The Rittenhouse trial has become a national spectacle for multiple reasons, starting with the very reason that Rittenhouse is on trial in the first place.
After all, most reasonably levelheaded individuals recognize the case to be fairly clear-cut in terms of basic self-defense, especially when the prosecution’s own “star” witness admitted to pulling a gun on Rittenhouse.
To be fair, however, the prosecution has made a number of other high profile lapses, including the absolute bungling of the basic definition of self-defense.
“[They] are trying to convince you that Joseph Rosenbaum was going to take that gun and use it on the defendant because they know you can’t claim self-defense against an unarmed man like this …
You lose the right to self-defense when you’re the one who brought the gun, when you’re the one creating danger. When you’re the one provoking other people.” [Source: Breitbart]
Clearly, prosecutor Thomas Binger needs to go back to law school.
Exactly how else is one supposed to engage in self-defense if they are not already armed? So, are all homeowners now no longer allowed to defend themselves since they may well be “creating danger” by having firearms in their homes?
Moreover, as far as “provoking” people is concerned, last time anyone checked, Rittenhouse did not exactly start the mass looting, burning, rioting, and other forms of violent destruction that Kenosha became embroiled in after yet another national outrage.
Needless to say, Bestor encountered widespread ridicule for that particular gem of a remark, especially since it was yet another proverbial nail in the prosecution’s coffin.
Another prosecutor, James Kraus, hasn’t fared much better, especially when he recommended for Rittenhouse to face a brutal beating.
In other words, Rittenhouse should have merely retreated (while likely being beaten) rather than defend himself (yes, a supposed lawyer made these remarks).
“Mr. Richards misstated the standard [for self-defense] … It is not ‘could have caused’ great bodily harm or death. It is not ‘likely’ to have caused great bodily harm or death. It is ‘imminent threat’ of death or great bodily harm …
Where is that, when you get a couple scrapes? Everybody takes a beating sometimes, right? Sometimes you get in a scuffle, and maybe you do get hurt a little bit. That doesn’t mean you get to start plugging people with your full metal jacket AR-15 rounds.” [Source: Breitbart]
“Everybody takes a beating sometimes?” Really, Mr. Kraus, is that so? How about you take one for the team then, ensuring that your suit isn’t mussed in the process?
That is, when you’re done preening for the ultimate dog-and-pony show routinely put up by the media.
While the clown show masquerading as prosecution has demonstrated abysmal performance over the course of the trial, it appears that the most egregious offense of all occurred when they withheld video evidence, which would have been vital to Rittenhouse’s defense.
Specifically, the prosecution had access to high-definition video footage of the entire situation, though they declined to produce this footage in court; instead, they used low-resolution, grainy footage instead.
Even worse, prosecutors attempted to use low quality footage as evidence that Rittenhouse had chased Rosenbaum, yet the “compressed version” offered by prosecution was not nearly as “clear as the video kept by the state.”
Consequently, at the literal eleventh hour, calls have mounted for a mistrial in light of the withheld evidence.
In its motion, Rittenhouse’s defense pointed out the integral role that video footage serves in the trial.
“The video footage has been at the center of this case … The failure to provide the same quality footage in this particular case is intentional and clearly prejudices the defendant.” [Source: The Daily Wire]
Considering that Biden has openly proclaimed that Rittenhouse is a “white supremacist,” it is safe to say that prejudice has been stacked up against him since the onset of court proceedings.
Even Psaki couldn’t come up with a remotely adequate excuse for Biden’s commentary.
As jury deliberations continue, cities across the nation continue to brace for the mass riots that will inevitably ensure if the verdict is truly just …
Author: Ofelia Thornton
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More