Yeah. Though it was already going badly before that.
From September,
In a hearing Friday, Kenosha County Circuit Court Judge Bruce Schroeder withheld a final decision on whether he would admit evidence that Rittenhouse said two weeks before the shootings that he wished he had his gun so he could shoot criminals. But Schroeder said he found the circumstance of those statements by Rittenhouse “so dissimilar” to the crimes he is accused of that Schroeder likely wouldn’t allow that evidence in the trial.
Prosecutors argued the evidence was “crucial” to their case as Rittenhouse’s statements would illuminate his state of mind on the night of the shootings. The video, which is available online, shows Rittenhouse witnessing alleged shoplifters at a CVS drug store and saying if he had his gun he would “start shooting rounds” at them.
Prosecutors also told the judge that Rittenhouse’s public appearance in January with members of the Proud Boys group, which embraces political violence, was relevant to the case.
“(Rittenhouse’s) actions of coming into our community illegally after curfew with a gun at the time of a protest is entirely consistent with what the Proud Boys make it their job to do,” said Kenosha County Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger .
Defense attorney Corey Chirafisi said their side commissioned an expert analysis of the contents of Rittenhouse’s cell phone. He said the report from that analysis found that the phone’s contents “(do) not establish that the user belonged to or even had any interest in any militia-style organizations.”
The judge sided with the defense.
Schroeder, who said he hadn’t heard of the Proud Boys prior to this case, said Rittenhouse’s later public appearance with members of the group wasn’t relevant to the night of the shootings. He ruled against allowing the information about Rittenhouse’s connections to the Proud Boys from being a part of the upcoming homicide trial.
Amazing example of how much a judge can do before a trial even begins to limit what can be said and how it can be said, thereby greatly influencing the outcome.
The prosecution should constantly fuck up and call the victims victims. It will likely end in a mistrial, but maybe then they can get a less biased judge.
While I might agree with you in theory and in reality – and in truth – that’s a great way to get jail time for contempt of that particular judge’s court.
That is true, but I would love to see the judge own his regressive views on the actual court transcript so he can eat shit in any subsequent preceedings.
