Jonathan Turley has never struck me as one for going out on legal limbs without carefully assessing their strength. So it seems notable that he expresses his expectations for the outcome of the Rittenhouse so firmly:
With the end of closing arguments, the jury now has the case. I remain confused how the sixth count was ever adopted. Even without the grand jury/indictment process, the prosecutor still had to establish the crime in the preliminary examination (PE)...
I still fail to see how Binger could represent that a crime was committed under the state governing the sixth count. I also fail to understand how a court could have found probable cause to believe a crime was committed on possession.
Now the jury will consider five counts that are ridiculed [sic = riddled] with prosecutorial contradictions. I cannot imagine that the prosecution hold much credibility with the jury at this point.
I would be astonished if the prosecution could secure a single conviction on the five remaining counts.
As you can see, Turley continues to consider that the dropping of the sixth (possession) count was a body blow to what little credibility remained of the prosecution’s case.
If Kyle is declared innocent there may be some violence, but life will go on. If he is declared guilty, expect a major change. To protect themselves people will resort to concealed carry of unregistered handguns, and they will when they feel threatened shoot to kill. Then they will disappear so as not to have to explain themselves. There will be accidents.
SWC:
>> https://twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1460794981623353347 <<
>> https://twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1460794981623353347 <<
Assuming this isn't just simply a "compressed file" (such as a zipped file) versus the decompressed size; it if it truly is a low res version given to defense, and a HI res version of the same video used by prosecution during closing arguments, then the defendant has been denied his due process rights to a fair trial.
If I had to guess, he either gets NG on all counts, or a mistrial with prejudice. This is egregious prosecutorial misconduct, and the judge can't let it stand. The kid is a free man right now. It's over ....
One unfortunate fact: defense didn't notice the hi-res version used by prosecutors during closing -- they should have noticed, and immediately objected. But they can't be held accountable for not being video resolution experts, so the only option for the judge -- if the jury comes back with any guilty verdicts at all -- is to set aside the guilty verdicts, and issue a judgement N.O.V., or a mistrial with prejudice. Alternatively, judge stops deliberations and orders jury to return a directed NG verdict. (Both outcomes presume the defense raises the issue tomorrow morning, but they may be confident enough in the jury to not bother. But to preserve it as an appealable error, they need to make the objection.)