to do with black lives matter and criminal justice if you have guys like this planted throughout the country able to basically completely put their thumb on the scale of justice when it comes to a case? unfortunately, jason, this are many judges in this country who tip the scales of justice in favor of the cause or side they like. and when there is a verdict of not guilty, those concerns don t go away but not resolved in legal form. the verdict is final. the prosecution cannot appeal. i want to say, though, that the defense gets a lot of the credit or a lot of the blame. mr. rittenhouse had the best defense money can buy. his $2 million legal defense fund enabled his lawyers to use o.j. simpson s jury consultant and before the trial, they held two practice jury trials that paid off well with mr.
they said they went back and forth with two juries and it was totally different when he took the stand. that s when they were able to win the jury. and, obviously, it worked in trial time as well. will: i think remarkably bold move from the defense especially since the evidence had been pro-defense. the key witness actually ended up key witness for the defense. you sort of were at that point in the lead and to then bring in kyle rittenhouse was a bold strategy but clearly it worked. this was a very genuine individual. i know folks like lebron james, jury consultant lebron james felt that the tears were fake. but those were real tears. nobody can conjure that up. this was a 17-year-old kid who wanted to be a paramedic not an actor. that was remarkably convincing. and if you looked into his eyes, which is the reason we need juries in buildings, not virtually, you could seat
vigilante, it s probably on the line of opinion. but a white supremacist? that s a incredibly injurious statement that can either be proved or disproved. that could be clearly, in my mind, defamation. there is also the tort of false light, really offensive statement that portrays somebody in a misleading or false light. and the standard there is also much less. reckless disregard. so i think against joe biden, especially against members of the media who put on a cavalcade of lies about rittenhouse, he has a strong case. lawrence: you know todd i want to go back to you and i want you to put on your legal hat. we found dr. demetrius was the jury consultant in this case. i remember when i was a private investigator for criminal defense we would have these mock trials and we would get as much opo on a jury and its makeup. how important was it to have kyle take the stand?
you? pleasure verbally, no. hasn t shown you a weapon? he has not. just aun run away from you? run past me, yes. i find it hard to believe that anyone could say that that is a reasonable excuse to kill a man. and they will be found guilty and then they will be prosecuted federally for what happened. and the reason why, he clearly didn t get the jury consultant that rittenhouse did because he did a crappy job on cross-examination. the self dep pu the self depization to police the streets, but he shouldn t be
one of the keys to the kyle rittenhouse case is being vindicated. talking about the mountain of evidence, the people who sat on the jury. my next guest is a famous jury consultant who is part of rittenhouse s team. what was the most important of the criteria for the defense to consider when you were doing the original jurors in this case? i think how this case is unusual is the judge did not allow any written questionnaire for these folks to fill out. number 2, he only allowed an hours worth parricide, number 3, he really limited the questions both sides were allowed to ask, they could not go into any political views, they couldn t go into any sort of membership