After more than eight hours of deliberations on Tuesday, the jury in the Kyle Rittenhouse case appears no closer to a verdict. Little was revealed from yesterday’s proceedings, save for the fact that jurors requested additional copies of the 36 pages of instructions they received. The jury reconvened at around 10 AM ET on Wednesday—two days after the defense filed a motion for mistrial with prejudice that Judge Bruce Schroeder has failed to rule on.

Rittenhouse’s defense team asked for a mistrial with prejudice last week and formally filed their motion on Monday. In their motion, Attorneys Mark Richards and Corey Chirafisi claim that the defense did not receive a higher quality version of the drone video presented by the prosecution and instead were given a compressed version. They believe that video is crucial in their case, writing that “the video footage has been at the center of this case.”

“The failure to provide the same quality footage in this particular case is intentional and clearly prejudices the defendant,” the motion reads. The defense also takes issue with a video showing Rittenhouse weeks before he fatally shot two people and injured another in Kenosha, Wisconsin, discussing “what he would like to do to people he believed were looting.” That video was barred as evidence in a pretrial hearing, but had been alluded to by prosecutor Thomas Binger while questioning Rittenhouse, earning him a swift rebuke from Schroeder.

    <a></a>
  
  
    <a href="#update-1637177775000">
            Wednesday, Nov 17, 2021 ·  7:36:15 PM +00:00

      ·
      April Siese
    </a>

    Earlier in the day, Judge Schroeder admitted he hadn’t had a chance to read the mistrial motion yet and pushed back against those critical of the fact that he has yet to rule on the motion. This afternoon, the defense and prosecution sparred over the compressed drone video cited in the motion.

Technological illiteracy once again played a major role in the back-and-forth, with defense attorney Natalie Wisco frequently using the word “milibites” before eventually correcting herself about the file size, as milibites don’t exist. Prosecutor James Kraus also appeared to have a limited grasp on what exactly Airdropping is and how it transfers files from Apple device to Apple device.

The judge initially felt that experts should come in and explain under oath whether the drone video file obtained by the prosecution and emailed to the defense was automatically compressed, resulting in a more blurry video. The agreement both sides ultimately came to and that Schroeder signed off on was that three videos pertaining to the drone video would be made available to the defense to watch in court while the courtroom itself was cleared.

The judge told the defense that the jury had yet to reach a point in which their deliberations included the drone video in question. Jurors so far appear to have only questioned how they can view videos related to the trial.

Also during Binger’s questioning of Rittenhouse, he claimed that this was the first time the teen was telling his story of what transpired last August as protests unfolded in Kenosha in the wake of the police shooting of Jacob Blake. Binger had to amend his comments and the jury was reminded that Rittenhouse has a constitutional right not to talk following his arrest.

As experts interviewed by the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel note, it’s unusual for a judge to essentially sit on a mistrial motion like this during jury deliberations. Criminal law professor Michael O’Hear, who teaches at Marquette Law School, told the paper Schroeder likely doesn’t anticipate granting the mistrial given his decision to turn things over a jury.

University of Wisconsin Law School professor Keith Findley backed up O’Hear’s claims: “The only reason I can think of for waiting is perhaps he wants to give the jury a chance to acquit so he doesn’t have to, but that’s speculation on my part.”

Given Schroeder’s conduct and seeming sympathy for Rittenhouse, the judge will most likely decide on whatever benefits the defense regardless of if that invalidates a conviction from jurors. Rittenhouse faces five charges with penalties ranging from monetary fines to life imprisonment.