggressively throughout the night, according to video evidence and eyewitness testimony. He then chases Rittenhouse through an old car park. Rittenhouse and another witness both testified that Rosenbaum reached for Rittenhouse’s gun. Rittenhouse fires four shots within a second, killing him.
“Mr. Rosenbaum was chasing me. I pointed the gun at him, and it didn’t discourage him. He could have run away instead of trying to take my gun, but he still chased me. It didn’t stop him,” Rittenhouse testified last week.
Rittenhouse then fled towards the police, he said during the trial. While he was running, several people started chasing him, including Huber and Grosskreutz. Huber attacked Rittenhouse with a skateboard, the evidence shows, and Grosskreutz was armed with a Glock pistol.
Prosecutors say the two men believed Rittenhouse was an “active shooter” and were trying to disarm him. But Rittenhouse testified that he feared for his life.
Steven Wright, a law professor at the University of Wisconsin, said the defense delivered a “very disciplined message” throughout the trial. They repeatedly highlighted Rittenhouse’s stated intentions that night – acting as a healer and protector of private property – and the threats to his safety, Wright said.
That message is shown most clearly when Rittenhouse himself attests, a bounce that many experts say is very effective for the defence.
“He was very prepared,” said Charles Coleman Jr., a civil rights lawyer and former prosecutor. He didn’t appear complacent or indignant. “That needs to be something that the judges were reminded of.”
Prosecutors had a high bar to pass Rittenhouse’s claim for self-defense
In Wisconsin, once a defendant has made a self-defense claim, prosecutors must then dismiss it “beyond a reasonable doubt,” the experts explained.
The prosecution’s case relies on video evidence that is often dark and fuzzy. An important video is shot from a great distance, and in others, the action is sometimes hindered, making it difficult to draw precise conclusions.
Chris Zachar, criminal defense attorney based in La Crosse, Wis., said: “Some of the still-frame footage, some of the still-frame footage seemed to support his claim of self-defense. Dear”.
Prosecutors tried to convince jurors that Rittenhouse provoked the encounter with Rosenbaum, which would have reduced his claim of self-defense. But the interaction they describe saw Rittenhouse point his rifle at someone else before the chase was captured with just a drone video, shot from more than a block away, in which Rittenhouse and Rosenbaum are very small and remote.
Another video of Rittenhouse’s encounter with Huber and Grosskreutz was analyzed frame-by-frame during testing. Defense attorneys and prosecutors urged jurors to reach the opposite conclusion – including, importantly, whether Grosskreutz had pointed a pistol at Rittenhouse before he was shot.
“The state must prove that Kyle Rittenhouse incited the attack with evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. And so the question is: If everyone in that courtroom remains uncertain, if the judge isn’t sure, what about 12 juries to be sure?” Kim said.
The state’s own witnesses have sometimes helped with the Rittenhouse case
Prosecutors called more than a dozen witnesses to help make their case. But legal experts say, at times, those witnesses seem to back up Rittenhouse’s claims of self-defense.
The state called two men who had accompanied Rittenhouse that night also intending to help protect private property. Both witnesses, Ryan Balch and Jason Lackowski, said Rosenbaum asked to be shot and the armed men “walked the wrong way” in an attempt to react. One described him as “hyperactive.”
“It all paints a picture that Mr. Rosenbaum is definitely the aggressor,” said Wright of the University of Wisconsin. “There is testimony that he rushed in for a gun.”
Another state witness, Richie McGinniss, the video director of a right-wing news site who witnessed the Rosenbaum shooting, testified that Rosenbaum was searching for Rittenhouse’s rifle.
And Grosskreutz, the prosecutor’s star witness who was the sole survivor of being shot by Rittenhouse, gave testimony that underscores the challenge prosecutors face.
Grosskreutz had been running after Rittenhouse after the first shooting and was approaching him, pistol in hand, when Rittenhouse shot Huber. Grosskreutz testified that he believed Huber was trying to harm Rittenhouse.
For a moment, Grosskreutz stopped and raised his hands to the sky, his right hand holding the gun with a limp.
But then he saw Rittenhouse adjusting his weapon, he testified, so he retracted his arm and moved toward Rittenhouse. In doing so, he pointed his weapon at Rittenhouse, he admitted during cross-examination.
“It’s not until you point your gun at him – hit him with the gun, now your hands are down, pointed at him – that he shoots, right?” Defense attorney Corey Chirafisi said.
“Yes,” replied Grosskreutz.
Kim, a former prosecutor, pointed out that that exchange was a particularly bad time for the prosecution.
“I think the defense did a good job of taking one of the state’s witnesses and using him to start building their case,” he said. “There was a time when I had to remind myself who called him a witness.”
