(The Post Millennial) – Prosecutors in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial withheld evidence from the defense that was “…at the center of their case,” according to a new report.
SCOOP: @HumanEvents has obtained both versions of the Kyle Rittenhouse drone video
The low quality version provided to the defense
And the HD version withheld by prosecutors
Here is the low quality version: pic.twitter.com/FmkRWsgS2Y
— Jack Posobiec ✝️ (@JackPosobiec) November 17, 2021
Cont'd pic.twitter.com/JJf97z5VSI
— Jack Posobiec ✝️ (@JackPosobiec) November 17, 2021
In a motion for a mistrial filed Monday and obtained by The Daily Mail, Rittenhouse’s defense claim that the state only shared high-definition drone video footage with the defense after evidence had closed on November 13.
Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger showed the footage to the jury during his closing statements and alleged that that the video showed Rittenhouse “pointing his gun” at people, which was used by the prosecution to claim that Rittenhouse provoked the attacks on August 25, 2020 in Kenosha, WI.
According to the motion, “On November 5, 2021, the fifth day of trial on this case, the prosecution turned over to the defense footage of a drone video which captured some of the incident from August 25, 2020.”
“The problem is the prosecution gave the defense a compressed version of the video. What that means is the video provided to the defense was not as clear as the video kept by the state.”
The motion added that the file size given to the defense is only 3.6MB while the prosecution’s full video is 11.2MB and that the larger file was not provided to the defense “…until after the trial concluded.”
“During the jury instructions conference, the defense played their version of the video for the court to review. The state indicated their version was much clearer and had their tech person come into court to have the court review their clearer video. The video is the same, the resolution of that video, however, was not.”
“As it relates to the compressed drone footage. The prosecution should be required to explain to the court why they did not copy the footage for the defendant with the same quality as their copy.”
“The video footage has been at the center of this case. The idea that the state would provide lesser quality footage and then use that footage as a linchpin in their case is the very reason they requested and were granted the provocation instruction by the Court.”
Rittenhouse’s attorneys filed their motion for mistrial with prejudice and had already alleged ‘prosecutorial misconduct’ and ‘over-reach’ directed at Binger’s for violating Rittenhouse’s constitutional right to remain silent when the prosecutor suggested during cross examination of the defendant that Rittenhouse had done so as to ‘tailor’ his story to fit the facts and videos as they were disclosed during trial.
Rittenhouse’s defense team alleged that Binger’s behavior was “clearly intentional” and “prejudicial.”
According to the motion, “The failure to provide the same quality footage in this particular case is intentional and clearly prejudices the defendant.”
The jury was sent home for the evening around 5:50 PM CT after the first day of deliberations and are expected to report back to the courthouse on Wednesday morning to resume deliberations at 9:00 AM CT.
thepostmillennial.com/rittenhouse-defense-team-files-motion-that-prosecutors-withheld-video-evidence