KENOSHA, Wisc. — It is always a gamble when a defendant, in any case, testifies because of what can happen during cross-examination. Kyle Rittenhouse testifying last Wednesday was no exception, but once everything was all said and done, I believe it was worth the risk.
The most important thing the jury heard from Rittenhouse was that he felt in danger for his life when Joseph Rosenbaum chased him into the Car Source lot after Rosenbaum threatened to kill him two times earlier in the night. The jury was able to see how traumatic the whole ordeal has been for Rittenhouse after he started to have a panic attack on the stand when he was retelling what happened prior to shooting Rosenbaum. While Rittenhouse has been made fun of on the internet and social media for crying, in some cases even accusing him of fake crying, it would have been much worse if he remained unemotional, where those same detractors would accuse him of being a psychopath with no remorse for what he did.
It was also key for the jury to hear from him how he did not want to shoot Rosenbaum, or Anthony Huber and Gaige Grosskreutz for that matter, but he had to shoot them because they were actively attacking him. It highlights that while he had good intentions, which is backed up by the videos taken that fateful night, he unwittingly put himself in a bad spot when he went down to the car lot by himself after friend Dominick Black told him to go there to put out a fire rioters had started.
Rittenhouse taking the stand was worth the calculated risk because it gave Americans, who had not been watching closely, to see firsthand how vindictive Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger has been throughout the trial. Binger crossed the line twice by probing Rittenhouse's right to remain silent when he turned himself in and started to ask questions Kenosha County Circuit Court Judge Bruce Schroeder had previously ruled could not be asked, which led him to admonish Binger for behaving in such a non-good faith way. It is a shame the jury was led outside the courtroom and did not witness the much-deserved smackdown toward Binger. Other questions Binger asked Rittenhouse were borderline parodies (paraphrasing here):
- You've played Call of Duty, where you kill people, right?
- Why are you running toward a fire, what's the emergency there?
- You knew the crowd of rioters wouldn't be happy with you putting out the fires they were starting. So why were you trying to put out the fires?
While there were many pros, there is admittedly a big con. It is because Rittenhouse took the stand, Binger was able to open up a baseless theory that Rittenhouse first pointed his gun at Rosenbaum, which was the reason Rosenbaum started to chase after Rittenhouse. The prosecution is now entering a super grainy photo that supposedly provides proof for their claim into evidence, but the screenshot looks like it was taken on a potato.
Lawyers have commented on social media this was a fatal flaw in the gamble, which is why it should have never happened in the first place. But I think lawyers tend to overestimate how legally-conscious juries can be, not to say they are stupid by any means, but it doesn't take many years of law school to see, through the videos, Rittenhouse shot in self-defense and the prosecution massively failed to prove it was murder. Remember, Binger began his opening arguments by claiming they had video from the FBI proving Rittenhouse first chased Rosenbaum. Now, they're resting everything on a zoomed-in screenshot from a different source that uses an algorithm to guess what is occurring in order to populate the image as you zoom in.
Yes, it was unnecessary for Rittenhouse to have testified, but the jury was able to see he was, and still is, a kid.
Closing arguments are set for today, which means jury deliberations will take place shortly thereafter. It will be up to the jury how long they will debate Rittenhouse's fate. Whatever happens, he left it all on the field, and that's all you can ask for.