Skip to main content

tv   CNN Newsroom With Ana Cabrera  CNN  November 19, 2021 10:00am-11:00am PST

10:00 am
it's beanpot butter and jelly time. two turkeys will be pardoned a bit later today by president biden. those turkeys are named peanut butter and jelly. the birds spent last night at the willette hotel here in washington, d.c. they will move to the rose garden this afternoon where justice and a little pumpkin pie will be served during the ceremony. later, these two turkeys raised in indiana will head home, new home, perdue university. have a fantastic weekend. ana cabrera picks up our coverage right now. >> jolo and thanks for joining us on this friday. i'm ana cabrera in new york. after months of division and dysfunction house democrats come together and deliver a major victory to the white house. erupting in cheers, the house now sends the president's build back better act over to the
10:01 am
senate. that's where the new fight begins. with no room for even a single defection, some moderate democrats are also grousing. let's go to capitol hill and cnn's lauren fox. lauren, there is a lot of work ahead, isn't there? >> reporter: well, that's exactly right, ana. obviously this celebration in the house may be short lived as this legislation heads to the u.s. senate where all eyes are on senator joe manchin of west virginia, the moderate democrat, who has already expressed deep concerns about pieces of this bill, including one part of the bill which who is four weeks of paid family leave. that is something that he says he supports in theory but he does not want to use just a democratic senate majority to pass it. instead, he says, that is some kind of legislation that should be passed with republican and democratic votes. obviously this large social safety net bill that is headed to the u.s. senate won't get any republican votes, so the question becomes in which ways
10:02 am
will this bill be changed? i talked to one progressive house member representative alexandria ocasio-cortez who told me that, look, it's not just joe manchin who may want to make changes to this legislation. >> it's not just so manchin that wants to see some changes. i think senator sanders wants to see some changes on this bill. i think he wants to cut some of the taxes, tax cuts on the rich. i think we need to open up a path to citizenship on the senate side so, you know, i think that certain changes on the senate side can also be positive in addition to guarding the bill from substantive changes that would prevent us from tackling climate change. >> reporter: and senate majority leader chuck schumer has said that he wants to bring this bill to the floor before the holiday recess in mid-december. however, whether or not joe manchin will be ready to vote yes by then another question entirely. ansnarks. >> lauren fox on capitol hill. thank you. so what does a $1.9 trillion
10:03 am
bill of your money buy? cnn's tom foreman walks us through it. tom, remind us what all is in this plan. >> reporter: we can't go over all of it, that's for sure but it is human. here are some of the highlights. clean energy and climate change, $570 billion in terms of how it might affect you at home, if you put on solar panels, get an electric car, there could be additional tax incentives for doing that. beyond that there's child care and pre-school, early education, a big priority for the biden administration. child tax and earned income tax credits. this is aimed at middle class families who are out there struggling to make ends meet. this could give them a break along the ways so they are not having such a hard time paying their bills. beyond that, there's home care. this is aimed at the disabled, older americans which are growing in numbers and frankly growing in huge numbers out in red america, aid to people who might be struggling, affordable housing, some sort of aid there and then beyond that, if you
10:04 am
look at -- there are premium subsidies here for the affordable care act, and reform, this is an interesting one, medicare hearing, they want to include dental and other things. this is for hearing. 30% of people over the age of 70 who probably need a hearing aid, only 30% have had one. that's aimed at trying to close the gap and frankly when you put it all together, there's a lot in here that people will want to hear about no matter the political base and a lot that will probably sound good to many of them. ana? >> tom foreman, thank you so much. breaking news to get to right now out of -- in ken sharks wisconsin, and the homicide trial of kyle rittenhouse. let's listen in.
10:05 am
>> you folks can be seated.
10:06 am
it may be a few minutes while we --
10:07 am
10:08 am
>> okay. we are awaiting a verdict right now in the kyle rittenhouse homicide trial, and we're -- my understanding is we're waiting for the jury to come into the room to deliver this verdict. let me go live to kenosha, wisconsin right now and our shimon prokupecz who has been covering this trial over the past couple of weeks or so. shimon, describe for us what we're watching exactly right now. >> reporter: so you see on your monitor there, that's the defense attorneys and obviously you see the defendant kyle rittenhouse and there you see the judge. what's going on in part, as you can imagine there's an immense increase of security around the
10:09 am
courthouse, so this could be what the holdup is. i was in the courthouse moments ago, and i could see just all of a sudden all of the sheriffs, deputy sheriffs, other law enforcement officials starting to gather. they were talking to the families of some of the victims who have been coming to court every day, working out some logistics with them and then in the back usually where the -- from the second floor where -- where kyle rittenhouse comes down from and his attorneys, i could see them coming down so then you sort of got the sense that something was going on. so i don't know why it's taking so long to get the jury downstairs because usually they come down from the second floor to the first floor. the judge is talking here. >> let's listen here, shimon. >> you want this on the record? >> it doesn't need to be. >> there can't be any reaction at all, no matter how strongly you may feel and it's understood that many people do have strong feelings, but we can't permit
10:10 am
any kind of a reaction to the verdict, and as you can see there's quite a bit of law enforcement here and you will be whisked out of here if there is any, so just be aware. >> would you come down please. >> yes .
10:11 am
10:12 am
>> all right. members of the jury. have you elected a foreperson? would you give your juror number, please. >> 54. >> 54, and has the jury reached a verdict as to each count of the information? >> yes, we somewhere, your honor. >> one verdict and one verdict only. >> yes. >> have you hand all of the paperwork to the bailiff. >> everything. >> thanks. >> may i see that, too, please. >> sorry. >> thank you .
10:13 am
>> the defendant will rise and face the jaire and harken to its verdicts. >> state of wisconsin versus kyle rittenhouse, as to the first count of the information joseph rosenbaum, we the jury find the defendant kyle h. ribthouse not guilty. as to the second count of the information richard mcguinnes, we the jury find the defendant kyle h. rittenhouse not guilty. as to the third count of the information unknown male, we the jury find the defendant kyle h. rittenhouse not guilty. as to the fourth count of the information anthony hubert, we the jury find the defendant kyle h. rittenhouse not guilty. as to the fifth count of the
10:14 am
information gauge grosskreutz we the jury find kyle h. rittenhouse not guilty. >> members of the jury, are these your unanimous verdicts? >> gentlemen. >> is there anyone who does not agree with the verdicts as read? >> no. >> would you wish the jury polled? >> no. >> okay. okay. folks. your job is done and we started just about three weeks ago, and i -- i caught -- i told you it could last two weeks and two days. this is three weeks. you were a wonderful jury to work with. you were punctual, you were attentive, and the forgotten six over here who had a very difficult job of keeping from discussing the case during the time that they were sequestered as well, all of you, i couldn't have asked for a better jury to work with, and it has truly been
10:15 am
my pleasure. i think without commenting on your verdict, the verdict themselves, just in terms of your -- your attentiveness and the cooperation that you gave to us justifies the confidence that the founders of our country placed in you, so i dismiss you at this time. you're never under any obligation to discuss any aspect of this case with anyone. you're welcome to do so as little or as much as you want. the media have requested -- a number of media sources have requested the ability to talk to you, and they have been allowed to present presentations to you that you'll get in writing and it's entirely up to you whether you want to contact them. they are not to contact you. if anyone does contact you and
10:16 am
just, you know, tell them you're not interested in discussing it if that's the case, and if anyone persists in doing so, report that to us, and it will be addressed. i assure you. at the beginning of the trial there was some concern about information and your safety, and i assure you that we will take every measure to ensure that that is -- your concerns are addressed and respected, and i'm going to talk to you for just a minute, not about anything to do with the case, but just about that sole issue, and -- and you -- as i say, you're welcome to discuss the case as little or as much as you want, and -- and any questions anybody? >> thank you so much, and after
10:17 am
four years you're eligible for service again. it would be my pleasure to work with you. thank you. >> yeah. >> please. >> or -- i think in the library. it's not going to be more than a minute or maybe it will be. take them upstairs, that's fine. that's fine. >> you've been watching as we have learned lyft verdict in the
10:18 am
kyle rittenhouse trial. not guilty on all charges after about 25 hours of deliberations. through the course of four days. i want to bring in our legal analyst to talk about this verdict now. i want to start with our senior legal analyst elie honig, former federal and state prosecutor. elie, your reaction to this? >> ana, this is our justice system at work. ultimately our justice system comes down to 12 people, 12 people. >> forgive me. let's listen back one more time. >> anything else? >> no, your honor. >> thank you. good day. >> elie, please continue. >> further detail on the instructions which is the law. it's also important to keep in mind that the law in wisconsin is very favorable to a defendant claiming self-defense. the prosecution has to affirmatively disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. if the jury went back there and
10:19 am
had some reasonable doubt, then they were to return a not guilty verdict and that it appears is what they have done. finally, ana, one more important note. this is over. the prosecution cannot appeal. a not guilty verdict is final, so this will be the end of the state prosecution of kyle rittenhouse. >> okay. we also have charles coleman, a civil rights tone and bob bianchi, a criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor as well with us. bob, your reaction to what we just witnessed and, again, the verdict being unanimous on all five counts, not guilty? >> honestly, it was not surprising to me. this case was charged within a couple of days before they had the autopsies done, before they had completed the evidence collection, before they had gone through all the videos and the interviews, and at one point on the show that i host i was actually listening to a witness and was asking the producer is this a defense witness that was called out of turn? to find out, it was the third victim grosskreutz because must pal witnesses in the state were actually providing the
10:20 am
self-defense testimony that rittenhouse had actually testified to himself, so it was a very in my upon strong self-defense case, especially given the fact that he was being chased, that he had rocks thrown at him, gunshots going off, kicked in the head and hit with a skateboard and the prosecution's theory of the case as a former homicide prosecution, tried lots of homicide cases, lots of self-defense cases, is that he merely provoked the incidents because he came there with the ar-15, but you've got to remember you're in a jurisdiction where this is not an unusual thing if you are in jersey or new york and you saw something like this, it would be crazy, but it's not there, so the theory of the government's case to me went too quick, too fast. i've investigated homicide cases far, far, far less complex that took weeks and months for us to finish our investigation and i think that the defense attorneys' statements to the jury that this was a rush to judgment and that the actual prosecution witnesses supported the self-defense claim of rittenhouse resonated with them. >> so you clearly are not
10:21 am
surprised by the verdict. i want to go live to sara sidner standing outside the courthouse. sara. if you can hear me, it's ana. we're live right now. what are you seeing as far as reaction there to this not guilty verdict on all charges, all counts? >> reporter: as each charge was called out and each not guilty was spelled out by the court clerk, i looked over to the family of kyle rittenhouse and at the very last one his mother gasped, it sounded like one of those relief gasps, her hands -- her head fell into her hands and she appeared to be crying. the verdict obviously not guilty for her son means he is a free man at 18 years old after being charged in a double homicide case with five different charges and, of course, the prosecution cannot retry this case. that would be double jeopardy. it means he can go about his life. as for the others in the court, there were family members of
10:22 am
those who were shot by rittenhouse as well. we expect to hear from them, and on the steps of the court as has been for every single day of this trial, the uncle of jacob blake, justin blake, has been standing there, and there have been crowds of people, up to about two dozen people on any specific day. they are clearly and visibly unhappy with this verdict, but it is the verdict that this jury saw fit. we learned a lot of things in this trial that we should sort of go over, and i was just kind of reviewing some of the things that we learned in the trial that were not necessarily public knowledge before that. one, there has been a lot of talk, especially by politicians, about where rittenhouse was the night of this shooting, and it turned out he was already in kenosha. that he had family here, including his father, that the gun was here in kenosha. he did not bring that over state lines. it turned out during this trial that we learned that the gun that he had a hold of he could legally possess according to the judge and to the law here because of the measurements of
10:23 am
the gun. had it been shorter and a short-barrelled gun, then it would have been illegal but because it wasn't the judge said that that needed to be thrown out and indeed that charge of minor in possession of a gun illegally was thrown out in this case. the jury only looking hat those who were injured, those who were endangered and killed the night in august that rittenhouse ended up shooting people. we also learned that he was working here that night, that he had stayed over that night here, and we saw some video, earning to, joseph rosenbaum, the first person that he shot and killed. we saw drone video, high resolution drone video that did not come into this case until five days into this trial, and that is under contention. there was a mistrial requested because of both what the defense called prosecutorial overreach and they said they were going to file about this video that appeared very late in the game, the high resolution version of it, but now none of that matters. they are certainly not going to ask for a mistrial after their
10:24 am
client has been acquitted in this case, but we did learn a lot of things from that video because it was very clear what was going on. there was a -- a video of rosenbaum chasing after kyle rittenhouse during this time when he had his gun, and at one point rittenhouse levels his gun at rosenbaum and rosenbaum continues towards him and as he gets close to kyle rittenhouse kyle rittenhouse fires his gun several times and we learned also in the trial he was hit four times. obviously this is an ar-style rifle that has the capability of firing very quickly. we also learned in this case we saw the only person who was shot and did not die that night from kyle rittenhouse's gun, and we heard from gaige grosskreutz and he said when asked whether or not kyle rittenhouse shot at him when his hands were up, he said
10:25 am
no, and then he was asked by the defense did you point your gun at kyle rittenhouse and then he shot you and he said correct. that a big moment for the jury for sure because that could be self-defense and that indeed is what the jury decided. when you go through each one, anthony huber who also was shot before grosskreutz, he attempted to hit rittenhouse with his skateboard. the prosecution maintained, they said the people who chased after kyle rittenhouse half he killed joseph rosenbaum were simply doing so because they thought they had a mass shooter on his hands and were trying to stop him but the jury clearly thought in this case after kyle rittenhouse tripped and fell and turned his gun and people started coming at him that he was only defending his own life or from great bodily harm and that is what they have decided. of course, this case has a lot of tentacles. it's not just what is going on inside of that court. this has been a political
10:26 am
football, if you will. it has been -- the right has looked at kyle rittenhouse the whole team as a here, o. the left often or far left has looked at kyle rittenhouse as the devil, and it has just gone back and forth. if you look at anything online you will see for and against, and it is pretty clear that people are sticking to their sides and they were not in this court. we watched every second of this trial. many folks didn't and the jury looked at all of the evidence. we know they looked at it hard because this is the fourth day of deliberations. they have deliberated more than 24 hours over the past four days, and so they looked at everything. they re-watched the videos, and really when people talk about the star witness in a case, the star witness in this case or the star evidence in this case was the video. the video could be watched as many times as they wanted to watch it. the public could watch the video if they liked, and so it seemed that in this case, yes, gaige
10:27 am
grosskreutz was an important witness, but the video seemed to be the star in this case because the video shows you exactly what happened that night. >> we know that that's what the jury was focused on in their deliberations because they put forward about five questions i recall to the judge, to the court, and most of those specific to the video as well as the jury instructions themselves, so they were reviewing that video, one of them in court and the other one they were able to take back and watch on a laptop so they can review it, multiple times if necessary, and they were very confident in this verdict as they delivered that not guilty verdict on all five counts that kyle rittenhouse was facing. we saw him tear up in court. we saw him in what appear to be a collapse in some way as he hugged his lawyer and then was visibly shaking as the judge confirmed he was now a free man. just 18 years old when this crime that he was alleged to have committed took place. he was just 17 years old at the
10:28 am
time when he went to kenosha, wisconsin with that ar-15 style weapon and shot and killed two men and wounded a third. again, not guilty on all charges. his defense was that it was in self-defense and the jury apparently agreed with that. sara, let me come back to you because we do know that this case was full of emotion by both sides, by people in with ensomewhat, wisconsin. remember this all happened in february -- excuse me, in august i believe of 2020. it was in the summer of 2020 following the black lives matter protests, after the death of george floyd, of course, and so there was so much emotion, right, when all of this happened, and that emotion really, you know, came to fruition again as this trial was under way, and we know that the
10:29 am
governor of wisconsin has been concerned about heightened emotion following any verdict. what is the status as far as security and that sort of thing right now? >> reporter: we knew that something was going to happen and that the jury had reached some sort of a verdict because all of a sudden there were a multiple number of deputies and members of the atf inside the court that had not been there or at least had not been visible throughout this trial. we also know that the national guard has been called in. they were called in earlier in the week. they have not been visible at all. they are nowhere around the court or anything like that, but they are ready and waiting in case there is unrest. we also know that this is very different from what we saw this summer. the number of protesters who have been coming to the court on a regular basis includes jacob blake's uncle justin and about a dozen or so more people who show up regularly, and then there are
10:30 am
folks here who are standing for kyle rittenhouse and now for this not guilty verdict, but there hasn't been a huge number of people who have shown up on a daily basis here. there have been people on the steps every day and yes, tensions, they flare up at time and one person was detained because they had a weapon within 1,000 feet of school. there's a school right across from the court and across the park in kenosha. that's against the law and the deputies told him to either put the gun away or that he would be arrested if he did not comply, but for the most part it has been peace. if it has been cordial and people arguing and talking on the court steps but there hasn't been any major violence that we have seen unfold here in kenosha. what there is though is tension in the city because as i've talked to many, many residents here, some folks going on this little troll that goes through town, some folks at some of the places that are open here, everyone is a bit concerned
10:31 am
about what might happen and what was going to happen no matter what the verdict was. now we are still seeing, you know, about two dozen people on the court steps, but nothing more yet. this is very early to be clear. we have just heard this verdict. the public is just now learning of this not guilty verdict, but we should also, to be clear, because i know you mentioned kyle rittenhouse coming with the gun. the gun was here in kenosha. there's been a lot of social media and politicians talking about him bringing it over state lines. actually we learned in the trial that the gun was here in kenosha. his friend had bought it for him. his friend was 18, kyle is 17 so he could not purchase this weapon but indeed going after state lines was after the shooting occurred when he went home and eventually turned himself in with his mom, but there are a lot of details in the trial and if people are not watching the trial and making up their own details it causes tensions to rise even more, but so far, again, it is calm.
10:32 am
there is some shouting, and there is some obviously upset outside the court, but for the most part it has been a very calm day here. the court is taking this all very, very seriously. there is security apparatus all around the court, some visible, some not and lots of security within the court to make sure that the families of those shot by kyle rittenhouse and kyle rittenhouse and his family and attorneys will all be able to execute this court safely and securely. ansnarks. >> stand by. i do want to bring in charles coleman jr., a civil rights attorney. charles, first, your thoughts about the verdict today. >> well, i think that this may be a surprise to many people's sensibilities but it should not be a surprise to your logic, and what i mean by that is trials, ana, are oftentimes a tale of competing narratives, and i oftentimes say that the important piece is to control
10:33 am
the narrative whatever side you're on, and in this case what we saw were the competing narratives of kyle rittenhouse on one hand being a victim and on one hand being a vigilante, and ultimately what we know now is that the jury bought the narrative of kyle rittenhouse being a victim. they thought that his self-defense claim was a lot stronger than the prosecution owes provocation claim. i think that there were a lot of other things that took place during the course of this trial that didn't necessarily put the prosecution in the best of light, but let's be clear about something. this was not a slam dunk from the prosecution from the get-go. they had an uphill battle to climb. the judge in this case did not do them any favors with many of his rules from the very beginning all the way through the entirety of the case. however, it should be noted that the prosecution did not have great facts to work with from the outset, and so while a lot of people out there may be looking at this case and wondering how could this have happened. if as the last guest said they were watching the trial and paying attention to the details, you may have seen some of this
10:34 am
coming, at least an acquittal on. of the charges if not all of them as we've seen here today. >> there were lesser charges they could have considered, charles, and so we never heard a verdict on those lesser charges for the most serious counts. is that typical that they wouldn't address those at all? >> it is typical in that they looked at the top counts, they looked at the more serious count and decided that those were not things they were going to entertain so what it came down to -- the jury gets a verdict sheet and the verdict sheet has what the final charges are, and there were those charges that were read to the jury that -- that were read to the public that the jury ultimately voted on and decided on, and so they basically threw those out and at this point we're looking at kyle rittenhouse as a freeman. i think it's important to understand that regardless of the outcome of this case in some eyes, kyle rittenhouse was going to be a hero and in some eyes he was going to be a villain but what we now know after seeing him walk issy he'll be
10:35 am
remembered pretty much forever going forward. >> elie honig, i know you're still with me. part of what made this case somewhat complicated is the law itself was complex in wisconsin specifically when it comes to self-defense, right? it was the burden on prosecution to essentially disprove his self-defense claim, right? >> yeah this. verdict is not surprising really for the fundamental reason our system requires proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. that's the highest standard in our legal standard. as a prosecutor i bore that burden. we welcome that burden. that's a key feature of our democratic system, of our constitutional system and the way it works here is the prosecution had the burden of disproving self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt so if this was a difficult decision, and i think there's a broad consensus that this was a close call and difficult decision, then the only right and just verdict here is not guilty. so it's important that we keep in mind that core feature of our
10:36 am
criminal justice system. >> it is so important, again, the law is the law, and that's what they were basing their decision on as the jury deliberated again in the past 25 hours over the course of the past four days since they were given this case and went into deliberations. a fir of five men, seven women. let's go back to outside the courthouse and sara sidner, i understand, sara, the family members of anthony huber, one of the men shot and killed by kyle rittenhouse are expected to exit any moment now. what can you tell us about this. >> reporter: that's right. they have been in court. they have been watching this. his aunt in particular but other family members as we will have been watching this case throughout. anthony high pressure, as you may or may not know, was one of the people shot and killed that night in august by kyle rittenhouse. he is shown on video running up to kyle as kyle has fallen on the ground with his gun pointing sort of out, and he had a
10:37 am
skateboard with him. after one man who they named jumpkick man in the trial because at the time they could not identify him, huber comes up and tries to strike and does strike kyle rittenhouse with his skateboard which i think was the only weapon that they found on him or turned into a weapon at that time. he was shot and he died that day, that night, you know, on the scene basically. you see the video of it all happening. it was captioned by livestreamers who were live the whole night, and that video was played by the jury. the jury also asked much of the video in this case and re-watched all of this. and the defense had long said, look, he was being chased by people. you could hear in the video them saying get him. get his ass, sorry, it's cable news, and so their point was he was running for his life. he feared not only -- he doesn't only have to fear being killed,
10:38 am
but kyle rittenhouse can also fear great bodily injury, and they made that point, that if you fear great bodily injury or death, that you are allowed to defend yourself, and that is exactly what the jury decided that he did in every single one of these cases, and so the family, of course, of anthony huber going to be upset about this. they are going to, you know, not see that justice was done because they feel that their loved one was simply trying to stop someone who had shot someone and killed someone. in their minds he was doing something valiant, but in the jury's minds and in the defense's mind he was -- kyle rittenhouse was simply defending himself from someone trying to attack him. aprila? >> one of the quotes from the defense attorney during the key arguments that they were making at the end was every person who was shot was attacking kyle, one with a skateboard, one with his hands and one with his feet, one with a gun, hands and feet can cause great bodily harm going back to that self-defense claim that they base their case on.
10:39 am
i want to go to cnn's correspondent at the courthouse, adrian broaddus. you're with the family of jacob blake. jacob blake was shot and killed by police and that's why there were protests in the street -- not killed but shot by police and severely injured, paralyzed because of it. what are you hearing from jacob blake's family? >> reporter: you know what, i will let his family tell you, and we've been talking since the verdict came down, and one of the things that struck me that justin said moments ago. you said this is worse than january 5th, and january 5th was the day we were here in kenosha when that officer who shot and injured your brother was -- your nephew, was cleared of all wrong doing. what's on your heart at this moment? >> well, i just want the nation to know, everybody out there. we want the nation to know -- the nation that you live in now isn't the nation of the united states that we used to live in.
10:40 am
>> reporter: so this is what's unfolding. you've got a divide here. don't go away here. you have folks on the left side who feel relief. >> you're unpatriot. >> yeah, you have an all-white jury. i bet you do. but a minute ago you were worried. you're ignorant! >> i would respect this verdict regardless. >> you piece of -- >> so, we're going to rap. that's what's playing out here. two different beliefs today, and i'm going to send it back to you. >> crawl back into the whole that you came from. >> hope that everyone stays safe. we'll come back to you. thank you for sharing, again, the thoughts and feeling of people who werism pacted to some degree by this whole situation. we're just hearing from the family of jacob blake, again, which sparked the protests that happened in kenosha, wisconsin
10:41 am
that kyle rittenhouse then went to where then this all escalated, and he ultimately shot and killed a couple of people and wounded a third person he says in self-defense. again, he has now been tried and acquitted on all of the counts related to that shooting that took place, again, in the summer of 2020. elie honig, i have a question for you. given this is done, this is over when it comes to any kind of criminal charges related to these shootings, clearly there will be family members who feel that this was not the right outcome. third loved ones died because of kyle rittenhouse. do they have other legal avenues that they could pursue still? >> they do, ana. they could file a civil suit seeking monetary damages, mondamages, but the criminal aspect of this case is decisively over with respect to the state of wisconsin. he cannot be tried again. that would be double jeopardy, and the prosecution does not have the ability to appeal an acquittal, a not guilty verdict, and ana, this is an important
10:42 am
point to make. the whole point of our jury system is for the decision to be rendered dispassionately, separately and apart from whatever else is swirling out there in the world. judges stress this to every jury in every trial. you are to decide this case only on what you see in the four corners, the four walls of this courtroom and nothing else. this is all about the facts and the law, and it's your job, jury, to apply the facts to the law, again, with the highest burden in our legal system, proof beyond a reasonable doubt necessary for a conviction, so this is over for kyle rittenhouse in the state. he cannot be tried again. he's not guilty, and that's the end of it with respect to the state of wisconsin. >> and he -- he spoke at his own defense during this trial. that was a key moment, a pivotal moment in this trial that took course of eight days. it was 31 witnesses total. a very rapid trial. shimon prokupecz was watching every moment of this, and you have some reporting on defense
10:43 am
and the attorneys, how they were feeling, what was going on prior to the verdict. what can you tell us about that? >> reporter: i mean, just within about an hour before the verdict came down, i was with the defense attorneys, and we were just -- they were getting kind of antsy, and they were trying to figure out what was going on, obviously waiting for this verdict. they felt confident. they were worried though over the video, the video, the drone video that they wanted -- the reason they asked the judge to declare a mistrial for. they were worried that that drone video was going to create problems for them. they felt that that is ultimately what would give the jurors the provocation, the charge that the judge gave to the jury, that instruction about whether kyle rittenhouse instigated everything so they were worried about that, and they felt there were probably more people on their side than on the prosecution side, but they were worried about it because also yesterday, if you recall, there was a juror who asked to take the instructions, the juror instructions home.
10:44 am
they were against it, and the judge allowed it, and that perhaps could have been what was the tipping point because for two days really, yesterday and today, we had not heard anything from the jurors. they ordered lunch around 11:00 or so. they ordered sandwiches. we were told by the court sandwiches were being delivered and within about an hour or so after that we started to get a sense that something was going on and then obviously we got word that there was a verdict, but the attorneys were sort of -- they were kind of on edge, but they were confident because they thought that their self-defense claims and that the case that they put on was very good, and they thought that they were going to be, you know, in the end, they thought they were going to certainly win this case. if not they would certainly start arguing the mistrial motions and then direct the judge to overturn the convictions. i can tell you from this morning hand my last conversations with them, they were pretty optimistic that things were going to go their way, and so it has. this was a grueling few days for them, for the rittenhouse family and really for the people who
10:45 am
were shot, the victims in this case as well. some grueling days. they were in the hallways every day waiting to hear what was going on, and then also, you know, for the jurors. i mean, we didn't get to see many of them as they were deliberating obviously, but, you know, sometimes they get questions and they come in. they really only would come into the court at the end of the day when they were september home and that was really our only read of them, and they seemed to be getting along. things seemed to be going along fairly well and it wasn't until yesterday that you could see that there was some division, specifically one juror, a woman sitting in the back room, the foreperson that she wanted the instructions to take home and perhaps, perhaps that was the tipping point here. obviously we may never know. it's interesting though the judge is basically saying he does not want the media reaching out to the jurors but, you know, we'll see what happens. for now obviously we wait to hear from the defense attorneys. we do think they may at some point speak to us, so we're waiting to hear about that. >> and we wonder if we'll ever
10:46 am
hear then from kyle rittenhouse also, if he will talk to the public. we heard from him during this trial as he shared his side of the story, and you mentioned that there may have been, you know, these discussions that at times there may have been divisions within the jury, but let's be clear. when they delivered the verdict, when the foreperson read the verdict, this was unanimous. all 12 members of the jury agreed kyle rittenhouse was not guilty on all five counts, and laura coates, former federal prosecutor, is with us now as well. laura, you and i have talked about this trial throughout the past couple of weeks as we watched and the developments took place. there were lots of twists and turns along the way. your reaction to its ending, the way this all came to a close. >> reporter: you know, i'm actually not surprised that this resulted in a not guilty verdict because of the jury instructions, ana, and you spent a lot of time talking to me about the jury instructions figuring out why they were so
10:47 am
consequential, and i want to direct everyone to a particular moment when defense counsel and the prosecution were fighting with the judge over a particular portion of the instructions, that being whether the jury would have to go beyond the idea of self-defense to reach the lesser included oechsz. there was an argument that ensued, look, if -- if the jury in this case -- the trial jury in this case finds self-defense was used in some way or entitled to be used then that's it, that ends the actual inquiry, and you heard the prosecution very adamant about not wanting that to end it because they knew that they couldn't go down the line to lesser included offenses, and a big part of me thinks to myself, this, of course, is where this came down to, the idea that if he was entitled to use self-defense with respect to the first victim, mr. rosenbaum, then a domino effect would occur to figure out whether he was entitled down the line. his testimony was the most compelling aspect of this entire trial. the prosecution's theme of this case, ultimately you saw in the
10:48 am
closing argument, but that was really sticking the landing and having the overall routine not being as compelling. they thought they could make the case in wisconsin about an active shooter and everyone else who responded to kyle rittenhouse were actually the ones reacting in self-defense. that proved unpersuasive to this particular reason and for two reasons. wisconsin is a place with a gun culture not synonymous with criminal activity. the idea of saying you want to alienate a gun owner would not have been persuasive enough. the idea of saying, hey, they were acting in self-defense might have been compelling, except for the jury instruction, ana. the jury instruction said you have to view whether his belief in having to use self-defense was reasonable not through the eyes in the jurors in hindsight, not in monday morning quarterback, but through the eyes of then 17-year-old kyle rittenhouse and a person of ordinary intelligence, and so
10:49 am
when you saw him take the stand and explain why he himself thought he was in lethal danger at that point, that probably was the one that tipped the needle, tip the scale and moved the needle to say, hey, this person in his testimony is exhibiting some aspects of ordinary intelligence, number one, that he believed that it was reasonable to do so and now the burden went back to the prosecution where it always should stay to say, hey, we have proven that he was not reasonable in his belief, that he was in a kill or be killed scenario, and so what you see here is even through the closing arguments, ana, as compelling as they would be about the objective shooter and the reaction to an active shooter, you have to actually through your case present evidence that disproves the very low threshold in wisconsin where a defendant only has toss offer some statement that they felt entitled to use self-defense, and you've got to disprove it.
10:50 am
and, of course, the two people who were killed might have been in a position to do so, but the third person testified that he had a gun and may have pointed it inadvertently after kyle rittenhouse and in the chaosic theme is what ultimately likely led to the not guilty verdict in the end. an assely has been spiking about, that is it. there is no other recourse for the prosecution in this case. but, there is this back drop, ana, of jacob blake shooting when the defense had the nerve to mention in this sense. they said, look, sen shots to the back was deemed to be okay in this jurisdiction. my client only shot four times. when i heard that, i thought to myself, you know what, this is spring training who is keenly aware of this political back drop, aracial inflection point
10:51 am
in this country trying to relate kyle rittenhouse with lawmaker and calling a use of force expert to talk about this and the discussion that had to usurp the authority of police because cops weren't doing anything about it at the time. all of this combined as you see now to a full acquittal. >> and now we're hearing from the family members of some people shoot by kyle rittenhouse. let's go back live to sara sidner. what are you hearing? >> reporter: the family of anthony huber, who was the seb person shot and killed that night as kyle rittenhouse was being chased down the street and he fell, anthony huber is the person who had the skate board in his hand and hit kyle rittenhouse with it went across his body and was fired upon. the family visibly upset in court.
10:52 am
they have been here every day. they have been watching every movement of this trial and every question that the jury had. and you know, they are upset. they feel that they are -- loved one did something to try and stop someone who he believed was a danger to the public in their minds and that, you know, that he died in vain. so we expect to hear more from the family of anthony huber. and you know, as we go through this, what i think what laura coates just said is very, very important, that there is a political back drop to this. outside of the court, in the court, some of the political back drop was brought into the court by the defense. a lot of people gasping at the comparison between kyle rittenhouse who is not a police officer and the officer who was never charged with anything in the shooting of jacob blake. but, the judge has been very clear in saying that this should
10:53 am
not be based on anyone's politics, this should be based on the evidence in this case. and it is clear that the jury did deliberate, and they did take their time and did look over evidence and they did ask questions, they did mull over what i think is the tar evidence in the case, the video itself of each of these shootings and it just so happened that each of them were captured on video that night. one from a drone from someone who brought that to the case very late in the case, and one or a couple from live streamers who were out following all of the action in the streets that night in august. for some people, this is a stunning verdict. for others they predicted this would happen because the whole time they believed that kyle was defending himself and that mr. rittenhouse was out here trying to help protect businesses and all of this stuff came out in the trial. but for those who did not watch the details of this trial, there
10:54 am
are a lot of folks talking about it in very general terms. but the details are what matter to a jury. and that is what the judge asked them to do. and they did what they felt was the right thing by looking at all of the details that they sat through for a couple of weeks an then deliberated for three and a half days. and they're decision is final as has been said by our very smart lawyer -- lawyers on today. the decision is final. there is nothing else that will happen with kyle rittenhouse in this case. he is a free man and can go about his life. ana. >> sarah stand by. i want to go back to charles coleman jr. because i think some people will look at this and not understand the law fully. they may say, you know, we heard the prosecution present their argument that it was kyle rittenhouse who came there, who had this gun, who provoked essentially these men who he ultimately shot coming at him.
10:55 am
why doesn't that hold water at least the jury deciding that that didn't cut it? >> well ultimately what this comes down to and i believe what it likely came down to for the jury is was kyle rittenhouse's claim to belief, the belief that he alleged on the stand, that he was in imminent threat of danger or losing his wife such that he had to respond with lethal force to defend himself. was that reasonable. and that was testimony during cross-examination where they talked about how the gun was being held or sideways. the prosecutor in that moment atremted to try to suggest that because the gun was being held sideways like you might see in a movie, that somehow that made rittenhouse's belief that his life was in danger less plausible. but obviously when it came to what the jury thought and what the jury felt in terms of how they reviewed this case, they
10:56 am
still believed that rittenhouse was reasonable in his feeting that his life was in danger and that it required the use of deadly force. and so because of that, the provocation charge that they were read ultimately was outweighed by his claim -- by rittenhouse's claim of self-defense. >> bob, a criminal defense lawyer and a former prosecutor, what do you see as the key moment in this trial that may have been a tipping point for jurors. >> i like to talk about the difference between narrative and facts as you're so eloquently reporting. we've been watching every day tail of the facts. now not what was being reported and the politics tv. i want to go to the provocation. if he's engaging if multiple conduct that provokes others to attack and then there is a line in there that is very, very important.
10:57 am
it indicates that a belief may be reasonable even if mistaken. so when kyle rittenhouse gets on the stand after three of the government's witnesses had indicated that he was being chased, there were screaming and yelling at him, hitting him with skateboards and getting kicked in the face by jump kick man and shots being fired behind him and th there were opportunities that he had to use the weapon where the people backed away and he didn't fire the weapon. to all, whether they're on the the liberal side or conservative side, trial lawyers who have tried cases, these jury instructions are not that unique. and virtually i would imagine every tate given the burden of proof and presumption of innocence in this country and the prosecution has to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt to all 12 jurors. how do you that when you saw no real provocation going on, him not threatening anybody. he's walking around with i
10:58 am
medical kit and he came off as a cop wanna be but they're pursuing him and the government's witnesses were saying they were in fear for his life because of the people throwing rocks at him and he was being pursued, his running away. come on. it is not -- it is not about narratives. it is unfortunate that narratives is a wag in the dog here. it is the facts that came out during the course of the case that showed that those narratives were in large part completely inaccurate. and so this jury did its job by looking at the facts, taking its time, deliberating over the evidence and even though it may have been a mistaken belief, they believed kyle rittenhouse under those circumstances felt not only death but great bodily harm, a lot of people are missing that. that could be a protacted loss of a body member or organ or what have you. and when he's down on the ground and people are grabbing his weapon and he's been threatened already and he's trying to run
10:59 am
away and there was a real trial lawyer, a trial lawyer that really tried cases that didn't sit here and say this is an amazingly good self-defense case and the sign of desperation for the prosecution was which they asked for the lesser included offenses after rittenhouse testified that they knew their self-defense claim was going down in flames and they were hoping, i'm temming you this is what goes on as a trial tactic, that would give the jurors, not guilty on everything, they knew they have difficulty with the case so they wanted to give them a middle ground so they could land on to convict him of something. but there just wasn't the facts here to support it irrespective of the narratives. >> okay. so obviously we are looking at images live outside of the courthouse there in kenosha, wisconsin, where we could see there are a number of people gathered, a lot of media there reporting on the outcome of this trial, not guilty on all counts. kyle rittenhouse now a free
11:00 am
18-year-old man. and we've also seen protesters. but not a lot. a number of people who are there with signs, who were perhaps hoping for a different outcome here. but the jurors, they looked at the law, they looked at jury instructions, they reviewed several pieces of evidence as they were deliberating over the course of four days, 25 hours. not guilty on all charges. the end of the kyle rittenhouse trial. the news continues right now with alisyn camerota. hello, everyone, i'm alisyn camerota. welcome to "newsroom." victor is off. we do have breaking news. minutes ago a jury acquitted kyle rittenhouse on all counts. rittenhouse was 17 years old when he fatally shot two men and wounded a third with an ar-15 style rifle that he brought to racial justice protests in august of 2020. he was charged


1 Favorite

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on