This part-timer at 3 places is not part-timed tonight and so when you have to write… Pleae also visit my Substack Site. (It’s free and has dozens of my articles that I’ve published nowhere else) I recognize many names in the comments from my time here. And it would be a dream come true if you could move over, too.
*
As every semi-politically literate person knows, Kyle Rittenhouse’s highly symbolic criminal trial remains ongoing, despite a defense motion for a mistrial today. Just yesterday, there was speculation in reputable media that the prosecution was attempting to make mistakes that would near require the judge to order a mistrial because the prosecution has been a complete zoo-break from the beginning, highly disorganized. Additionally, the judge seems to be an older version of Mike Pence, Ron DeSantis’s grandfather, and that was before yesterday.
The judge had already made disturbing rulings regarding the admissibility of evidence that had civil rights advocates concerned. The judge refused to allow in a discussion between Rittenhouse and friends weeks earlier where, upon watching looting on television, Rittenhouse just mentions that he wishes he had a gun that moment so he could shoot some of the people. You know, like everyone does in similar situations.
That would seem to be important as to the state of mind (he is claiming self-defense) and though – yes – I’m an attorney, I don’t want to get too deep in the weeds, the judge determined that the statements would be too prejudicial.
Yes, well, pictures of him carrying an assault rifle, goggles, and gloves that night are prejudicial. They are also necessary. One might find the earlier statement just as necessary.
Moving on, there were several other rulings that continued to convince progressive analysts that this was perhaps the worst judge that could possibly have been assigned the case. And they determined all that before… the ringtone.
You cannot have your phone ring in court. If your phone rings in court, you are expected to go outside and commit seppuku on the courthouse steps. Pro tip: Do not have your phone go off in court. Now, generally, judges follow this rule too, because it would be pretty sucky to sit there and think, “Damn, yesterday a guy had to go out and stab his stomach for this and yet here I am, the boss, having the same issue.”
The judges I have been around don’t bring their phones into court. Not only did Rittenhouse’s judge bring it to court, but he also set the phone out on the bench as if he was going to play Roblox while the trial went on. Most would wear it in a pocket or somewhere discreet, yes? And check that it’s on vibrate six to ten times, right? This guy plops it right on his desk at the bench…
Right underneath the microphone. He put it in the one place, the only place near him, where if his phone went off, it would be heard throughout the courtroom and in the video (below). The next part is Alice in Wonderland stuff but the ringtone was one of Trump’s primary campaign songs, “Proud to Be an American” by Lee Greenwood. While the lyrics are neutral, everyone knows that the right, especially the MAGA right, has taken this up as their own informal national anthem. There it was, playing for the jury. Much more below:
LISTEN: Judge Bruce Schroeder's phone loudly goes off during the homicide trial for Kyle Rittenhouse. pic.twitter.com/ZqJPdf7g2o
— Mediaite (@Mediaite) November 10, 2021
We all know how MAGAs feel about Rittenhouse, we now know the judge is almost certainly a confirmed MAGA AND (though I’m the only one reporting this on major sites), I think someone needs to evaluate whether this was done on purpose as a sign to the jury. Trump’s hatred of the protestors and the riots was so palpable, so dripping, that one already “feels” what Trump and his supporters believe about the case. Is the judge telling the jury that he also knows?
Think about all the coincidences that had to come together for that to happen and that it might have real meaning. One must also consider the fitness of a judge who knows he works in a politicized environment, checks the tunes available to him and decides “I can have U2’s “Where the Streets Have No Name” or go with the most political song out there, one that is now cliche and kind of sucked from the beginning. I’m going with the latter!”
Some thoughts from various articles out today, reprinted by Rawstory:
“This is outrageous,” he tweeted in response to a video of Judge Schroeder’s phone ringing. “Aside from the obnoxious disruption it causes (I’ve seen judges threaten defendants and witnesses with jail time when their cell phones rang during court proceedings), it further reveals Judge Schroeder’s potential for bias in this matter and related ones.
Right.
The entire thing is wrapped up in Trump and the MAGA movement and any time a court case is about more than the evidence in front of the jury, it invites big problems into the procedures. I think I was one of only 2-3 at the bigger sites that truly floated the possibility that it was not accidental. I invite all of you to consider all that had to be done perfectly for this to work. Even if the phone had been on the other side of the desk it would have been hard to pick up.
****
[email protected] @JasonMiciak, Much Ado About Everything; By Jason Miciak
Even before the ringtone I was thinking WTF? about this judge opening up (apparently he likes having a fancy leather case for his phone and has to open the flap that covers/protects the screen) and fiddling with his phone ON THE BENCH! And setting it down with the flap open (so he can read instructions/suggestions from fellow MAGA legal types) in front of him. I don’t recall ever seeing a judge in a televised trial take out his phone as he’s settling in, much less fiddling with/using it. Have you? Has anyone else?
The one tiny bit of hope I take from this is that some members of the jury realize the fix has been in for Rittenhouse from the beginning, and that the judge is in on it in a major way AND are able to convince the rest that enough it rotten in Denmark to view the prosecution’s evidence in the most favorable light and convict. Some people get their backs up about being played as sucker pawns in someone else’s game. Maybe we’ll at least get a hung jury and the judge, realizing he overplayed his hand won’t direct a verdict of not-guilty or declare a mistrial with prejudice as the defense has asked him to do.
Now that the defense strategy is clear a different, better prepared prosecutor might be able to make a good case even if Rittenhouse/his lawyers decide he shouldn’t take the stand in a retrial.
I know far less about the actual trial than you, it’s fairly obvious. I know the important rulings and I know the judge let Rittenhouse out on $2 million bail that was raised for him, so it’s not exactly doing it’s job of holding him there.
Additionally, one has to keep in mind, this is the same community in which the police never told him to drop the gun, he held it up “friendly, friendly” and then was never detained, just questioned. Drove home.
It took national (not local) uproar to get him arrested. It was always going to be next to impossible to convict him.
But even that’s not the point. If it was a fair trial (the type of mixed rulings one expects), with a fair, mixed jury, and they found him not guilty, I would accept that he had sufficient evidence of self-defense to at least carry his burden, that he was defending himself, or thought he was defending himself
I will always believe he drove there hoping to put himself in a position to shoot in self-defense. But this trial won’t give us any answers on the weight of the evidence.
Let’s also not forget that this judge is the one who disallowed the use of the “v” word to refer to Rittenhouse’s VICTIMS (just in case the “v” word wasn’t clear). If I’d been the prosecutor, I would’ve DEMANDED the judge immediately recuse himself. How many murderers and rapists go to trial and their defenses manage to get the judge to disallow the word “victim” in describing the people who (allegedly) suffered at the defendant’s hands?
I thought that sealed it, too. But I heard an NPR report that he never allows the word “victim” in his court when it comes to self-defense cases, and they can prove that.
It’s an asinine rule. The guy is on trial bc there is probable cause to believe he committed the crime!
And guess what? They can be “victims” of him, and he can still legitimately (in an ideal court) found not guilty. The court can read the instruction on a right to use self defense in certain instances, and the jury takes that into consideration. States differ, but in many states , the burden doesn’t “formally” move. But, if Rittenhouse puts out evidence that it was 30% to have been using self defense, does that mean the prosecution has proven murder beyond a reasonable doubt? It is 100% up to the jury.
So, Rittenhouse can be “Not Guilty” of murder, and yet they can still be victims of his actions. It’s a ridiculous rule that actually goes against typical pro-prosecution judges.
But he only uses them in self-defense cases. Who usually brings self-defense? A man’s castle… cop feared for his health and safety… he reached down to his waist and I thought I saw a black metal object I interpreted to be a gun…
And who are those cases usually against?
The underlayment of the floor in this courtroom must be pretty poor indeed, people tripping around there like the floor has buckled up here and there … Watching Rittenhouse run up the street with his military style weapon, one designed to kill people, proven to do just that too many times before … “for his own safety”, WTF, what was he planning to do, that he would appear with so much power?
These weapons cost a lot of cash, and are restricted in some areas because of that power, and WOW, 2 million bucks collected for bail !!
Where did that much money come from? It was probably small change for the donors, as it was produced on a short lead time …
A new trial would be a problem for Rittenhouse, he already used the sobbing, emotional ploy to cue the jury, doing it again would trip all the wrong triggers …
The circus in the case of the Judge’s actions and the fly-away prosecution, are at the least mind-boggling, so many questions, unasked in my mind, and the answers were so poor from the defendant, the look of, “Guilty as charged”, seemed to flash across his face …
Get the Civil suits ready to go!!!
This is a combination of a prejudicial judge (noted from day 1 remarks) who’s also a backwoods hick now in the limelight and wanting to wave his dick around to prove he’s not just some hayseed cosplaying in a cheap polyester robe.
If the prosecution (chosen to be weak and incompetent) could pull its head from its ass, they should demand a mistrial immediately.
Probably best comment so far, including mine. I think both sides have moved for a mistrial. I know the prosecutors would love one, but they might wait a day to ask, since the defense just moved for one.
I think the judge wil deny all mistrial motions no matter how egregious, more and more it looks like he’s on a mission.
The odds of that phone ringing just as it did….