Interesting that they put Rittenhouse on the stand.
Prosecutor questioning appears to be calculated towards making a case that use of an AR-15 rifle and/or use of full metal jacket bullets was reckless on that night (e.g., because of distance a rifle can shoot, and the potential for overpenetration by FMJ bullets as opposed to expanding bullets which are safer). Grilling Rittenhouse on the technical details of rifle ammo and full metal jacket vs. expanding bullets. I wonder if that means they've given up on intentional homicide. Interesting that they want his testimony on that, and not an expert on ammo or rifles. I assume they are doing that because they didn't follow that line of argument when they were presenting the case against him, but need to do so now. Weird.
(no message)
he get the truth after expert testifies.
And not just in front of a courtroom but it front of a national audience!
Link: https://twitter.com/i/status/1458492336720302084
(no message)
(no message)
Then, the prosecutor can start over fresh, with a new trial. Not allowed.
Judge will have to rule.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
has to request it. The only exception in the rule is the Judge can do it on their own only in cases of manifest necessity.
Essentially, the criminal defendant has the choice.
Which supposedly means no retrial in WI