Comments by "Ronin Kraut" (@roninkraut6873) on "TYT MELTDOWN Over Kyle Rittenhouse Verdict" video.

@tonyconnor5691 Mistrial with prejudice means they had to show that Binger and Kraus intentionally crossed the line. Go back and watch and you’ll see they asked for one With Prejudice.
9
@jamesandrews8655 My bad. People have been arguing (not just here) about mistrials and evidence and everything. One person that the mistrial motion was because of the state’s “prejudice.” It’s amazing how wrong people can be. It also doesn’t help that major news networks are spreading misinformation. But that makes sense. I thought the ADA’s (Binger and Kraus) were unethical many times. In their opening statements they said Kyle was chasing Rosenbaum. Then their case self destructed and they changed their story. When the photo journalist said Binger tried to get him to change his statement they attacked him. I can understand that it could just be perception but it’s not good. I thought it showed clear bad faith when Binger was attacking Kyle’s right to remain silent. Then argued why but when they came back from lunch his argument had changed and they suddenly had this mysterious interview from Kyle but it was never mentioned before. That shows me they are lying and unethical. Putting witnesses on the stand when you know they are lying is grounds for mistrial and disbarment. In Binger’s closing he said he did it knowingly. These two are like movie villain lawyers and the good people of Kenosha should be making every complaint they can to get rid of them. I wouldn’t want those two representing my community.
4
@tonyconnor5691 I didn’t watch Rekeita law commentary. But from what I saw was the defense objected when Binger was talking about Kyle’s 5th amendment right to remain silent. Then they objected again to what’s called propensity evidence. Binger was trying to bring in the evidence of Kyle in a video saying something about his AR and shoplifters. This was ruled on during pre trial and Binger would not be allowed to talk about it in front of the jury without getting prior approval from the judge. After that, I think they adjourned for lunch and came back or it was the next day when the defense entered a motion for a mistrial with prejudice. The judge took it under advisement but never ruled on it because the jury came back with a not guilty verdict. The last thing the judge did was to dismiss the charges (because of the guilty verdict) with prejudice. Meaning it was over and the state is done. The only thing that can happen to Kyle now (charges or another trial) would be the federal gov bringing charges against him (civil rights violations).
2
@jamesandrews8655 I heard something about Binger being related to someone but I wasn’t sure. I hope people won’t let the gov ‘forget about it’
2
@jamesandrews8655 Yes. “With prejudice” means that the state cannot re-try the case. But, to get the judge to rule favorably, the defense has to show that the state is either intentionally causing a mistrial because they ‘are not winning’ or they have intentionally ‘sabotaged the defenses case.’ That’s the best layman terms I could think of at the moment. Mistrials happen a lot. But rarely do they happen ‘with prejudice.’ I hope this makes sense.
1
@robertmulligan6201 They don’t care about the truth. If they can make a political statement and make this kids life hell, they’ll do it.
1
Kyle’s mother raised him right. He was out there cleaning up and volunteering his time doing the right things. And her child wasn’t a degenerate ex con child rapist. Amazing…
1