I think that the prosecution is going to argue that Rittenhouse had no business being there (”looking for trouble”) and no business carrying a rifle (”he should have just taken his beating or died like a good little serf”).
I don’t see what else they can argue.
Dunno how that will pay to this jury. I am thinking a hung jury and a mistrial, and that the DA will keep trying.
According to a pre-trial poll of the jurors, something like 2/3’s think he is guilty. Will that change after the trial? Probably not. I’ll be surprised if he doesn’t do a long time in prison, for self defense.
Self-defence therefore as it is justly called the primary law of nature, so it is not, neither can it be in fact, taken away be the law of society.
Blackstone, Commentaries on English Law
One argument that I saw was that since he brought a gun to a "protest" he gave up his right to self-defense. Can't remember if this was from a prosecutor or a "journalist".