Pretty sure he is speaking from experience...
Posted on 11/17/2021 3:40:22 AM PST by MtnClimber
hat is an extremely serious allegation and one that seems, on its face, to justify the requested mistrial with prejudice.
During the Kyle Rittenhouse trial, the prosecution argued that Kyle provoked the men who attacked him by waving his gun. To prove this, during the trial, the prosecution gave the defense fuzzy drone footage. There was a great deal of argument about what could be extrapolated from that fuzzy view. It turns out that the prosecution had within its possession a high-quality video that it played for the judge after the trial ended. On this, and other evidentiary grounds, the defense moved for a mistrial with prejudice.
The defense motion states the facts with sufficient clarity that I’m going to reprint them here verbatim:
On November 5. 2021, the fifth day of trial on this case, the prosecution turned over to the defense footage of a drone video which captured some of the incident from August 25, 2020. The problem is, the prosecution gave the defense a compressed version of the video. What that means is the video provided to the defense was not as clear as the video kept by the state. The file size of the defense video is 3.6 MB and the state’s is 11.2 MB. Further, the dimensions on our video are 480 x 212, the state’s, 1920 x 844. The video which was in the state’s possession, wasn't provided to the defense until after the trial concluded. During the jury instructions conference, the defense played their version of the video for the court to review. The state indicated their version was much clearer and had their tech person come into court to have the court review their clearer video. The video is the same; the resolution of that video, however, was not.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Is anybody surprised by this?
The prosecutor should be disbarred. I will be very disappointed if they are not.
What was the prosecutions reasoning for holding the HD quality footage until after the trial? Why did they bother showing the video knowing it would open up a can of worms. It comes across as the state DA prosecution team lie cheats and steals just like the BLM and Antifa goons they are protecting. Hope the jury figured this out.
You are correct, they should be, but don't be disappointed, because they won't be disbarred.
Wisconsin, like PA have many conservatives but the demonRATs have control of boards and committees and towns and cities.
We have been living life and the communists were infiltrating everything, and CRT and blm are just open evidence of that.
“””It turns out that the prosecution had within its possession a high-quality video that it played for the judge after the trial ended.”””
If I recall correctly, I watched that back and forth between the attorneys and the judge who were watching the ‘better’ version.
I do not recall anyone saying: “Wow, this uncompressed video is a lot clearer”.
Considering everything else they did you would think the judge would dismiss the case. If it wasn’t high profile then I think he would. Instead they will charge this kid with something. They are going to riot anyways.
would showing the 11.2MB video have helped proving Kyle’s innocence?
Or, is it the fact that a different video was shared.
Showing a fuzzy video sure wastes a lot of time and money trying to decipher what each shape is. Prosecution should pay Kyle’s Defense Lawyers.
Ever read about the Soviet show trials?
Their video guy worked for several days and ~ 20 hours to polish a turd that they had (for at least that long) and never revealed it to the defense. Not guilty! Case dismissed and the state will pay all costs to the defense.
There is also unconfirmed rumor that the prosecution knew the identity of “Jump Kick Man” because he approached the prosecution to offer his testimony in exchange for dropped pending unrelated charges against him.
If true, then the identity of “Jump Kick Man” should have been shared with defense.
Yet more withheld evidence.
Plus … on one, or more occasions during questioning, prosecutors said the ID of JKM was unknown. If that is/was a lie, then …
Pretty sure he is speaking from experience...
I was watching a bunch of attorneys on a YouTube channel yesterday discuss the case. They live streamed the trial and would provide various legal opinions and case strategies throughout.
Anyway, one of them brought up the fact that BINGER has a history of prosecutorial misconduct and this commenting attorney offered pre trial advice to Kyle’s team on how to handle this attorney but they chose not to.
I think it might have been Branca.
Why is this even a factor? I have seen several times that if someone is in retreat, he regains his self defense protections.
They're just camouflaged in nice suits.
After some more research, I cannot find a mainstream story about the identity of Jump KicK Man (not surprising) but did find this from a smaller blog Wisconin Right Now:
Maurice Freeland, a felon with a long criminal history and an open domestic violence charge, is accused of being the mysterious supposedly unidentified man known as “Jump Kick Man” during the Kyle Rittenhouse trial.Wisconsin Right Now has learned from a law enforcement source in a position to know that prosecutors informed the Rittenhouse defense team only last Thursday, Nov. 11, 2021, as the trial came to an end, that Freeland had come forward claiming to be Jump Kick Man.
It’s not clear when Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger and his boss, DA Mike Graveley, first learned about Freeland’s claims, the source said. Clearly, it would be a much bigger issue if the prosecution knew his identity for longer because the defense might have wanted to call or cross-examine him or track him down and vet the story; Wisconsin Right Now wrote Graveley and Binger and asked them for comment, and neither wrote back.
So it is possible that defense was informed, and decided that there wasn't any probative value in interviewing him or calling him for the defense, and thus not worth mentioning in the mistrial brief.
It’s the Rekeita Law Channel on Youtube. Barnes used to part of the defense counsel team. He was the one that commented.
The prosecutor is a dirty slimey corrupt rat. As are many left wing activists like he is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.