If you’ve been watching any of the Rittenhouse trial, than you’re already aware how the prosecuting attorneys attempted to continually violate the established legal guidelines agreed to by all parties before the high profile trial began.
Judge Bruce Schroeder had instructed both camps on what was admissible and what was not.
However, within a matter of days “bad boy” Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger, was willfully violating the judge’s ruling, by attempting to infringe on Rittenhouse’s constitutional rights.
Judge Schroeder immediately stopped the proceedings, and ordered the jurists to exit the courtroom. What followed was a rare glimpse of what the viewing audience seldom gets to see, a visibly irate judge openly admonishing the prosecution. He warned Binger that he had committed a “grave constitutional violation” that conflicts with Rittenhouse’s Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, during the initial charge by the state.
That willful infraction by Binger was enough to declare a mistrial by Schroeder if he had chosen to do so.
However, the Kenosha County Circuit Judge allowed the trial to continue, despite the troubling antics by the prosecuting attorneys, who seemed woefully unprepared and incompetent.
On Monday the case was handed over to the jury, to deliberate over the faith of young Kyle Rittenhouse.
However, according to an exclusive report by the Daily Mail, lawyers for Rittenhouse are claiming that the prosecution team may have played a “bait-and-switch” game with the video evidence they originally played during the actual trial and the one played during the state’s closing argument.
The one played by the defense during the trial was of low quality, difficult to see. The other version during the prosecution’s summation was of high-definition quality, meaning that the prosecution purposely withheld the high-definition footage, until two days before their closing arguments.
The defense team in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial filed an updated motion for mistrial with prejudice, claiming the prosecution withheld video evidence from the defense. https://t.co/VY1nE16JnB— Chippole (@flashed12) November 17, 2021
Documents obtained exclusively by the Daily Mail, shows that on November 5th, 2021, the prosecution team on the 5th day of the trial, turned over to the defense video of drone footage depicting images of the riot on August 25th, 2020.
The issue is that the prosecution team gave the defense team a compressed version of the video, which wasn’t as clear and crisp as the enhanced version, in which the prosecution had apparently digitally improved the video to high definition, improving the overall quality of the footage.
The video provided to the defense was 3.6MB while the prosecution’s was 11.2MB, which is a dramatic change in the quality and resolution. Moreover, according to the defense, the improved video was not revealed until after the trial concluded.
As soon as the enhanced video version was revealed, the defense team again filed a motion for a mistrial with prejudice, based on the prosecution team withholding of the video.
“During the jury instructions conference, the defense played their version of the video for the court to review,” the motion states. “The state indicated their version was much clearer and had their tech person come into court to have the court review their clearer video. The video is the same, the resolution of that video, however, was not.”
Adding; ‘The video footage has been at the center of this case. The idea that the state would provide lesser quality footage and then use that footage as a linchpin in their case is the very reason they requested and were granted the provocation instruction by the Court.”
It would appear that if Rittenhouse is convicted, the defense could easily appeal the decision on grounds of egregious misconduct by the state.