# The Rittenhouse trial **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [November 4, 2021, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798 "2021-11-04T14:56:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 48
**Author:** ![Crane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crane/32/3495_2.png) [@Crane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crane)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/943 "2021-11-17T15:39:44Z")
That is why I believe it is now in the hands of the jury fore person. He/she will control the deliberation. The fact that the jurors have requested and are individually absorbing the written instructions lends some credence to my outline. They are considering everything in incremental detail. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/944 "2021-11-17T17:03:52Z")
> [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](#): > > I think he is hoping for an acquittal so he doesn’t have to declare a mistrial with prejudice but I believe he will in fact do exactly that if there is a guilty verdict. Likewise. ---
**Author:** ![SuntanLotion](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/suntanlotion/32/16165_2.png) [@SuntanLotion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuntanLotion)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/945 "2021-11-17T17:09:08Z")
Is it a good sign if the jury takes a long time? ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/946 "2021-11-17T17:23:38Z")
It’s probably no sign at all. The traditional view is quick tends to = conviction, long tends to = acquittal. But in a complicated capital case like this with multiple charges I think you can throw all of that out the window. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/947 "2021-11-17T17:28:15Z")
> [@Crane](#): > > That is why I believe it is now in the hands of the jury fore person. He/she will control the deliberation. The fact that the jurors have requested and are individually absorbing the written instructions lends some credence to my outline. They are considering everything in incremental detail. They are supposed to consider everything in incremental detail. The one thing they are not supposed to do is walk in the the jury room and say “Whataya think, guilty?” They have to go through each charge and deliberate guilt or innocence to each one. That’s the minimum. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/948 "2021-11-17T17:29:33Z")
> [@Tamerlane](#): > > It’s probably no sign at all. The traditional view is quick tends to = conviction, long tends to = acquittal. But in a complicated capital case like this with multiple charges I think you can throw all of that out the window. Yeah not only is it a complicated case with multiple charges and possible downgrades, they are well aware of the spotlight on them. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/949 "2021-11-17T17:42:41Z")
Just a minor thought WRT the “crossing borders” discussion. No matter how close you might live to the WI border, IME most Illinoisans have always been aware of the significance of going from state to state. Back in my youth, WI had a younger drinking age. There was always the suspicion that WI cops were on the lookout for folk w/ IL plates. Heck, even today you have to cross the border to buy New Glarus beer. So no, you don’t need shots or a visa, but there is SOME significance in SOME respects to crossing state lines. ---
**Author:** ![Sunny\_Daze](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sunny_daze/32/438_2.png) [@Sunny\_Daze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunny_Daze)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/950 "2021-11-17T17:50:49Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > Not particularly. He seems very arrogant in an “I am the law” kind of way that many long sitting judges have. He has a reputation for being hard on prosecutors in all cases. It’s just that some people’s sympathies are not usually in line with that side. The two issues he came down hard on the prosecutor for were valid fuck ups that he should have come down on. **He revels in his eccentricities but he hasn’t shown actionable bias in my opinion.** Bolding mine. Good to know. The media has distorted things a bit methinks. ---
**Author:** ![ASL\_v2.0](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asl_v2.0/32/3525_2.png) [@ASL\_v2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASL_v2.0)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/951 "2021-11-17T17:52:16Z")
I think part of the emphasis being placed on crossing state lines, apart from taking it as short hand that he traveled far to get to Kenosha (except he really didn’t), is that people are accustomed to seeing “across state lines” or “crossing state lines” mentioned in the context of federal cases, as if that is something that makes an infamous crime more serious, when the reality is that is just a hook that the federal government has included into a law to give it jurisdiction where it otherwise wouldn’t. Someone walked down to the corner store in Tulsa, Oklahoma and killed a man in cold blood? Meh, it’s only murder. But, oh gosh, man does the same thing in Texarkana, and the "corner store’ is on the other side of the state line! Oh my! We’ve got ourselves a veritable _federal case_ here. And everyone knows a “federal case” is a big deal… Which, as an aside, I’m curious as to whether there _could be_ federal charges in this case, if the DOJ tries hard enough and thinks creatively. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/952 "2021-11-17T18:12:36Z")
> [@Sunny\_Daze](#): > > > [@Loach](#): > > > > Not particularly. He seems very arrogant in an “I am the law” kind of way that many long sitting judges have. He has a reputation for being hard on prosecutors in all cases. It’s just that some people’s sympathies are not usually in line with that side. The two issues he came down hard on the prosecutor for were valid fuck ups that he should have come down on. **He revels in his eccentricities but he hasn’t shown actionable bias in my opinion.** > > Bolding mine. > > Good to know. The media has distorted things a bit methinks. What matters most is his conduct in front of the jury. They didn’t see him browbeat the prosecutor. It’s still possible he can call a mistrial. There are valid grounds for him to consider it. I won’t claim to be an expert and say if he should or not. If he does I’m sure everyone on one “side” will say he was biased. There are definite grounds for an appeal if he doesn’t declare a mistrial. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/953 "2021-11-17T18:16:03Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > There are valid grounds for him to consider it. I won’t claim to be an expert and say if he should or not. If he does I’m sure everyone on one “side” will say he was biased. There are definite grounds for an appeal if he doesn’t declare a mistrial. The two things he blew up at the prosecutors are fairly textbook mistrials grounds. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/954 "2021-11-17T18:18:04Z")
That’s how I saw it as well. It’s hard to believe it wasn’t done on purpose. ---
**Author:** ![Crane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crane/32/3495_2.png) [@Crane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crane)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/955 "2021-11-17T18:20:56Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > complicated case with multiple charges I’d say 5 days minimum ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/956 "2021-11-17T18:36:40Z")
My WAG is three. If they reach a consensus on Rosenbaum I think the other counts will go a lot quicker. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/957 "2021-11-17T18:40:18Z")
> [@Crane](#): > > I’d say 5 days minimum That’s possible, but considerably longer then I would expect unless they get hung up on something. 2 to 4 days for a case of this complexity is more common. ---
**Author:** ![Crane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crane/32/3495_2.png) [@Crane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crane)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/958 "2021-11-17T19:20:27Z")
The interesting thing is you have different gradients of the same issues as you go through the cases. As they apply the instructions sequentially to each case, they may see completed issues in a different light and have to start over. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/959 "2021-11-17T19:25:00Z")
I wonder about the mindset of the jurors. Do they really consider each charge and weigh the evidence against that? Or do they approach a more “results oriented” approach, thinking, for example, “Well, he did SOMETHING wrong, and ought to have SOME penalty. Which combination of charges would result in what I consider an appropriate penalty?” ---
**Author:** ![Crane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crane/32/3495_2.png) [@Crane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crane)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2021, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/960 "2021-11-17T19:39:02Z")
That’s why the fore person is key. Like the Mods on this board. I suspect the debate is being focused on the instructions of the judge. A couple of “results oriented” rants will convince the jurors they need to follow their leader if they ever expect to complete the task and go home. ---
**Author:** ![eschrodinger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschrodinger/32/122_2.png) [@eschrodinger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschrodinger)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2021, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/961 "2021-11-18T03:25:02Z")
> [@Tamerlane](#): > > But in a complicated capital case like this with multiple charges I think you can throw all of that out the window. It’s not a capital case. > [@Dinsdale](#): > > I wonder about the mindset of the jurors. Do they really consider each charge and weigh the evidence against that? Or do they approach a more “results oriented” approach, thinking, for example, “Well, he did SOMETHING wrong, and ought to have SOME penalty. Which combination of charges would result in what I consider an appropriate penalty?” I’m sure every jury is different, but when I was on a jury in a complicated civil case, the vast majority of us were extremely conscientious. There was one guy who wanted to just figure out what to say to let us get home the fastest, but everyone else said no, we’re working through this bit by bit. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2021, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798/962 "2021-11-18T03:37:00Z")
> [@eschrodinger](#): > > It’s not a capital case. Oh, true. No death penalty in Wisconsin. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798.md?page=47) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rittenhouse-trial/953798.md?page=49)