Posted on 11/08/2021 3:42:26 PM PST by conservative98
Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger appeared stunned after a key prosecution witness in the murder trial of Kyle Rittenhouse in Kenosha, Wisconsin, Gaige Grosskreutz, admitted that he was only shot after he pursued the fleeting teenager and drew his own weapon, a handgun, and pointed it at Rittenhouse.
[cut]
Biden claimed, without evidence, that the 17-year-old Rittenhouse was a “white supremacist” — a claim that led immediately to threats of a defamation lawsuit from Rittenhouse’s attorney.
Rittenhouse faces several counts of murder, as well as a weapons charge and a curfew citation.
During cross-examination, defense attorney Corey Chirafisi noted that Grosskreutz had lied to police about being armed.
The Racine Journal Times summarized the exchange:
Chirafisi brings up statement Grosskreutz made to police on Aug. 26, saying at some point during Aug. 25 his Glock fell off his waist. Grosskreutz said he didn’t remember making that statement, but confirms it via written statement.
Chirafisi says “That’s a lie, no?” regarding the statement the gun fell. Grosskreutz says what he wrote was not a lie. “I told multiple officers that I dropped my firearm,” the statement reads, according to Chirafisi.
“You were chasing Mr. Rittenhouse with your gun, right?” Chirafisi asks. Grosskreutz says “I wasn’t chasing the defendant.”
…
“You omitted the fact (to police) that you ran up on him and had a Glock pistol in your hand?” Chirafisi asks, which Grosskreutz confirms, but notes that he just got out of surgery and “was on pain meds,” and the “traumatic experience I had just gone through.” Grosskreutz says that the omission was not “purposeful.”
Chirafisi then brings up that Grosskreutz had a “thoughtful process” to not share his occupation (out of concerns for safety) and make other statements accurately, but then he somehow didn’t mention having a gun.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Was this said in front of the jury?
I would think that would be “reasonable doubt” right there. Game over.
Feared for his life huh....what a joke
“the omission was not “purposeful.”
Boy I really dislike lawyers.
The DA started to worry when he noticed both Perry Mason and Ben Matlock were on the defense team.
I do not interpret the picture of the prosecutor as you do. It does not come across as a face palm, but a natural pose for someone that is taking notes. My perception might be different if the camera panned to the ADA table immediately upon GG’s statement - but this is like a full minute or two later. A face palm is generally an immediate action - and it isn’t held until the camera guy can get a good shot.
Yet, I do agree that it is damning to the prosecutor’s case.
How incompetent is this ADA? Don’t they thoroughly interview the witnesses before trial? These guys are as bad as the OJ Simpson case ADAs.
My wife’s cousin was a successful defense attorney form Palm Springs. He has a hundred hilarious anecdotes about incompetent govt DAs. They make his job much easier some times than it has any right to be.
That is an impressive shot of an arm vaporizing . . . yea?
I’m getting a vibe similar to when Mueller came before Congress and mumbled incoherently.
Why was this guy not arrested on the spot?
"Mama said there'd be days like this,
there'd be days like this, my mama said."
West Allis PD Part of the Gaige Grosskreutz police report
The suit, the tie, the shirt, all very professional. And, the black earrings do match...but...earrings.
My guess is they are inserts and without them there is a big, ugly hunk of flappy skin dangling there.
The only thing worse would be a face tattoo.
Frankly, I’m shocked he told the truth. I wonder why. This is certainly going to damage his street cred and his standing with his hommies.
Pause video at 2:54 for the hilarity of a pic of the ADA.
No one is going to take notes in that position as it could be misconstrued, if they have a brain.
So you dislike the lawyers who are busting their asses to save Kyle's hide? Including the one who just dealt a significant blow to the prosecution's case by his expert cross-examination of a prosecution witness?
I don’t see how Rittenhouse attorney can loose by asking the judge to dismiss the case upon the prosecution’s resting their case as they clear have not proven the crime was committed
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.