Posted on 11/10/2021 11:20:46 AM PST by RandFan
Judge wants the case to get to the jury.
If Rittenhouse is acquitted, then that’s it.
At this point the judge could be at the point of ordering dismissal even if the jurors convict.
“The Rittenhouse trial is fixed. He will get off. Every time the prosecutor makes a point or traps Rittenhouse in a lie, the judge intervenes to stop him. This is one of the most egregious examples of the lack of equal justice in this country that I have witnessed.”
Henry M. Rosenberg on Twitter
Just to illustrate the other side.
Thanks for that.
I know that plenty of guns have not killed as many persons as Ted Kennedy’s Oldsmobile.
Yeah, I think this trial has been pretty loose, even the judge doesn’t seem to have much control. He gets a little disturbed at the DA now and then, but lets him keep doing the same garbage. The defense attorneys are doing a little better, but they have the benefit of having all the facts and evidence in their favor. Still, not a favorable view of the Kenosha County court system.
Why would you want a mistrial when you are winning? Doesn’t that just mean you start over again? He could face a better Prosecutor, who has the hindsight to avoid all of the current pitfalls the current idiot has fallen into. Why start over when you are winning? I don’t get it. He seems to be on his way to full exoneration and having this thing behind him. Why ask for a mistrial and have to repeat the entire process with a better Prosecutor?
What am I missing here?
If I’m on trial I want an attorney who fights for me like a junkyard dog. I want objections on EVERYTHING.
But that’s just me.
One of the things I would not do if charged in a small county is get a local lawyer. They know they have to work with the DA in the future so they might not be as aggressive.
They have the wrong guy on trial 🤪
There are a lot of reasons you don’t necessarily object to every objectionable question. For one, the objectionable testimony may actually be helping you. And for another, objections can draw the jury’s attention to something you don’t want them to pay attention to, or make it look like you are trying to hide something.
Experienced trial lawyers often make fewer objections, because they’ve learned that less is often more in front of the jury.
Those who have been following the trial on Rekieta Law on You Tube know that this thread is incorrect.
The Lead Defense Counsel informed the judge that he intends to file a motion for a dismissal of all charges with prejudice (which means that the case cannot be brought again). The grounds are based on prosecution misconduct regarding 5th Amendment violations in open court. However, the motion has not yet been filed. Stay tuned.
They probably knew that the judge would deny it, and asking for a mistrial may have been necessary to preserve a complaint for either a post-verdict motion for new trial or for an appeal. In many jurisdictions, certain complaints can be waived by failing to move for a mistrial.
If there is a mistrial with bias declared, the case cannot be retried.
You ask for a mistrial so you don't waive it on appeal in the event that the jury decides to convict.
The prosecution appears to be pushing for a mistrial so they can have a do-over. The defense is asking for a mistrial with prejudice, meaning that the prosecution would not be able to retry him.
It is hard for a jury to pay attention during all of the testimony during a trial. It is like trying to listen to two weeks of lectures, eight hours a day, in a course that you did not choose to take.
You want the jury to pay attention when you are questioning witnesses, not necessarily when the other side is questioning witnesses. If the jurors are starting to nod off while the opposing attorney is questioning a witness and you make an objection, the jury will pay more attention. If the objection is sustained, they will really start paying more attention.
So you object only when you have to. When you have to object you stand up and calmly state the objection, like it is no big deal whichever way the judge rules.
Early in my career, I had a non-English-speaking client having a very bad time on the stand, giving some terrible testimony through the translator. Apparently I didn’t have much of a poker face, because I spoke to a couple jurors afterwards and they mentioned how frustrated I looked.
That was a pretty valuable lesson. Since then, I’ve learned to look like I am falling asleep myself during the other guy’s questioning. Funny enough, that was another lawyer’s case that was referred to me to re-try after a mistrial.
” Based on my extensive experience watching TV crime shows, I’d say that is grounds for a mistrial.”
Totally meaningless if you didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn last night.
Back in the early 1990s, when I was a few years out of law school, I got to serve on a jury in a murder trial. It surprised the hell out of me that neither side struck me. It was the best CLE I have ever had.
“A mistrial order is a legal decision by the judge that can be more easily overturned by a quarter of appeals.”
OMG!!!
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.