Rittenhouse Prosecutors Really Screw the Pooch

If you want to teach aspiring lawyers to recognize an incompetent prosecutor, just cue up the video of the Kyle Ritttenhouse trial and watch the clown show put on by Thomas Binger. Binger’s latest gaffe may force a mistrial if the jury does not find Kyle innocent of all charges. What did the dunce Thomas do? Withheld evidence from the defense.

According to the Daily Mail:

Prosecutors in Kenosha shooter trial WITHHELD high-definition video evidence from the defense that was ‘at the center of their case’ and initially shared a lower quality version of drone footage from the night of Kyle Rittenhouse shooting.

This is grounds for declaring a mistrial. So, why has the judge not shut it down? He is giving the jury a chance to do the right thing based on the evidence presented. The prosecution failed to present any evidence to support their claim that Kyle was an active shooter, a murderer on a rampage intent on killing innocent protesters.

But this is not the only grounds for declaring a mistrial. Before he pointed Kyle’s AR-15 at the jurors with his finger on the trigger (thank God the rifle was unloaded), Binger had already metaphorically shot his legs off. Remember? He challenged Kyle for embracing his constitutional right to remain silent until he had the chance to confront his accusers in a court of law.

This entry was posted in Larry Johnson. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Rittenhouse Prosecutors Really Screw the Pooch

  1. Babeltuap says:

    Mistrial. Are they really going to live with death threats the rest of their life over this kid who Biden suggested was a white supremacist:


    I highly doubt it. The pointing of the rifle with the index on the trigger at the jury was no accident; it was a message.

  2. Fred says:

    Pointing the rifle at people in the trial is the least egregious thing he’s done. Withholding evidence and witnesses far exceeds that. The left needs a directed verditct – so they can condemn the judiciary, or a mistrial – so they can continue to condemn the concept of a right to self defense. The press, fresh off earning those Pulitizers for Russia Collusion coverage – stands ready to condemn the young man who would in a fair trial be found ‘not guilty’. Why a city 83% white would riot over a white suspect who shot three white guys and is found not guilty at trial is not a question reasonable people should ask. The press sure won’t.

  3. BillWade says:

    Pinky Floyd’s nephew, and others, makes threats to intimidate the jury, the judge and family have received death threats, the prosecutor aims an AR-15 in the court, plus crucial evidence withheld by the prosecution, if the Rule of Law keeps getting trashed we’ll soon enough have war lords running our favellas.

  4. lysias says:

    Looks like the left wants riots.

  5. robt willmann says:

    The first questions about the drone video and its fuzzy and clearer versions is whether it is complete and not edited, and whether the clearer version is the clearest edition, or whether there is another one that has a still better resolution. This also goes for the forward looking infrared (FLIR) sensor’s video. Apparently the FLIR video came from the FBI. Was that the case with the drone video? Are there other images in video form from the FBI or other governmental agency or contractor that have not been revealed?

    The FBI has been known to say they cannot find something they had in their possession, as was the case with text messages between former FBI agent Peter Strzok and his paramour, former FBI lawyer Lisa Page. After Attorney General Jeff Sessions said “we will leave no stone unturned” to find them, the text messages were located.

    The drone video that is discussed in the British Daily Mail article, and in another motion for a mistrial with prejudice by Kyle Rittenhouse, is said to be at least in part shown here–

  6. JK/AR says:

    Here in Arkansas I’d call that brandishing and were I in Wisconsin and carrying my legally permitted weapon, it would appear, Wisconsin would call it that too:


    Binger, obviously, graduated the Alec Baldwin Academy of Firearms Safety.

    • Pat Lang says:

      I have told you people not to post links here without your thoughts.

      • JK/AR says:

        Aye aye Sir.

        I have very closely attended to this trial. State’s presentation of the full 11+MB – rather than what Defense got in its 4MB turnover of *available evidence – and given as Defense’s expert [Black] stating for the record occurred in 0.74 seconds. Further State in its presentation to the jury prefaced “We’re going to present this [evidence] ‘at half its speed.’ ”

        You and I Colonel Lang, aware as we are of, in what’s known in civilian circles as ‘The Tueller Drill”


        Almost certainly “appreciate” that the human Mind&Time can and (more frequently than not in my experience) does ‘play tricks’ on an individual’s perception of What the hell just happened? and how do I process that?

        I can only offer Sir that that [previously seen] Babylon Bee piece only occurred to me after I’d clicked on the ‘Post Comment’ Unconsidered to your prior, standing order.

        I regret Sir, my doing so and will from here on out, heed both the intent and the spirit of your House Rules.

        Yes Sir. I _[messed]_ up and submit myself to the authority of the Court.

  7. Jim S says:

    Baba Yetu – Peter Hollens & Malukah
    The same with lyrics

    May Kyle Rittenhouse and Alec Baldwin receive the same justice: fair and impartial. And if Man’s justice should falter and stumble, may the Lord extend His justice to both men, as well as His mercy, should they accept it.

  8. Fred says:

    Looks like the DA not only witheld high def video but knowingly doctored what was given. Those acts should result in disbarment at a minimum.

  9. JK/AR says:

    Colonel Lang, Sir.

    As the court’s video seems to be down at present – 1300 – here’s a “lawyer’s diiscussion” going on which – I would suggest; needs be backed to a startpoint some thirty (30) minutes prior to the point – 1400 – “ought be considered.”


    – Whether “our Justice System” is capable (given as I understand, some of our government agencies systems date back to COBOL – I have some real doubt) Regardless, here we are and whether Justice as we’ve understood it previously can exist side-by-side with “as the Framers intended” to “the Present State of Technology” I, personally, extremely doubt.

    [In the one hundred ten or so minutes I’ve taken to “proof” this comment; It wouldn’t surprise me at all to find there’s more scope I’ve … in this ‘computer-age’ there’s no benefit of hindsight acceptable … failed to account.]

    This ‘Age of Aquarious’ looks to me at present – not as promising as it was previously advertised.

Comments are closed.