'Close to questioning evolution': Rittenhouse judge blasted for claim enlarged videos are 'so-called scientific evidence'
The highly-controversial judge overseeing the Kyle Rittenhouse homicide case is once again under fire. Judge Bruce Schroeder last week took a good deal of time to debate whether or not zooming in on a video, say, enlarging it via hand motions as people do countless times a day, or by other means, means the evidence has been changed, something experts say is false.
On Monday, as he was instructing the jury, Judge Schroeder introduced his own personal bias into the issue, outraging the prosecution.
Prosecutors called the method used to zoom in on a video "a forensically-sound program used by a forensic analyst."
Schroeder then compared zooming in on a video to "so-called scientific evidence," introducing the "Daubert rule," as he called it (technically the "Daubert Standard," or the "Daubert Test.")
The Rittenhouse judge compares zooming in on videos to "so-called scientific evidence"pic.twitter.com/JTdJO0UHqD— Aaron Rupar (@Aaron Rupar) 1636990557
Legal experts and others are blasting Schroeder, especially, as some noted, all these details should have been agreed upon before beginning his instructions, with the jury out of the room.
Getting close to questioning evolution here.https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1460270352169324545\u00a0\u2026— Simon Rosenberg (@Simon Rosenberg) 1636993489
Former federal prosecutor turned USA Today opinion columnist:
I'm trying to not let my blood pressure jump so not watching Rittenhouse coverage.\n\nBut, two federal prosecutor friends are texting, telling me how the judge is screwing up the jury instructions.— Michael J. Stern (@Michael J. Stern) 1636995610
Drives me nuts that some outlets, including @CNN, are referring to the Rittenhouse judge as a "tough jurist."\n\nThere's a difference between being a stickler for legal requirements and being nasty as a way to mask incompetence.— Michael J. Stern (@Michael J. Stern) 1636996561
Univ. of Alabama law professor, MSNBC and NBC legal analyst, former federal prosecutor:
The Judge in the Rittenhouse trial is gumming up his delivery of the jury instructions to the point where I\u2019m concerned he\u2019s given the defendant an excellent argument on appeal if he\u2019s convicted.— Joyce Alene (@Joyce Alene) 1636995630
Former federal prosecutor:
Rittenhouse judge speculating about inadmissibilty of video evidence he already admitted-normally judges make a record to protect their decisions on appeal - Judge Schroeder sowing record for conviction to be overturned - its like he wants insurance for Rittenhouse...— Shanlon Wu (@Shanlon Wu) 1636991759
Have never seen a judge stop jury instructions to debate with attorneys whether the instructions need to be changed. This should all have been sorted out already. This is why they had the weekend to do this. Jury instructions are already confusing and this just makes it worse.— Shimon Prokupecz (@Shimon Prokupecz) 1636995624
- 'Potential for bias': Civil rights attorney stunned after Rittenhouse ... ›
- Is a conservative coffee company supporting 'Kenosha killer' Kyle ... ›
- Judge tosses misdemeanor gun charge in Rittenhouse trial ... ›
- 'Whole case is a mess': Internet stunned as judge lets Rittenhouse choose final jurors in raffle system - Alternet.org ›
- Rittenhouse judge goes off on a tangent about his grievances against the media - Alternet.org ›