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.
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
Last week, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment. We are presently looking for 242 new monthly donors in the next 2 days.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy