Skip to main content

Things learned from the Rittenhouse trial – American jurisprudence works

Written By | Nov 19, 2021
Kyle Rittenhouse, Kenosha, Trial, Final Arguments

LOS ANGELES, November 19, 2021 — Kyle Rittenhouse was found not guilty on five counts, including the fatal shooting of Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber and the wounding of Gaige Grosskreutz during the violent riots in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

Here are ten lessons to be learned from the Rittenhouse trial.

  1. The jury system works.

    Juries consist of ordinary people, and everyday people had shown great astuteness when it mattered most. This jury deliberated very carefully. They ignored outside noise and stuck to the facts of the case. Jurors asked the judge precise questions on issues that required clarification. They put aside their emotions and focused only on the law and the facts.

  2. Trying to guess a jury verdict is a fool’s errand.

    Analysts kept saying that the longer the deliberations drag out, the better it is for the prosecution. This turned out to be incorrect. The jury deliberated for four days before finally returning a not guilty verdict.

  3. The jury affirmed the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

    Supporting Rittenhouse’s right to defend himself. This case was a textbook example of why the Second Amendment exists and why the individual right to own a gun “shall not be infringed.”

  4. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution was affirmed.

    The prosecution attacked Rittenhouse for invoking his right to silence. Judge Bruce Schroeder cracked down on prosecutor Thomas Binger for implying that the right to protect oneself from self-incriminating statements was an admission of guilt. The right to avoid conviction by self-incrimination is settled law.

  5. Kyle Rittenhouse is the poster child for responsible gun usage. Unlike Prosecutor Binger.

    Rittenhouse shot Gaige Grosskreutz once, wounding him. When asked in court why he did not shoot Grosskreutz a second time to kill him and finish him off, Rittenhouse calmly explained that after the first shot, Grosskreutz “was no longer a threat.” Thus, Rittenhouse clearly understood when and how he could use force to defend himself.

    In the heat of the moment, Rittenhouse showed calmness, maturity, and mercy.

    Grosskreutz is alive because Rittenhouse spared his life. Rittenhouse knew precisely how to handle his weapon. Prosecutor Binger showed utter ignorance in proper gun usage during his courtroom display. By putting his finger on the trigger and pointing it at the jury, Binger risked the very same deadly debacle that just engulfed Alec Baldwin only a few weeks ago. From the prosecution to the media, far too many Rittenhouse critics do not understand how guns work and properly use them.

  6. Jury tampering through threats and intimidation has consequences.

    Judge Schroder banned MSNBC from the courtroom after one of their personnel was caught by police trying to photograph the jurors illegally. Attempts at doxxing jurors to bully them into a guilty verdict failed. Nevertheless, this will not stop outside agitators from trying in future cases. Such tactics are a violation of law and must come with stiff punishments.

  7. The court of public opinion is not a court of law.

    The court of public opinion should have zero influence on a jury verdict. Those who hated Rittenhouse for ideological reasons demonized him as a white supremacist. The facts showed him to be a thoughtful, decent young man who did not belong to any militia or hate group of any kind.

    The court of public opinion accused him of illegally trafficking a weapon. This was factually false. The court of public opinion claimed that Rittenhouse shot three innocent people in cold blood.

    The facts showed that Rittenhouse lawfully defended his own life against three convicted violent felons. Lastly, the court of public opinion accused Rittenhouse of being a white supremacist who killed in the name of white supremacy. The facts showed that the three people Rittenhouse shot were all caucasian. Their race had nothing to do with this case.

  8. Jurors want to hear from the defendant.

    The conventional wisdom is that a good attorney never puts their client on the stand in a high-profile case. The risk of a disaster on cross-examination is considered too significant a risk. O.J. Simpson was found not guilty even though he refused to testify. In this case, the Rittenhouse defense team properly rolled the dice. Defense attorney Mark Richards said that you have to put the defendant on the witness stand in Wisconsin.

    Rittenhouse showed himself to be anything but the monster. On the contrary, he showed himself to be quite human and empathetic. Rittenhouse was the closest thing to a perfect witness a defense attorney could ask for. Rittenhouse conducted himself brilliantly and genuinely.

  9. Rioting has consequences.

    Three men were shot because they made bad life decisions. Rittenhouse went to Kenosha because his father and other family members live there. Rittenhouse had every right to be worried that his family members would be at risk of having their homes burned to the ground. The three people Rittenhouse shot were all in Kenosha for illegal and violent activities.

    It may be harsh to say someone deserves to die, but committing violent felonious acts carries risks.

    So many rioters in the last decade have been led to believe that rioting carries zero risk as wrong as that rioter carried the correct politics. Being a leftist did not save three men from being shot by Rittenhouse. The media narrative is that Rittenhouse should have stayed home. This is false. The three rioters he shot should have stayed home. They were in Kenosha to disrupt and destabilize society. Rittenhouse was there to save and preserve society.

    Rittenhouse delivered justice. Rioters may wish to think twice before responding to the verdict with Kenosha’s second wave of riots.

  10. The words of politicians and media heads also have consequences.

    President Joe Biden had a duty to avoid inflammatory comments before, during, and after the trial. Unfortunately, the same individuals who slandered Nick Sandmann for ideological reasons are making the same error with Rittenhouse for the same reasons. Biden labeled Rittenhouse a white supremacist.

    Biden and others who piled on Rittenhouse may wish to retain attorneys of their own. Sandmann won large settlements after being subjected to libel, slander, and defamation. Rittenhouse could become a very wealthy young man. MSNBC, CNN, the New York Times, and The Washington Post could find themselves on the receiving end of costly lawsuits.

Suppose there is one central lesson to be learned from the Rittenhouse trial. In that case, a person should not be convicted of a crime just because influential people, including the President, personally dislike them.

Justice must be cold, blind, and even-handed. Rich people are not automatically guilty. White males are not automatically guilty. People who support gun rights are not automatically guilty. A person’s political ideology must have zero bearing on conviction.

Sadly, ideology played far too large a role in this case. Rittenhouse should never have been charged, to begin with. However, the evidence supported him, and no responsible prosecutor brought a case where an acquittal was definite. The goal for the prosecution should be justice, not winning at all costs. The ends do not justify the means.

Sadly, Rittenhouse’s critics still fail to grasp this. Thankfully, the jury ignored the ideological zealots and stuck to the cold hard facts.

Read Also:

A few thoughts on the Rittenhouse exoneration

BREAKING: Kyle Rittenhouse found not guilty on all five counts


Read more from Eric Golub

About the Author:

Brooklyn-born, Long Island raised, and now living in Los Angeles, Eric Golub is a politically conservative columnist, blogger, author, public speaker, satirist, and comedian. But he lives for football. Particularly the Raiders.

Visit Eric’s Website Tygrrrrr Express and follow him on Facebook and Twitter.

Follow CommDigiNews at 








Eric Golub

Brooklyn born, Long Island raised and now living in Los Angeles, Eric Golub is a politically conservative columnist, blogger, author, public speaker, satirist and comedian. Read more from Eric at his TYGRRRR EXPRESS blog. Eric is the author of the book trilogy “Ideological Bigotry, “Ideological Violence,” and “Ideological Idiocy.”