NOTES.
WATCHING THIS VERY CLOSELY AS
THE REST OF THE COUNTRY HAS BEEN
AS WELL.
I’D LIKE TO BRING IN FOX NEWS
CONTRIBUTOR ANDY McCARTHY AND
ATTORNEY BRIAN CLAYPOOL THAT
HAVE BEEN WATCHING THIS CLOSELY
AS WE’VE GONE THROUGH.
CLOSING ARGUMENTS ON THE PART OF
THE PROSECUTION WENT ON FOR A
COUPLE HOURS, ANDY.
YOUR THOUGHTS ON HOW THEY DID IN
CLOSING THIS CASE ON THEIR SIDE.
>> I WAS REALLY SURPRISED,
MARTHA, THAT THERE WEREN’T
OBJECTIONS BY THE DEFENSE.
BECAUSE HIS -- BINGER’S THEORY
HERE IS THE PROVOCATION THAT HE
IS ARGUING IS BROUGHT AGAINST BY
RITTENHOUSE BY BINGER’S ACCOUNT
IS IN A PLACE WHERE HE DOESN’T
BELONG.
HE’S LIKE AN OUT OF TOWNER THAT
HAS COME IN INTRUDING INTO A
SCENE THAT HE DOES.
BELONG IN.
HIS POSSESSION OF A GUN, WHICH
HE SUGGESTED TO THE JURY WAS
ILLEGAL EVEN THOUGH THAT COUNT
IS OUT OF THE CASE.
SO IT’S SURPRISED THAT THEY
DIDN’T OBJECT TO THAT.
HE’S SAYING LEGAL GUN
POSSESSION, LEGALLY IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD, ALL OF THAT IS A
PROVOCATION BY WHICH SOMEHOW HE
FORFEITS HIS RIGHT OF
SELF-DEFENSE.
SO WHAT HE’S TRYING TO DO IS
SUGGEST THAT IN THE ENTIRE
CONTINUUM OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES,
THIS KID DID A LOT OF THINGS
THAT HE SHOULDN’T HAVE DONE AND
THEREFORE THAT WAS PROVOCATIVE
TO THE PEOPLE THAT HE ULTIMATELY
INTERACTED WITH.
HE DOESN’T GET TO DEFEND HIMSELF
IF IN THE COURSE OF THE
INTERACTIONS HE’S ASSAULTED.
WE’LL HEAR FROM THE DEFENSE
OBVIOUSLY THAT THAT’S NOT WHAT
THE STANDARD IS.
>> Martha: ONE OF THE THINGS,
BRIAN, THAT HE WAS TOUCHING ON
AT THE END THERE IS THERE IS A
VERY HIGH STANDARD FOR
JUSTIFYING SELF-DEFENSE IN
KILLING SOMEONE.
HE SAID YOU HAVE TO HAVE A
REASONABLE PERSON HAS TO BELIEVE
THAT THEY WERE AT RISK OF DEATH
OR GREAT BODILY HARM.
OBVIOUSLY THE PROSECUTION IS
ARGUING THAT THAT WAS NOT THE
CASE.
THERE WERE OTHER THINGS THAT
KYLE RITTENHOUSE COULD HAVE DONE
TO GET OUT OF THERE AND
DE-ESCALATE THAT SITUATION.
>> MARTHA, BINGER IS DOING IF
BEST YOU CAN.
BUT IF YOU FLY A PLANE WITH A
BAD ENGINE, IT’S GOING DOWN.
THE TWO MOST PROFOUND FACTS THAT
GRAVITATE AGAINST THE
PROSECUTION, LET’S TALK ABOUT
THE FIRST ONE.
THE VIDEOTAPE THAT BINGER PLAY,
IT HELPS THE DEFENSE.
WHY?
BECAUSE IT SHOWS THAT ALL THREE
OF THE GENTLEMEN SHOT WERE THE
AGGRESSORS.
THERE’S NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT.
LET’S FOCUS ON ROSENBAUM.
HE THROWS A BAG AT RITTENHOUSE.
HE’S THEN CHARGING AT
RITTENHOUSE.
RITTENHOUSE IS RUNNING AWAY.
RITTENHOUSE ISN’T RUNNING
TOWARDS ROSENBAUM.
AND THEN -- THIS IS CRITICAL.
THERE’S SOON ON THE HAND OF
ROSENBAUM.
WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU?
THAT TELLS YOU THAT ROSENBAUM’S
HAND IS ALMOST ON THE GUN OF
RITTENHOUSE.
SO ARGUABLY THAT MAKES
RITTENHOUSE IN FEAR FOR HIS LIFE
AND HE SHOOTS.
LOOK AT HUBER.
THERE WAS VIDEOTAPE OF
RITTENHOUSE BEING ON THE GROUND
AFTER BEING HIT WITH A
SKATEBOARD.
THEN YOU HAVE GAIGE GROSSKREUTZ
TESTIFYING THAT HE DID POINT A
GUN AT RITTENHOUSE BEFORE
RITTENHOUSE SHOT.
SO ALL OF THIS VIDEOTAPE
EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT THOSE THREE
ARE THE AGGRESSOR.
THE LAST POINT I WANT TO MAKE,
MARTHA, BINGER ADMITTED AT THE
END OF HIS CLOSING ARGUMENT, HE
SAID IF THAT WAS ME, I WOULDN’T
HAVE DONE WHAT HE’S GENTLEMEN
DID.
THAT TO ME IS THE THEME OF THE
DEFENSE’S CASE.
THESE THREE GENTLEMEN, WHY DID
THEY DO WHAT THEY DID?
THEY SHOULD HAVE WALKED AWAY.
RITTENHOUSE POINTS HIS GUN.
WALK AWAY.
HAD THEY WALKED AWAY, WE
WOULDN’T BE HERE TODAY TALKING
ABOUT THIS.
>> YOU KNOW, ANDY, ONE OF THE
THINGS -- THE THEME THAT BINGER
WAS TRYING TO HAMMER HOME IS
THAT HE SHOULDN’T HAVE BEEN
THERE.
OKAY?
HE’S APPEALING TO THE JURY WITH
THE ARGUMENT THAT THIS
17-YEAR-OLD YOUNG MAN OVER THE
COURSE OF THE EVENING CONTINUED
TO SORT OF WALK BACK TO THE
DANGER.
HE SORT OF TRIES TO DESTRUCT THE
IDEA THAT HE IS A CREDIBLE MEDIC
OR HE WAS PROTECTING A BUILDING
THAT THE OWNERS HAD ALREADY
TAKEN EVERYTHING OUT OF AND THEY
DIDN’T COME THERE TO PROTECT
THEIR BUILDING THEMSELVES AND HE
HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH IT.
WHY IS HE THERE.
TO THAT POINT, WHY WAS HE THERE
IN THE FIRST PLACE, HOW RELEVANT
IS THAT FOR THE JURORS?
>> SHOULDN’T BE RELEVANT AND IT
SHOULDN’T BE RELEVANT NOR THE
PROSECUTOR BECAUSE IT’S LAWFUL
CONDUCT.
WHAT BINGER IS TRYING TO SUGGEST
IS BECAUSE HE WAS DOING THESE
THINGS UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES THAT
BINGER DOESN’T THINK IT WAS
REASONABLE THAT THAT WAS
PROVOCATIVE AND THEREFORE BY
PROVOKING SUPPOSEDLY EVERYTHING
THAT HAPPENS THEREAFTER, HE
FORFEITS HIS RIGHT TO
SELF-DEFENSE.
THE OTHER THING HE SAYS, MARTHA,
IS BY CARRYING -- HE’S RUNNING
AROUND, CARRYING THIS GUN.
IT WAS REASONABLE AFTER THE
ROSENBAUM SHOOTING FOR PEOPLE TO
THINK THAT HE WAS AN ACTIVE
SHOOTER.
WHAT WE SAW IN THE VIDEO THAT
BINGER PLAYED, RITTENHOUSE MUST
HAVE RUN PAST SCORES OF PEOPLE
IF NOT HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE.
HE DIDN’T OPEN FIRE ON ANYONE
OTHER THAN THE THREE PEOPLE THAT
ATTACKED HIM.
IF HE’S AN ACTIVE SHOOTER, THAT
EVERYBODY SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO
TRY TO STOP, YOU WOULD THINK HE
WOULD BE ACTIVELY SHOOTING.
HE WAS ONLY SHOOTING AT THE
PEOPLE THAT ATTACKED HIM AND HE
RAN PAST DOZENS OF PEOPLE
OBVIOUSLY ABLE TO SHOOT THEM IF
HE WAS AN ACTIVE SHOOTER AND
DIDN’T.
>> Martha: JUST WANT TO POINT
OUT BEFORE THIS GETS BACK
UNDERWAY AGAIN, THERE’S A LOT OF
GRAPHIC LANGUAGE IN THIS, A LOT
OF VERY GRAPHIC IMAGES AS WELL.