Kyle Rittenhouse Trial - Update: Acquitted On All Charges

[Azure]

Someone want to explain that from a legal perspective?

I assume both the defense and prosecution were able to exclude jury members for various reasons, and then they had 18 left?

[Knightslayer]

I literally can't stop laughing.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

How is this typically handled? Did they just happen to have a raffle drum in the courtroom?

It sounds like yes. There's 18 jurors in attendance, and then 6 are randomly chosen to not partake in the actual decision. The only unusual aspect is that it's not normally the accused that pulls the names from the drum. Apparently it's unusual to have the defendant draw the names, but it's not against the rules either:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/...urors-81191279

There’s no prohibition on having the defendant draw the numbers of alternate jurors, but the general practice is to have the clerk of courts do it, said Ion Meyn, an assistant professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School.

“This is not really a well-litigated area,” Meyn said.

If it is common practice for that judge, prosecutors may decide it’s not worth objecting to, Meyn said.

Typically, there's 20 jurors to start, but 2 have already been dismissed in this case.

The Rittenhouse jury pool had started at 20, but one juror was dismissed for health reasons and another was let go after he told a joke related to the case to a bailiff.

[Azure]

Jambois said alternates were designated by picking numbers from a tumbler but the clerk of courts pulled the numbers from it, not Jensen.

“I’ve never heard of a defendant pulling the names,” Jambois said. “That’s done by a member of the court.”

Julius Kim, a former Milwaukee County assistant district attorney, said he’s never seen a judge allow a defendant to draw the numbers to determine who the final members of a jury will be.

“It’s not unusual to select alternates by lot,” Kim said. ”(But) I’ve never seen a judge allow a defendant to draw those names. That might be a little unconventional but there’s nothing wrong with it that I could really see."

Milwaukee-based defense attorney Tom Grieve also said he’s never seen a defendant do that, “but it's a shoulder shrug for me.”

“I don’t really care," Grieve said. "The point is they have some system to arrive at 12 jurors. It’s certainly unusual but I don’t see anything wrong with it.”

There’s no prohibition on having the defendant draw the numbers of alternate jurors, but the general practice is to have the clerk of courts do it, said Ion Meyn, an assistant professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/...urors-81191279

I would assumed there were only 12 jurors to begin with, but I guess they can exclude at random up to the end to get down to 12.

[Azure]

Actually seems like a decent idea to have 18 sit through the trial, do a raffle to remove 6, and then go with the 12 remaining for the final verdict.

Kinda dumb to make the defendant do it though. Makes it seem like a spectacle.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Azure

Someone want to explain that from a legal perspective?

I assume both the defense and prosecution were able to exclude jury members for various reasons, and then they had 18 left?

You would exclude jurors at the beginning before the trial starts. Both sides would typically be allowed to choose a certain number of jurors to exclude from the initial large pool. Many jurors can exclude themselves too, for various reasons.

Then you have your 20 jurors who hear the case. Then it gets whittled down, apparently via lottery system, to the final 12 that decide the case. That's a lot of randomness to insert into the system IMO. At the start of the trial both sides have a say in who is on the jury. Then the lottery system could randomly result in a jury made up of almost all jurors favorable to one side.

[Azure]

Fair enough. I would imagine the 18 that are left have been picked over by both sides, especially with such a high profile case.

The randomness isn't an issue, is it?. Not a lot of room for manipulation if you just get excluded by a completely random event that nobody can anticipate.

[OptimalTates]

There was 20 to start. One was dismissed for health reasons, the other made a Jacob Blake joke that got him removed.

Nevermind, Blankall's on it.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

There was 20 to start. One was dismissed for health reasons,the other made a Jacob Blake joke that got him removed.

Nevermind, Blankall's on it.

Which this judge hilariously asked the guy to tell again.

[Mayer]

Originally Posted by Macman

It does look a little too cozy, what do you think the jurors may be getting from this. It is bad optics for someone that's on trial for murder.

I don't think Rittenhouse will be doing much time if any, even if he does get convicted on one or some charge there will most likely be an appeal.

The other thing to note is that when this picture was taken, the jury had been asked to leave the courtroom, so they wouldn't have observed that. And if they follow the guidelines of the Judge to not read about or talk to anyone about the trial, then they wouldn't have seen the picture at all.

[FlamesAddiction]

I don't think allowing him to draw the jurors compromises the integrity of the jury, but it does (combined with the cozy photo) create a positive image of the defendant as being helpful, trustworthy, and engaged in justice, an image that is at the heart of his defense. It's fine for the defense attorneys to paint that picture, but the judge seems to be doing his best to help out which I don't believe should be his role. I think that is an issue.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

How is this typically handled? Did they just happen to have a raffle drum in the courtroom?

Who doesnt? I've got a Raffle Drum right here! You never know when you're going to need one for a raffle emergency!

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Locke

Who doesnt? I've got a Raffle Drum right here! You never know when you're going to need one for a raffle emergency!

Now you've gone and reminded me of my pocket sized disco ball.

[fulham]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Which this judge hilariously asked the guy to tell again.

So now that its clear the evidence will exonerate Rittenhouse, all thats left is trying to make it out to be a sham trial. Very trump-esque tactic.

The judge wanting to confirm what was said so he could kick the juror out is now- "The judge wanted to laugh again at the inappropriate joke, so he asked the juror to repeat it for the lolz before he kicked him out"

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by fulham

So now that its clear the evidence will exonerate Rittenhouse, all thats left is trying to make it out to be a sham trial. Very trump-esque tactic.

The judge wanting to confirm what was said so he could kick the juror out is now- "The judge wanted to laugh again at the inappropriate joke, so he asked the juror to repeat it for the lolz before he kicked him out"

Where did I say any of that?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Now you've gone and reminded me of my pocket sized disco ball.

You bring the Disco Ball, I'll bring the Raffle Drum. We can meet at The Legion.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Locke

You bring the Disco Ball, I'll bring the Raffle Drum. We can meet at The Legion.

And it will still be less weird than this trial.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

And it will still be less weird than this trial.

We'd probably run into that Judge if it was Wing night.

[wwkayaker]

Originally Posted by Locke

You bring the Disco Ball, I'll bring the Raffle Drum. We can meet at The Legion.

Pre-party drinks around the arcade game?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by wwkayaker

Pre-party drinks around the arcade game?

Shuffle Board!