tv The Lead With Jake Tapper CNN November 15, 2021 2:00pm-3:00pm PST
because he's impugning my character. nathan debruin, excuse me. hernandez. he's lying because he's a right wing journalist. all six of them are lying. and then, i forgot, detective howard. he's lying, too, because he could see through the videos. he could see that rosenbaum came out from hiding behind the car after my client passed the duramax. rush to judgment? as i said earlier, you bet. highly charged atmosphere here in kenosha. make no mistake. you live here. you know. they had to do something. they had to charge the white supremacist who isn't a white supremacist. they never reassessed their case. they've never looked at it. they've never said, oh, dr. kelly, let's talk about this wound on the hand. that means he was touching the
barrel or his hand was over the barrel when it was fired? well, that means he was pretty close. no. we're not going to reassess. we're going to march forward. we're going to throw it into the hands of 12 people from the city and let them do our work. ladies and gentlemen, this is a political case. we could take politics out of it as a democrat and republican, but the district attorney's office is marching forward with this case because they need somebody to be responsible. they need somebody to put and say we did it. he's the person who brought terror to kenosha. kyle rittenhouse is not that individual. the rioters, the demonstrators who turned into rioters, those are the individuals who bring us forth. and i ask you to remember, and i'll show you the videos for the last time from me. the anger in the mob that was
going on that night. they were not going to be dissuaded from doing things. they were pushing, firing dumpsters, destroying property and that was -- so you're saying mr. rittenhouse put out a fire. yes. it was a small fire. last time i checked, small fires turn into big fires. so kind of stupid. james armstrong, hocus-pocus, out of focus, i've talked about him. he spent 20 hours reworking a frame in a video and averaging -- having my client somehow miraculously go from a right-handed shooter to a left-handed shooter. the mirror on the truck is the arm. their whole case relies on that one photograph that he spent 20
hours. that's how they're going to prove provocation. a word you never heard in the opening statement. it was my client who chased him down and shot him in the back. oops, can't prove that. this is the day before car source burning. car source 1 burning to the ground. what's in the foreground? trailer which will be the subject of pictures later on. there's kyle earlier in the day on the 25th setting up his ala alibi, his i'm a good person story because he thinks he's going to go out and kill three people that night. ladies and gentlemen, that is garbage. how would he know he's going to be photographed? and what does that do? it just shows he's interested in his community, trying to do
good. picture, car source 3. state doesn't want kyle to go to car source 3. according to the state, he has to stay at car source 2, 59th and sheridan, yet nick smild called and asked him to go there because whoever was going to protect that property had left. >> objection, your honor. the record does not indicate that nick smith made that phone call. >> folks, you heard the evidence and use your collective r recollections and discount anything that is not supported in the evidence. >> testimony was he received a phone call saying they were destroying cars at car source 3 and he went down there. first, kyle asked for a fire exting wusher. asked the other individual to go down there with him. he said -- didn't give an answer and kyle took off going down there to try and help protect
that property. this is that night. tear gas, fires. here is mr. rosenbaum pushing one of many dumpsters. dumpster fires. right there. that's one. another one. that's mr. rosenbaum pushing it in to the gas station -- police vehicles right down here. >> i can't hear. >> apologize. trying to put the dumpster into parts of the gas station.
it's put out and their reaction from mr. rosenbaum. dumpster number two. >> you hear the voice? why you do that? there's mr. rosenbaum arguing. mr. ziminski, the smiling puppeteer standing behind him. yeah, they didn't know each other. maybe they didn't, but they sure spent a lot of time together that night. mr. ziminski with the yellow circle, holding his firearm. yellow pants, kelly ziminski with a flashlight in her hand. last time i checked there wasn't any lighting problems. the flashlight is a weapon to bash heads if you have to.
many people with ar-15s. not one person with an ar-15. that's the difference between this, the ultimate gas station fracus and what happened down at car source 3. kyle rittenhouse was alone. he had been taken away from the herd and mr. rosenbaum and mr. ziminski were going to get him. movement. mr. rosenbaum and his bag. he's not dissuaded by the people. he's going right at them. [ yelling ] he's not afraid of them. he's pushing in and going at
them. he's not afraid of a gun. yelling. shoot me, "n" word, shoot me, "n" word, mr. ziminski pulling his gun down to his side. remembering this is black lives matter rally and he's there to support their cause. yeah, right. >> mr. huber right there holding him back actually physically holding him back. right in the middle of it. look at the anger in his face. this here, i'll start it, but i'm going to point it out first.
this individual starting -- right here jumped in. you see him shoot in the lighter fluid or flammable liquid. you see him get right involved. this is the calm tuesday evening that mr. binger is alluding to. mr. rosenbaum, this time wearing a blue mask, tipping over the port-a-potty. it was just a little port-a-potty. the trailer. trailer is important because it's the way he arms himself
with the chain. there's rosenbaum pushing it. if he's just a regular demonstrator or misunderstood, a little bit upset, what does he need a chain for? what does he need a bag? why didn't he leave it with --? here, three things. blue circle, his bag, backed up by the fire. look at that bag. does that look like there's nothing in it? look at this. what is that? that's not a water bottle, ladies and gentlemen. i can't tell you what it is, but it's not a water bottle. look at this. two feet of chain on each side. he's got it. take be from right here, the tow chain. right there, white chains, black. look at the boots.
those boots would soon be impacting my client's face. run down live here once again. rosenbaum, ziminski at the trailer after it's been taken down the street. set up on its side and started on fire. you can still see one of the chains hanging from the tongue of the trailer. run down live. the state showed this video. i started my opening statement with it. i was going to show you where mr. rosenbaum is. i've already done it. don't need to waste your time. i'm going to get to the end. here's the picture that we showed at the beginning right
there. the 1:25.26. mr. rosenbaum masked with his chain during the run down live video. mr. rosenbaum with the chain. we said earlier, look how kyle is dressed. look at the pack on his left side, left hip. the crosses going across the front and the back of his chest. nowhere in the magic picture is that depicted. 11:40, he's crossed over that line asking people if they want medical. runs into yellow pants. he walks away from confrontation. and yellow pants said -- you pointed your gun at me and goes like this, low right. the individuals who were there with him slingshot, rocks in the
hand, gun. mr. mcginnis. kyle, after having the brief thing with yellow pants, he goes away from them. goes over. looks for mr. balch. they might have been close to one another, but they did not find one another. he tries to go back. wants to get back to car source 2. after that, he goes back and waits. he gets the phone call. he testified about the phone call. either from nick or dominick. and what does he do? he gets a fire extinguisher. hasn't had a fire extinguisher all night but gets one. the call came through.
he testified the call came through. you know if it wasn't in his phone, the state would have brought it up, but now they're playing games once again. this is drew hernandez's video. it starts in color and goes -- excuse me, starts in black and white and goes to color. you have jump kit man, ziminskis. you'll hear kelly ziminski talking. and during the first part of the trial we saw this trailer go by, and it cut off the view from this location. i'll stop it a few times and -- did you hear that? talking about a pepper ball exploding in her ass. that's kelly ziminski speaking.
there. that's kyle with the fire exping wisher walking. doesn't say anything to any of them. they see him coming. they had down to do their ambush. he's not chasing them. he's not running after them. he's walking down to put out the fire. let's start it over again. you hear kyle yell friendly, friendly issue friendly. that is the start of mr. rosenbaum chasing kyle.
that wall of people. listen for the first shot and watch the lackadaisical attitude and then hear the four shots in quick succession and watch what happens. >> they shooting? >> think about that, ladies and gentlemen. the first shot happens. they barely begin to move. between the first shot and kyle's first shot, which is the second shot you hear, kyle has turned around. why has he turned around? because that wall of people was there and he has nowhere else to run. the cars, the van, all of the people destroying property, the soda machine, he turns around
and mr. rosenbaum keeps coming. mr. rosenbaum keeps coming. he lunges. gunshots. there's mr. ziminski with his gun down there at his side as his wife yells, f'ing get him, f'ing get him, he just shot somebody. which they started. >> he f'ing shot him. >> pointing the gun, once again, his right hand. >> he f'ing shot him! he shot him!
>> he shot him. >> gaige grosskreutz's cell phone video. does kyle ever point the firearm at gaige grosskreutz when he runs up on him unarmed? >> what are you doing? >> hey, what are you doing? you shot somebody? >> i'm going to get the police. he's going towards the police. he's continuing on. he's passed gaige grosskreutz. hasn't shot grosskreutz or pointed the firearm at him. the medic, if he thinks someone is being shot, why isn't he there? he doesn't know rich a mcginnis is tending to him. none of the people that chase him are at car source 3. there's no evidence. ziminski doesn't chase him. ziminski doesn't want anything to do with it. his wife doesn't want anything
to do with it but the mob has now formed and is chasing him down sheridan road in a northerly direction. >> who is shot? who shot? >> he turns all the way around looking towards car source 3. could go there. at this point he hasn't armed himself. kyle is zero threat to anyone. this active shooter bs is something that mr. binger is trying to sell you. has he shot anybody since car source 3? no he hasn't. he's running to try to get to the police. mr. binger must live in fairy tale land to think that kyle could stop, put his gun down and say, hey, everything is good. leave me alone. i'm going to the police. unfortunately, that's not how the real world works. this was real world.
people yelling to stop him. next picture, you saw it in opening statements. mr. rose -- excuse me, mr. grosskreutz chasing down kyle rittenhouse. kept his gun in the small of his back. arming himself right here. look how far kyle rittenhouse is ahead of him. no threat. he's running two blocks, almost three because it's at the far end of 63rd. he hasn't shot his gun since. if he's an active shooter looking to take as many people as possible, he's laying waste to everybody as he rwas running. he's got 30 bullets. he shot eight times. four in scene one and four coming up. he's not indiscriminately shooting, pointing, doing anything.
here's full speed. pointing the gun at anyone? no. running down the street trying to get to those lights where the bearcats are and law enforcement. he's not running off to the side to hide in the shadows. blow to the head first, knock his hat off. what has kyle rittenhouse done? nothing. trying to get away from the mob. first strike from the mob. he's not an active shooter. he's gone two blocks. hasn't shot anybody. coming in behind with a skateboard at the ready, anthony huber. that will be strike number one.
remember in opening statements when mr. binger said, oh, something happened to his skateboard. he took a swing at him. kyle blocked it with his arm in the enhanced photos. what does mr. huber does? runs, grabs a skateboard and runs in for more. >> he's on the ground. the most vulnerable position you can be in. what do we have? anthony huber here already picking up his skateboard. this guy with the towel wrapped around his head coming in at kyle. jump him, man. guys hit him in the head. they go forward just a little bit.
you saw this individual over here is now -- kyle points his firearm at him. he backs up. kyle does not shoot. jump kick man is leading with his foot. his foot is still on the ground. what direction is kyle pointing right now? watch what happened after jump kick man kicks him in the face. he's turned around. he's looking in that direction. anthony huber coming in with a skateboard. watch what anthony huber does with the skateboard. blow to the head. coming in, kyle is trying to get up. anthony huber's hand goes onto the gun. this is the fast one.
the cap is off. anthony huber winds up with the full force of his body. and back here, he swings the skateboard at kyle. kyle senses it coming. he turns around and looks, blocks it with his arm. doesn't turn around and shoot anthony huber as he's being attacked with what is a deadly weapon. a skateboard can cause death or great bodily harm, ladies and gentlemen. he doesn't do it. he continues to run a couple of steps. before the blow to the head and this has knocked him to the ground. he immediately changes direction, goes running for the skateboard.
want to get through this one. and then, okay, now this is slow motion. as he's on the ground, he's set up, trying to get up, the individual to kyle's left is the one who runs in. kyle points the firearm. he backs off. he is not shot at. backs up. he's now addressing the second nearest threat. does not shoot. that individual right there in that picture is stopping. jump kick man launches, contact, fire, turned around. in comes anthony huber.
blow to the head and neck. now when it started you'll see anthony huber pull on his gun. and you'll see the butt of the gun separate from kyle's body going in that direction away from him . see the gun being pulled away from him? shot. mr. huber goes down. grosskreutz flinches, freezes. stops. hands up.
no pull. mr. grosskreutz is standing like this and all of a sudden, you see him kick his foot back and launch forward. he loads his back foot going forward at kyle. with a loaded glock handgun. kyle sees it coming, gets within a couple of feet. he fires. if he's got his hands up and wants nothing to do with kyle, like everybody else, just back away and you don't get shot. mr. grosskreutz decides he's going to take him out and his only regret, as stated in the facebook post, he didn't fire first and empty his clip into
him. he's hit in the arm. he's shot at once. he's backing up. that's the last shot. that went through the quickness of the shots from the rock in the head to that fourth shot. he gets up. you still see this individual, arm with a board or 2 by 4 or fence post. doesn't shoot at him. this person he doesn't perceive as a danger. his hands are up. doesn't shoot at him. as he wields around, watch what this individual does. that was the end of it. kyle turns around. he turns. that individual steps away from him. no more shots.
doesn't shoot randomly. shots from behind him. he continues on his way trying to turn himself in to the police. trying to get to the end of it. people yelling to shoot him. he doesn't stop because it's not safe. goes with his hands up to law enforcement. >> [ inaudible ]. >> he continues on. hands up. you hear the story about the
pepper spray. ladies and gentlemen, that's the case. there was no threatening behavior that started this. mr. rosenbaum was hellbent on causing trouble that night. he did what he did, and he started this. there are tragic parts of it, but kyle rittenhouse's behavior was protected under the law of the state of wisconsin, the law of self-defense. you've heard the instructions, and i'll end with this. you decide on count one. if you decide that his conduct was privileged under the use of self-defense, you don't go on to the lesser included. if it was privileged and under self-defense, that affects count two. both of the things that happened in scene one, as i read earlier. page 9 of the injury instructio.
if it was privileged as to mr. rosenbaum, it's privileged as to mr. mcginnis. scene two, there is no evidence whatsoever that he was an active shooter other than mr. binger calling him that. and there's no evidence that any of those other individuals who attacked him in the mob that night were attacking an active shooter. he wasn't shooting. and if they want to be the heroes, and they want to beat somebody and do what they're going to do to him, they better be right. and they weren't. kyle rittenhouse shot mr. rosenbaum because he was attacking kyle. every person who is shot was attacking kyle. one with a skateboard, one with his hands, one with his feet,
one with a gun. hands and feet can cause great bodily harm. i'm sure the state will get up and say he didn't have great bodily harm so it doesn't matter. that's not the standard. the standard is could cause great bodily harm. my client does not have to take a beating from the hands of this mob or the hands of mr. rosenbaum. and mr. rosenbaum might be little, but he was a pretty muscular guy and some 30-some-year-old guy can take a 17-year-old kid nine times till tuesday. it's a tough choice, but the evidence only leads to one conclusion. that is that kyle rittenhouse's conduct on august 25th was privileged based upon the actions of mr. rosenbaum and others. there are no winners in this case, but putting kyle rittenhouse down for something he was privileged to do will
serve no legitimate purpose. i ask you to do this, do justice here under the law of the state of wisconsin. thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. richards. let's take about ten minutes and please don't talk about the case, read, watch or listen to any account. >> welcome to our viewers here in the united states and around the world. i'm wolf blitzer in the situation room. we've been watching very dramatic moments, closing arguments in the trial of kyle rittenhouse. the armed teenager who killed two people, wounded another
during unrest in kenosha, wisconsin, last summer. they are taking a quick break right now. we'll see what happens after this break, if they resume closing arguments, rebuttals or take a break for the night and continue tomorrow. sara sidner is following all of this from kenosha. sara, update our viewers who may just be tuning in. a very dramatic day. we heard from the defense. now we've heard from the prosecution in their respective closing arguments. >> absolutely. and what we heard were some very strong arguments, as you would expect in this case from the defense and prosecution. the defense just ending there, so i'll start with them. they did something for the jury to try to get them to see that kyle rittenhouse, in their opinion, was under attack. and they said four things. hands, feet, skateboard, gun. those are things that can cause great bodily harm, the defense told the jury and the jury has to determine if that is indeed true and if kyle rittenhouse was
simply defending his own life. the prosecution for their point said, look, he and many of the others that were running after kyle rittenhouse, after he shot and killed joseph rosenbaum, were doing so because they thought they were dealing with an active shooter and were trying to stop him and they have every right to do that. and so the argument is very different, of course. the prosecution trying to say that rosenbaum, who is the first person that was shot and killed by kyle rittenhouse that night, was actually going after his gun. the prosecution saying, absolutely not, that he was not lunging for his gun. the kill shot was in the back of joseph rosenbaum. but the prosecution saying, no, he was trying to put his hands on kyle's gun that he was being aggressive and for every single person that kyle rittenhouse shot, the prosecution says these people are victims, some of them heroes trying to stop someone they thought was a mass shooter. and the defense turning around and saying, actually, they were the aggressors.
they were trying to hurt kyle. they were not letting him go to the police and surrender. they were trying to stop him and do bodily harm to kyle rittenhouse. very dramatic moments. both, by the way, the defense and the prosecution attorneys picked up the gun that kyle rittenhouse used that night, the ar-style rifle and pointed it in some direction. one of them pointed it sort of low into the court and one pointed towards a wall over the heads of those sitting in the court all trying to show what kyle was doing, kyle rittenhouse was doing that day that he ended up shooting and killing two, and maiming a third. but this hinges on whether or not the defense thinks he was going out and trying to be a vigilante and create his own form of justice or whether or not kyle rittenhouse was actually defending himself and did whatever he did, including the killings and the maiming of another person, if he did that in self-defense. so that's the argument they have to think about. whether or not it's first-degree
intentional homicide or they have a decision as to whether it's second-degree. the judge allowing that in at the last moment. and also he isn't facing the number of charges he faced initially in this case. he faced seven charges initially in the case. a couple of those were dropped. one, mandatory, keeping people off the streets, they said, look, kyle no longer faces breaking the curfew. the mandatory curfew that was in place. and they said just today, before the jury came in, the judge said, look, they are dropping the charge for a 17-year-old, someone under the age of 18 possessing a firearm. why did that happen? a lot of people are asking. because the judge determined that in the law here in wisconsin, the gun has to be a certain specific measurement. and this gun that was used by kyle rittenhouse was not that. and so they could not charge him with possessing illegally
posegsingposegs i possessing a handgun. we have just heard the defense and we expect to hear a rebuttal from the prosecution. this case going a bit late. we'll see what happens, whether or not the jury will take it up and start deliberating tonight or whether or not the judge will tell them to rest and start deliberating tomorrow after the prosecution gets their rebuttal time, wolf. >> we're anticipating a rebuttal from the prosecution. we'll see what the judge, you are correct, what the judge decides to do momentarily. stay with us, sara. i want to bring in two legal experts. we're joined by criminal defense attorney, former prosecutor julie rendellman and former federal prosecutor andrew jurkowski. what did you make of the defense's closing argument? >> well, we heard both sides go back and forth for hours today about their versions of how they think the case played out or what happened that night. but i think the most important
thing to focus in on the idea that the burden of proof here is beyond a reasonable doubt. so while the prosecution may have made very valiant efforts here, they may have made points that they think point to guilt, they really had to overcome all reasonable doubt that there wasn't self-defense at play here. i think the defense counsel in their closing argument did a very fine job of going point by point, moment by moment, highlighting how kyle rittenhouse may have seen the threat to be sufficiently high to justify that use of force that he used that day. and it's really just whether it was a doubt, a reasonable doubt, a reasonable way to have potentially gone about it that will see him be acquitted of these charges if the jury sees it that same way. i thought the defense was effective in their argument. >> let me ask julie. did the defense do what the defense needed to do here? >> so it's funny. throughout this trial, i have been a bit judgmental in regards
to the prosecution. i didn't think they gave a very strong opening. i thought their presentation of the case was pretty flat, and i thought the prosecutor in many ways was flat. i didn't think it during his summation. i actually thought, he has a gentlemanly way about him and i think he used that along with being incredibly assertive to really make his points. i thought he was incredibly organized. i thought he pulled out those parts that he needed to, to corroborate and support his position that kyle rittenhouse, by coming out there that day, with that weapon, with that weapon that he really didn't understand how to use, slowly created a scenario of recklessness and chaos that led to these deaths. now the defense, it's true, you know, the big point is that the prosecution bears the burden. not just bearing the burden of proving his guilt but disproving self-defense. the defense, while they did a good job, they were a bit
disorganized. it's important to lay out your points in the beginning, instead of waiting to the end. i wanted to hear more from them saying it's not my burden. it's the prosecution. it's the prosecution. i don't feel like i heard it enough. i wanted them to be a little more organized. for me to have a better sense this jury is going to say, yeah, i'm going with the defense versus prosecution. >> and you heard, sara, the defense attorney in this particular case really going after the prosecutor's case, didn't we? >> absolutely. very strongly saying that the prosecutor basically wanted kyle rittenhouse's head on his wall as a trophy, as an example. very much attacked the prosecutor in this particular case. even naming him as he was attacking him. which isn't all that unusual, but it was pretty constant throughout his closing argument. let's listen to a little bit of what the prosecution did have to say because, as you just heard,
the prosecution was more salient today than throughout the entire trial, bringing all the elements together and creating a narrative that they hadn't done before. it was all piecemeal. today they pulled that all together and tried to make a point to the jury he was out here with his ar, not just here to be a medic. he lied about many different things, including saying he was an emt to the media out here and here's some of what he said to the jury to convince them to convict. >> in this entire sequence of events from the shooting of jacob blake on sunday, august 23rd, 2020, all the way after that, everything this community went through, the only person who shot and killed anyone was the defendant. you cannot claim self-defense against a danger you create. this is someone who has no remorse. no regard for life. only cares about himself. after killing anthony huber,
after severely wounding gaige grosskreutz, the defendant walks away like he's some sort of hero in a western. without a care in the world for anything he's just done. >> andrew, what did you think of that closing argument statement by thomas binger, the assistant district attorney? >> it was a very myopic view of the case and the facts that came out here. i thought his commentary on how rittenhouse walked away and what he must have been thinking, how he was acting, sure, might be how that prosecutor saw it happen and go down, but i think there's a very strong case to be made that this is a young man who was walking away from a very stressful situation, after feeling very much intimidated and very much threatened. so i thought that while the prosecutor was making a fair point that some people might see and they might see it that way, he was doing little to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, and
that's the ultimate point here. had he not fired that gun, can he assure kyle that he would have been safe, that he would have walked away without having been seriously injured himself or killed himself by what the defense described as the mob. so it really goes back to, you can see this case any number of ways, but you really can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. that's at least how i see it and how i think the defense has seen it throughout this case. >> beyond a reasonable doubt, key words the jury will have to consider. julie, the prosecutor also argued you lose your right to self-defense, and i'm quoting now, when you are the one creating the danger. when you are the one provoking other people. did the prosecutor effectively portray rittenhouse as the instigator? the instigator in all of this? >> so the whole idea of using provocation in the jury instruction was a huge loss, at least the defense's perspective. they did not want that in because that created a little
bit of a hiccup for the defense attorneys when it came to that pure criminal -- that pure, you know, rule in regards to the fact that it was on the prosecution to disprove self-defense. and so here's the problem with that. even with that, i still don't think that the prosecution was able to get over that hump in establishing that even if there was -- even if there was -- sorry. even if there was provocation, there was no question that there was still a danger by mr. rosenbaum. and that danger was, as far as i'm concerned, something that could have potentially caused his death by grabbing that weapon. >> andrew, the judge in this particular case, judge schroeder, he decided that the jury could consider lesser charges that would decide, not
necessarily lesser charges. could consider some lesser charges against rittenhouse, but he dropped a weapons charge, specifically the original charge, possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18. what impact could these last-minute changes have with the jury as far as the >> well i think the under 18 charge is one that if it stuck, could have been a problem for kyle rittenhouse. now, the judge ultimately determined that the law has some nuance in it regarding the type of firearm he was carrying versus the type of firearms that the law seems to be protecting against minors carrying, minors possessing. he found that to be an improper charge to move forward and some may call that a legal technicality. at the end of the day, rittenhouse was under a anyone of 18 carrying a firearm and that seems to be what the law was protecting against.
i think that might have been the only charge he was looking at a strong likelihood of conviction on. the judge did a favor there for kyle rittenhouse, not from the perspective of trying to show favor towards him, but that rittenhouse ultimately come out favorably as a result of that ruling. >> what you think, julie, did the removal of that one charge we saw today primarily benefit the defense in this particular case? and is it unusual at that moment just before closing arguments to go ahead and remove one specific charge? >> i think it's a bit unusual that neither the defense nor the prosecution seemed to know that the gun wasn't the right length. one would have guessed they would have had an opportunity to measure the gun so it seems unusual with all this publicity it's something they would have made sure they did. it also hurts the prosecution because now the jury's going now
there's two charges that the judge has decided that the prosecution hasn't made out. what is wrong with their case that they already have two charges that they're having before they deliberate? it can raise questions with the prosecution in the case. >> sort of confusing to the jury i would suspect, andrew, don't you think? >> the jury's instructed not to pay any mind to it so it's something that could be a distraction and i've certainly sat in the back room strategizing about what a jury would think about a charge going away. there's all sorts of ways to speculate about that, but you've really got to trust in the jury system that they're going to follow the instructions of the judge. i think it shows weakness on the part of the prosecution that their charges seem to be disappearing. >> all right, hold on. hold on. i want to go back to the trial.
the judge is back in his seat. they're waiting for the -- looks like the rebuttal is about to begin. the prosecution is going to have a chance to try to rebut what the defense attorney just laid out and more than an hour, hour and a half, almost two hours respectively. very long closing arguments on both sides. the defense and prosecution. now there can be a rebuttal from the defense, which we presumably will be hearing.
not sure if we'll hear it now or if we'll wait until tomorrow, but we'll find out fairly soon from the judge. let me bring in as we await, i may have to interrupt you, julie, but talk about the procedure, the rebuttal that we're going to hear now or tomorrow. >> yeah so, look. in new york, where i always practice, we didn't get the chance as prosecutors to come back up and give a rebuttal. so this is an incredible chance for the prosecutor to really hit hard every aspect of the defense. >> hold on, julie. >> it certainly cannot be reasonable for someone to be holding an ar-15 semiautomatic rifle with powerful ammunition and be chased by someone who is unarmed who's smaller than him,
who's shorter than him. and the first thing you do to defend yourself is you plug four rounds into him. you shoot it from about 4 feet away and not from 4 feet from mr. rittenhouse, but from the end of that gun. you're first shot immobilizes him. it shatters his hip. then he's caused to go forward and if you watch the videos and we're going watch a couple during this brief rebuttal, he crumples. he immediately crumples to the ground. no one is saying that mr. rosenbaum should have chased mr. rittenhouse. no one is saying that mr. rittenhouse did not have a right to defend himself. this case is about the right to use deadly force and i want to talk about that standard because attorney richards perhaps on accident misstated it.
he said that the standard is that it could cause death or do bodily harm to mr. rittenhouse or that it is likely to cause death or do bodily harm to mr. rittenhouse. that is absolutely not what the standard is. and that is not what this trial is about. the standard is the defendant may intentionally use force, which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm, such as firing an ar-15, only if the defendant reasonably believed that the force used was, was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself. not oh, if you repeatedly smash someone's face, it might lead to injury. not, oh, this could have happened. imminent great death or bodily harm. there's an old phrase that i could kill you with my bare
hands. and there's literally no evidence that mr. rosenbaum was capable of that. mr. rittenhouse has size on him. we heard he's a swimmer. we heard he's a life guard. apparently in some kind of shape. punch him in the face. kick him in the testicles. knee him in the face. hit him with your gun. you don't just immediately get to shoot someone. and i don't care about provocation or any of that. put that aside. it is not reasonable for any adult, for any person, for any 17-year-old male to not try and defend yourself first using other methods. now you factor in provocation, the fact he had no right to retreat, or no ability to -- or he had to retreat and exhaust all methods. clearly if there's provocation, he's guilty. but even outside of provocation. why do you get to immediately just start shooting?
as mr. binger said, he brought a gun to a fistfight. too cowardly to use his own fists to fight his way out. he has to start shooting. let's just say theoretically that we think that the 12 of you think it is reasonable to have used force, deadly force in that situation. shoots once, takes out his hip. what does mr. rittenhouse have to do to avoid that? take one step back. mr. rosenbaum is no threat. and mr. rittenhouse is responsible for every round of that gun. it did not have to happen as fast as mr. rittenhouse made it happen. he could have held back in one shot. at two shots. the guy in the blue hoodie who came in attempt to kick him didn't get four shots. mr. rosenbaum didn't get four
shots. the defendant has the ability to gauge what he's doing and stop shooting. mr. richards talks about the threat be immobilized. what threat does someone 6 inches shorter than you who's already been hit in the hip have? a kill shot in the back? hit him. kick him. knee him. anything else. and mr. rosenbaum and mr. rittenhouse are alive. because the defense talks about games that the prosecution has played. let's talk about games. let's talk about how mr. rittenhouse on that night did not tell joanne black, dominic fieldler, about this grabbing of the gun. about oh, i was afraid they were going to use the gun against me. that is because once mr.
rittenhouse and his team understood that an unarmed person chasing him, an unarmed people chasing him later on would not be enough to meet this standard. to meet this privilege. they had to concoct a story. they had to concoct a story about how -- in great fear of this gun being used. >> welcome to our viewers in the united states and around the world. i'm wolf blitzer in "the situation room." we've been watching the kyle rittenhouse homicide trial. we'll continue to monitor, but there's another manl story we're following here in "the situation room." president biden sealing a much ne needed victory by signing the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill into law. it is now the law of the land. let's go to our chief white house correspondent. after a long, very hard fight, the president just delivered o
IN COLLECTIONSCNN (San Francisco) Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service The Chin Grimes TV News Archive
Uploaded by TV Archive on