Posted on 11/17/2021 1:09:13 PM PST by Navy Patriot
The jury at Kyle Rittenhouse’s murder trial will be allowed to review some of the video in the Kenosha shootings, after their request on the second day of deliberations Wednesday triggered debate between the judge and opposing attorneys over how to accommodate the request.
The judge, meanwhile, expressed irritation over the media's coverage and legal experts’ commentary on some of his decisions, saying he would “think long and hard” about allowing televised trials in the future.
Jurors were weighing charges against Rittenhouse for a second day after they failed to reach a swift verdict Tuesday on whether he was the instigator of a night of bloodshed in Kenosha or a concerned citizen who came under attack while trying to protect property.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Way to go, Judge, that really helps out a lot. /s
What does it mean that the jury didn’t come back with a verdict after 5 minutes of deliberation?
Give a unanimous jury is needed to find guilty, could 8 jurors be for guilt, with one holding out?
Just find that hard to believe...
Was the fact that the first man shot was pulling the barrel of Rittenhouse’s rifle and, because Kyle’s finger was on the trigger, caused the rifle to fire, brought up in court?
I think that was mentioned but was it emphasized?
“The jury at Kyle Rittenhouse’s murder trial will be allowed to review some of the video...”
Is this a good thing?
I agree. I don’t like how things are going but we can only wait now.
WTF? The jury didn't have access to the video from the first minute of deliberations?
As I heard the instructions, unanimity is required for both guilty and not guilty verdicts.
Could be wrong.
“WTF? The jury didn’t have access to the video from the first minute of deliberations?”
No. The prosecution withheld some until the last minute.
L
“The jury at Kyle Rittenhouse’s murder trial will be allowed to review some of the video...”
Is this a good thing?
____________________________________
No. It means there is disagreement over guilt or innocence, time is dragging on and it hasn’t been resolved, which is generally considered a bad sign for a defendant.
BLUF - this judge is an idiot.
Two words, Judge Ito.
“What does it mean that the jury didn’t come back with a verdict after 5 minutes of deliberation?”
Multiple counts and it’s only Day 2 of deliberations.
I think Newsmax is a little impatient with their reporting
My “guess” is that the jury is trying to convince a holdout or two that “not guilty” is the only verdict they can return.
Well I guess they can just keep talking until the rioter wanna bees die of old age
Are jurors allowed to slap the sense into the holdouts? /s
This is a jury looking to manufacture soemthing to convict on. They are trying to find an excuse to be on both sides. This Judge is an incompent moron for allowing this farce to go on.
“No. The prosecution withheld some until the last minute.”
Technically past the last minute, maybe. But earlier they handed over the exact version they had, from their cell phone to a defense cell phone. The defense phone compressed the video, making some details not noticeable.
It’s gets worse to explain from there, but that’s a start. And it doesn’t sound good that the defense said if they had seen the original quality video they would have defended against it “differently”.
That’s concerning.
I hear that.
“What does it mean that the jury didn’t come back with a verdict after 5 minutes of deliberation?”
Generally (and I use that term with reservations), the longer a jury is out the worse it is for the defendant.
But, this case is kind of unusual in that it is WAY more high-profile than it should be; but that is because the media and the left have ginned it up to fever pitch. The jurors are well aware that they are under a microscope, so it may be that even if they have decided that Rittenhouse is not guilty they do not want to return a quick verdict, but rather are crossing their T’s and dotting their I’s.
But, one can never really predict what a jury will do (and I say that as having been involved in over a hundred trials during my career as a litigation analyst in the insurance industry).
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.