Prosecutors within the Kenosha shooter trial withheld proof from the protection that was ‘on the heart of their case,’ solely sharing the high-definition drone video footage on which they’ve hung their prosecution after the trial had concluded, DailyMail.com can reveal.
Assistant District Lawyer Thomas Binger performed the improved drone footage to the jury throughout his closing statements and claimed that it confirmed Rittenhouse ‘pointing his gun’ at folks – an assertion that opened the door to the state claiming Rittenhouse provoked the violence of the evening of August 25, 2020.
Now, within the movement obtained by DailyMail.com, Rittenhouse’s protection insist that the state solely shared it with the protection after proof had closed on Saturday November 13.
That is one simply one of many grounds on which they’ve made a movement for a mistrial with prejudice filed by Kyle Rittenhouse’s protection Monday afternoon.
Prosecutors within the Kenosha shooter trial withheld proof from the protection that was ‘on the heart of their case,’ DailyMail.com reveal. Assistant District Lawyer Thomas Binger initially shared low high quality drone footage from the evening of he taking pictures with the protection
The protection claims Binger solely shared the high-definition footage after proof had closed on Saturday. Rittenhouse’s legal professional Mark Richards and Corey Chirafisi are pictured in court docket
James Armstrong, a photographic knowledgeable within the Wisconsin State Crime Lab, testified about drone video through the trial final week
Prosecutors within the Kenosha shooter trial withheld proof from the protection that was ‘on the heart of their case,’ solely sharing the high-definition drone video footage (pictured) on which they’ve hung their prosecution after the trial had concluded
Assistant District Lawyer Thomas Binger performed the improved drone footage to the jury throughout his closing statements and claimed that it confirmed Rittenhouse ‘pointing his gun’ at folks – an assertion that opened the door to the state claiming Rittenhouse provoked the violence of the evening of August 25, 2020
In response to the movement, ‘On November 5, 2021, the fifth day of trial on this case, the prosecution turned over to the protection footage of a drone video which captured a few of the incident from August 25, 2020.
The jury is now deliberating the destiny of Kyle Rittenhouse
‘The issue is the prosecution gave the protection a compressed model of the video. What meaning is the video offered to the protection was not as clear because the video saved by the state.’
The movement goes onto clarify that the file measurement of the protection video is simply 3.6MB whereas the prosecution’s is 11.2MB.
The movement states that this bigger file was not offered to the protection ’till after the trial concluded’
It reads, ‘Through the jury directions convention, the protection performed their model of the video for the court docket to assessment. The state indicated their model was a lot clearer and had their tech particular person come into court docket to have the court docket assessment their clearer video. The video is similar, the decision of that video, nonetheless, was not.’
In reality, the state didn’t present the bigger file till two days earlier than closing arguments and after the proof had been closed.
Kyle Rittenhouse is seen wielding the AR-15 he used to kill two males and injure a 3rd on the evening of August 25, 2020
Attorneys for Rittenhouse filed their movement for mistrial with prejudice primarily based on this and a number of other different grounds. In response to a movement filed at present by the protection, ‘The issue is the prosecution gave the protection a compressed model of the video’
The movement states, ‘Because it pertains to the compressed drone footage. The prosecution must be required to elucidate to the court docket why they didn’t copy the footage for the defendant with the identical high quality as their copy
‘The video footage has been on the heart of this case. The concept that the state would offer lesser high quality footage after which use that footage as a linchpin of their case is the very cause they requested and had been granted the provocation instruction by the Courtroom.’
Attorneys for Rittenhouse filed their movement for mistrial with prejudice primarily based on this and a number of other different grounds.
They’d already raised the difficulty of ‘prosecutorial misconduct’ and ‘over-reach’ for Binger’s conduct when he ‘violated’ Rittenhouse’s constitutional proper to stay silent by suggesting that he had executed in order that he might ‘tailor’ his story to suit the information as they emerged throughout trial.
And for his bid to enter proof into trial that had already been excluded by the choose. Each transgressions got here the day that Rittenhouse testified and noticed Decide Schroeder furiously admonish the prosecutor telling him, ‘This higher cease.’
Now, within the movement filed Monday, Rittenhouse’s protection workforce has re-iterated Corey Chirafisi’s rivalry in court docket that Binger’s conduct was ‘clearly intentional’ and ‘prejudicial.’
For his half Decide Schroeder didn’t settle for Binger’s insistence that he acted ‘in good religion’ snapping, ‘I do not consider you.’
In response to the protection, ‘The failure to supply the identical high quality footage on this specific case is intentional and clearly prejudices the defendant.’
The jury is now out for deliberation to find out the destiny of Kyle Rittenhouse.
