Rittenhouse’s indictment deceives jury over testimony from their own witnesses – RedState

0
17

The prosecution presented its concluding argument today, and it was a festival of false and misleading information.

As we previously reported, one of the most troubling things was that the prosecutor, ADA Thomas Binger, falsely claimed that you lose your right to self-defense when you carry a gun.

This is simply wrong under the law. If that were true, then you could never have a self defense case, no one who has a gun could ever claim self defense. And maybe that’s the goal here: contesting the right to self-intensity with a gun in general. Binger also told them that you cannot claim self-defense if the person is unarmed. It is so untrue.

Why did he say that? He is trying to argue that Rittenhouse caused the situation, which would allow him to argue that self-defense disappears, as we have previously reported. But that doesn’t mean it can misrepresent the law and deceive the jury with remarks that simply aren’t legally true.

But those weren’t the only untruths reported by the prosecution. Check out this bull festival from the jury prosecution bullet points.

He claims that Joseph Rosenbaum, the first man shot and killed, did not threaten Rittenhouse or try to take his gun. The prosecutor said Rittenhouse fired before Rosenbaum got close.

But Rosenbaum threatened to kill Rittenhouse, according to Ryan Balch’s testimony, and he obviously wanted his gun, which is why he grabbed it, to witness Richie McGinniss. Those were Binger’s witnesses who testified that. So, not only does he not tell the truth, but he contradicts his own witnesses. Not good looking.

Then there was this hot grip. According to Binger, Rittenhouse should have stayed around and helped Rosenbaum and, apparently, let the mob kill him rather than run away.

How did it work when people reached it? Gaige Grosskreutz pointed a gun to his head, and Anthony Huber hit him in the head with a skateboard. The “mob” was the threat to Rittenhouse – that was the problem. If he stayed around and / or didn’t defend himself, he had every reason to believe they would come after him as Rosenbaum did.

Crowds can apparently be “provoked”, but Rittenhouse cannot. They are “provoked” by the fact that he has a gun and defends himself, says Binger. But according to this logic, he is not allowed to defend himself if they attack him, he just has to let himself be attacked.

Binger painted those affected as “heroes”, even claiming that Huber gave his life to save others. Leaving aside the all-important point that Huber chased someone, not knowing what the facts were, and then attacked Rittenhouse in the head with a skateboard.

Meanwhile, he mocked Rittenhouse’s effort to try to help people.

We will have to see what the defense’s concluding argument is, but it is troubling to think that the jury has not had these untruths challenged so far and that they could be taken from this.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here