Posted on 11/04/2021 9:16:18 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Richard “Richie” McGinniss, chief video director for The Daily Caller, testifies in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial at the Kenosha County Courthouse on Thursday in Kenosha, Wisconsin. A key prosecution witness in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse on Thursday indicated that a man Rittenhouse shot was aggressive and reaching for the then-17-year-old when the shooting took place.
Testimony from a prosecution witness that painted Rittenhouse as responding to aggressions rather than being the aggressor was characterized by the website Legal Insurrection as an “absolute train wreck” for the prosecution’s case against Rittenhouse. “This is NOT how it’s supposed to be done,” author Andrew Branca noted.
Richard McGinniss — who was recording video on a cell phone for The Daily Caller on the night of the shootings with which Rittenhouse is charged — indicated Joseph Rosenbaum, the first man Rittenhouse shot, tried to grab the rifle the teen was holding.
Rittenhouse had gone to Kenosha in response to rioting that took place in the Wisconsin community.
“So your interpretation of what [Rosenbaum] was trying to do … is complete guesswork,” prosecutor Thomas Binger said at one point when questioning McGinniss, according to a video posted on Twitter .
“Well, […]
READ THE WHOLE STORY AT : THE WESTERN JOURNAL
In a video posted on Legal Insurrection, McGinnis says that as the confrontation began, Rittenhouse was holding the gun at a 45-degree angle with the barrel pointed toward the ground.
McGinnis said that when Rosenbaum “lunged” for the gun, Rittenhouse “dodged around,” adding “that’s when it was leveled at Mr. Rosenbaum and fired.”
McGinnis continued to use the word lunge to characterize Rosenbaum’s effort to grab the gun.
Binger and McGinniss sparred over words, with the prosecutor wanting the witness to characterize Rosenbaum as falling when he was shot.
“He was lunging, falling. I would use those as synonymous terms in this situation because basically, you know, he threw his momentum towards the weapon,” McGinniss said.
You know a prosecutor is in deep trouble if he needs to try to discredit testimony from his own “key witness.”
Rosenbaum was a convicted child molester. After Rittenhouse killed him, Rosenbaum’s victims and their families finally were able to sleep soundly. For now they knew this bizarre monster would never be able to hurt them again.
Well, well.
You can bring any case to trial I suppose, if you make enough
sense to a judge. The problem is, if it’s as uncalled for or
as weak as this case is, you’re going to look like a dufus of
the century as you are proven incredibly misguided over and
over during the trial.
That’s what is happening here.
I just hope the jury is wise enough to grasp what they are
seeing.
What is the over/under until ANTIFA tries to assassinate the judge in this case?
They can’t stand for anything approaching truth.
Rosenbaum died doing what he loved: chasing underage boys.
Your summary omits the most devestating part
Prosecutor: “So your interpretation of what [Rosenbaum] was trying to do is complete guesswork.”
Witness: “Well, he said ‘fuck you’ and then he reached for the weapon.”
You’ve heard of jury nullification, and this is a new thing for 2021 called prosecution nullification as We The People are going to hide our true feelings to be called as witnesses (or to get on juries) and destroy the left’s risky scheme of convicting patriots. They are trying to destroy America from within. Like clockwork Democrats spend years promoting something BY NAME then they claim it is just a figment of our imagination. I saw an article of the latest example, “CNN’s John King Falsely Declares CRT Is the GOP’s Racist ‘Dog Whistle’”, and you can give that a look at NewsBusters. Old Alinsky trick from Rules For Radicals. And as long as those witnesses are speaking truthfully they have nothing to fear from angry prosecutors.
He had his hand on the barrel so he wasn’t simply falling. Lunging sounds more accurate.
His vetting is for ****. That is great news for Kyle, who isn’t guilty anyway.
That’d make a great tshirt.
Semantics is how the prosecutor plans to win. Banking on a pliable jury that hates guns.
One of the jury folk said, ‘Why does anyone need a machine gun?’
Kind of tells us what ding bats are deciding this case.
Rittenhouse was hardly a underage boy at the time.
Remember that the liberals’ love to have you believe that anybody under the “legal” age are incapable of making intelligent choices.
Just another part of their plan to destroy the country.
I heard McGinness’ statements early on. It seemed like he WAS just trying to be a “reporter” and describing the events.
And then he turned into trying to be a medic. With camera rolling trying to figure out where Rosenbaum had been shot, etc.
At the 11 and 12 second interval it appears that Kyle’s gun has jammed due to the attack on him (falling, kick from one guy, and hit by the skateboard by another). That is when the now one-armed guy decides he has the chance to kill Kyle. The attacker was raising his hands and backing away, and then suddenly moves in with gun pointed at Kyle.
Kyle quickly clears the jam and defends himself.
A video from another angle shows Kyle getting up after shooting his attacker, with his rifle at low-ready. He begins scanning the area and sees the guy in black armed with a baseball bat. The baseball bat lowers his bat and shrugs - and Kyle continues his scan and then jogs off.
Pretty impressive for a 17-year old.
The need to make him an example much like what they are doing to the jan 6 patriots and it seems they cant
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.