Skip to content Skip to footer

Judge Allows Rittenhouse to Eliminate Jury Members Using a Raffle Drum

Eighteen jurors who participated in the trial were downsized to 12 by random lottery, selected by the defendant himself.

Kyle Rittenhouse pulls numbers of jurors out of a tumbler during his trial at the Kenosha County Courthouse on November 16, 2021, in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

Eighteen jurors who heard evidence in the jury trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, an 18-year-old man who is accused of murdering two individuals and injuring a third during an uprising in Kenosha, Wisconsin, last year, were whittled down to 12 on Tuesday, after the judge allowed the defendant to play a role in who should decide his fate.

All 18 jurors’ numbers were written down on slips of paper and placed in a metal raffle tumbler. Judge Bruce Schroeder instructed Rittenhouse to select six slips from the tumbler, stating that those selected would be dismissed, and that the remaining 12 would deliberate over whether the evidence they heard during the trial.

The six jurors that were dismissed were ordered by Schroeder not to discuss the case with anyone and to avoid media reports about the trial, in the rare circumstance that a juror from the 12 deciding the case had to be dismissed. Two jurors have already been dismissed earlier in the trial — one for health reasons, and the other for making a tasteless joke about Jacob Blake, the Black man who was shot several times in the back by a Kenosha police officer. The uprising that followed in the wake of the police-perpetrated shooting was attended by Rittenhouse, who shot three demonstrators, two of whom he is accused of murdering.

Rittenhouse, who was 17 at the time of the shootings, is claiming that he shot the three men — Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber, the two that he killed, and Gaige Grosskreutz, who survived — out of self-defense.

The decision to have Rittenhouse take part in the selection process of jurors is highly unusual. It is standard practice in Wisconsin trials for a jury to consist of more than 12 individuals and to be reduced to that number at the end of the trial. But typically, it is the judge themselves, or a clerk, that chooses, at random, which jurors will remain.

The 12-member jury began its deliberations on Tuesday. As of 12:30 p.m. on Wednesday, they have not yet reached a verdict in the trial.

John P. Gross, the director of the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Public Defender Project, speaking to NBC News about the matter, said he’s only seen judges take part in the final jury selection process.

“It’s completely random, and whoever is picking is picking. It was an interesting piece of theater having the judge inviting the defendant to make the draw,” Gross said.

But to others, especially to a number of people on social media, Schroeder’s choice to allow Rittenhouse to seat his own jury drew questions and denunciations.

“It really doesn’t impact the jury that Rittenhouse was allowed to pick the names out of the hat. But the optics are terrible,” said Joe Lockhart, a political analyst for CNN.

It’s “one more move by a Judge who is more interested in getting reelected than dispensing Justice,” Lockhart added.

Indeed, Schroeder has taken a number of actions and issued orders that seem beneficial to Rittenhouse’s defense strategy. Early in the trial, the judge barred prosecutors from describing the men Rittenhouse shot as “victims,” calling the term a “loaded” one that could bias the jury. At the same time, however, Schroeder allowed the defense to describe the three men as “looters,” “rioters,” and “arsonists,” in spite of the fact that they were never charged as such.

Schroeder also dropped a charge of illegal possession of a deadly weapon against Rittenhouse under the questionable rationalization that the Wisconsin statute was unclear to the judge.

The actions the judge has taken have been heavily criticized, viewed as being uneven and biased, increasing the likelihood that Rittenhouse will be acquitted on all charges, according to some observers.

“Judge Bruce Schroeder’s atrocious handling of the #KyleRittenhouseTrial has done new and consequential damage to the tarnished image of Wisconsin’s judicial branch,” said John Nichols, associate editor for the Madison, Wisconsin-based Capital Times.

We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.

As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.

Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.

As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.

At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.

Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.

You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.