Advertisement

Drone video quality not likely grounds for mistrial in Rittenhouse case, legal expert says

Drone video is at the center of evidence being highly scrutinized by the jury deliberating the Kyle Rittenhouse case.

Advertisement

Drone video is at the center of evidence being highly scrutinized by the jury deliberating the Kyle Rittenhouse case.

The amateur video was given to prosecutors after the trial began.

They played a higher-quality version for the jury.

But defense attorneys claim prosecutors gave them a lower-resolution video.

They said they didn't find that out until after their case was complete.

"We can sit here all day and say it's been played," defense attorney Corey Chirafisi told the judge Wednesday. "We didn't know there was another version. How is that reasonable?"

"I do not believe a technical reality shall we say, or an unknown technical incident should result in a mistrial," Assistant District Attorney James Kraus said.

"There's nothing that can happen now. It came in as evidence," attorney and legal analyst Paul Bucher said. "If they want to do motions after verdict, which they will, I guarantee it that certainly will be one of the issues. I mean, they're planting land mines, if you will, as you go through this trial."

Sister station WISN asked him if the defense had a strong argument in requesting a mistrial based on the fact that there were different qualities of video.

"No, if the defense felt the video was substandard, they could've enhanced it," Bucher said.

"I forewarned you, you pressed with this and that's fine. I've let it in. And my view on it now is we are where we are and we might as well follow through with it. And if they've got everything correct and it's reliable, then they won't have a problem. If it isn't, it's going to be ugly," Judge Bruce Schroeder told prosecutors Wednesday in court.

There are two defense motions for a mistrial.

One is with prejudice, meaning the case could not be tried again.

It was made after the prosecutor was accused of asking questions to a witness he knew were out of bounds.

The second is without prejudice, meaning the case could be tried again.

It was filed Wednesday based on the drone video evidence.

The judge is not expected to rule on that mistrial request until after the jury reaches its verdict.