7 Key Factors in Closing Arguments of Rittenhouse Trial

There were several heated moments during the closing arguments in the Kyle Rittenhouse Trial that took place on Monday in Kenosha. The trial is coming to an end as several key witnesses and Rittenhouse himself took the stand in the previous two weeks.  

Rittenhouse shot and killed Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber, as well as injuring Gaige Grosskreutz the night of Aug. 25, 2020, in Kenosha during Black Lives Matter protests that turned into riots. 

Both the prosecution and defense took over two hours to deliver their closing statements. There were several key factors that occurred in the trial Monday. 

Provocation 

During the closing arguments, the prosecutor, Thomas Binger, used provocation to strip Rittenhouse of his right to self-defense. He argued that the defendant provoked the two deaths and the third wounded. Provocation states that you cannot hide behind self-defense if you provoked someone else, and you must exhaust all reasonable means to avoid confrontation.  

According to Wisconsin’s self-defense law, The Defendant may intentionally use force which is intended likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if the Defendant reasonably believed that the force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself. 

Binger argued that Rittenhouse was never in danger of great bodily harm or death. He argued that after Rosenbaum was shot in the pelvis, he was incapacitated and no longer a threat. However, Rittenhouse fired three more shots, with the fourth being the fatal blow. Therefore, he claims Rosenbaum was never a serious threat. 

“You can’t claim self-defense against an unarmed man. You lose the right to self-defense when you bring the gun,” said Binger. 

Binger further explains that he could’ve just left Rosenbaum after the first shot and ran away, however, he fired four consecutive shots.  

“He tracks the body all the way down to the ground for the second, third and fourth shots,” he said. 

Binger continued to say that the crowd attempted to stop an active shooter. They attempted to do this without shooting the defendant and used the “least intrusive means possible.” 

“This shows someone who has no remorse for human life and only cares about himself,” Binger said.   

He added that the defendant doesn’t try to save any of the men he shot and just cares about his own safety. He said the only way it’s justified is if Rosenbaum was reaching for the gun and was going to kill the defendant and others. However, that is exactly what Defense Attorney Mark Richards is arguing. 

“I’m glad (Rittenhouse) shot him because if Joseph Rosenbaum got that gun I don’t for a minute believe he wouldn’t have used it against somebody else,” Richards said. 

He also explained that the prosecution was trying a last-minute provocation attempt because they were losing the case. 

“When his case explodes in his face, now he comes out with provocation,” he said. 

Richards went on to say that Rittenhouse had as much of a right to be there as anyone else. He said “there was nothing reckless that day” when referring to Rittenhouse’s actions that night. Also, he counters Binger’s argument that Rittenhouse continued to fire three more consecutive shots at Rosenbaum.  

“He ran as far as he could, and he shot four times in three-quarters of a second,” Richards said. 

Richards made it clear that the four shots fired were all consecutive in an instant and there was no dramatic pause between shots like Binger demonstrated.  

Active Shooter  

Binger portrayed the defendant as an “active shooter,” and said people in the crowd had the right to stop him. He also points out in the video evidence that Rittenhouse denies shooting anyone when Grosskreutz asked him if he shot anyone. As an active shooter, he loses his right to use self-defense. 

“In this situation, the crowd has the right to try and stop an active shooter,” Binger said. “They have a right to protect themselves. The defendant is not the only one in the world who has the right to self-defense.” 

Richards disagreed with the idea that Rittenhouse was an active shooter. He called it “BS” and claimed that everyone who was shot was attacking Rittenhouse. 

“My client is not an active shooter,” he said. “That is a buzz word that the state wants to lash on to because it excuses the actions of the mob that was there on Aug. 25, 2020.” 

In addition, he argues that Rittenhouse had to use the gun to prevent great bodily harm. 

“My client does not have to take a beating from the hands of this mob, or from the hands of Mr. Rosenbaum.” 

Rosenbaum’s Portrayal 

The portrayal of Rosenbaum’s character was a recurring topic in the closing arguments. The prosecution recognized that he had a troubled past, but that the jury agreed that no one individual’s life is more valuable than another. Binger explained all the “bad things” Rosenbaum did that night in a sarcastic tone. 

“He tipped over a Port-a-Potty that had no one in it,” Binger said. “He swung a chain, he lit a dumpster on fire. Oh, and he said some bad words. He said the N-word. If he were alive today, I’d probably try and prosecute him for arson. But I can’t because the defendant killed him.” 

Binger argued that Rosenbaum was this small man that couldn’t cause any harm. Often referred to as the Napoleon Complex, Binger explained that Rosenbaum was too small to cause any real trouble. 

However, Richards painted a much darker description of Rosenbaum. He described him as a feisty man looking for trouble all night. He used video evidence of him shouting the N-word at people and telling people to “shoot me.” Although short, Rosenbaum was more than capable of causing serious harm. 

Richards called Rosenbaum “irrational and crazy,” as he backed Rittenhouse into a corner and continued to pursue him. Rosenbaum was seen in video evidence carrying a chain at one point that could be used to cause harm.  

AR-15 Demonstration 

Perhaps the most dramatic moments of the closing arguments were the reenactments of how Rittenhouse handled his AR-15. During Binger’s argument, he took out the gun from evidence and demonstrated his portrayal of Rittenhouse moments before he shot Rosenbaum.  

Binger’s portrayal of Rittenhouse drew criticism for the way he held the gun. First off, he pointed the gun directly at the jury. He wanted the jury to feel uncomfortable to better connect with Rosenbaum and the others that were shot. However, he also had his finger on the trigger as he pointed the gun at them. Binger attempted to get the jury to understand how dangerous the weapon was.  

Many criticized him for carelessly aiming the gun around the courtroom and holding it incorrectly at times. This can be seen best in a still photograph that portrays Binger holding the gun up towards the jury. Richards briefly demonstrated Rittenhouse’s actions with the AR-15 from his perspective in his argument, but he didn’t hold it up to his face or aim it at anyone.  

Fraudulent Liar  

Binger painted Rittenhouse as a fraud who lied on multiple occasions. He explains that Rittenhouse was telling people he was a medic when he had no official medical license or training. In addition, he added that Rittenhouse lied about shooting anyone when asked on video.  

Binger explained that Rittenhouse couldn’t have been a legit medic, because no qualified medic walks around with an AR-15 strapped to their body. It gets in the way of helping people and makes people feel threatened more than wanting help.  

“For him to call himself a medic is an insult,” Binger said.

He was very sarcastic in discussing all the good deeds that Rittenhouse did that night, such as wrapping an ankle. He made it clear he felt those actions didn’t negate killing two people and injuring a third. 

Drone Footage 

The prosecutor used an enlarged image taken from a drone video that showed Rittenhouse provoking the events that led to the killings. However, this one video was his only evidence, and it was very blurry. He said that the photo showed Rittenhouse aiming his gun at protestors. A state crime analyst testified that the video took 20 hours to produce. 

Richards told the jury to disregard the photo because not only was it blurry, but he claimed it was a modified image.  

“What he did for those 20 hours is hocus pocus,” Richards said. “And he makes an exhibit that is out of focus.” 

Political Controversy 

Binger began his closing argument on Monday with a statement regarding the political outrage and biased media coverage of the case.  

“Look for the truth,” Binger said. “So many people look at this case and they see what they want to see.” 

Richards echoed this statement and said, “This case is not a game. Use your common sense and good judgment.” 

Despite the controversy, Richards made it clear that this case isn’t political and there is no winning side. 

“It’s a tough choice, but the evidence only leads to one conclusion: that is that Kyle Rittenhouse’s conduct on Aug. 25 was privileged based upon the actions of Mr. Rosenbaum and others,” he said, adding, “There are no winners in this case.” 

The jury will begin deliberations Tuesday as the public eagerly awaits a decision later this week.