Crime Stories with Nancy Grace - Teen Vigilante Guns Down 3, Heads to Jury

Episode Date: November 15, 2021

Closing arguments to begin in the Kyle Rittenhouse murder trial. Before today's court session opened, we learn at least two charges have been dropped. Rittenhouse was 17 when he crossed Illinois state lines into Kenosha, Wisconsin, with his AR-style rifle and a medic bag. He said his intent was to protect property against protesters who were in the streets after a white police officer shot Jacob Blake, a black man, seven times in the back. In the course of the night of August 25, 2020, Rittenhouse shot and killed two people and wounded another, claiming self-defense.Joining Nancy Grace today: Troy Slaten - Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney, Slaten Lawyers, APC, Twitter @TroySlaten  Caryn Stark - NYC Psychologist, www.carynstark.com, Twitter: @carynpsych, Facebook: "Caryn Stark"  Dan Corsentino - Former Police Chief, Former Sheriff, Served on US Homeland Security Senior Advisory Board, Private Investigator www.dancorsentino.com  Dr. William Morrone - Chief Medical Examiner, Bay County Michigan, Author: "American Narcan: Naloxone & Heroin-Fentanyl Associated Mortality", RecoveryPathwaysLLC.com Spencer Coursen - Founder and President: Coursen Security Group www.CoursenSecurityGroup.com, Author: "The Safety Trap: A Security Expert’s Secrets For Staying Safe in a Dangerous World", www.TheSafetyTrap.com, Instagram: @s.coursen, Twitter: @SpencerCoursen Alexis Tereszcuk - CrimeOnline.com Investigative Reporter, Writer/Fact Checker, Lead Stories dot Com, Twitter: @swimmie2009 Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You're listening to an iHeart Podcast. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. As we go to air, the National Guard has been called in in the so-called Kenosha shooting case. Kyle Rittenhouse, then 17 years old, guns down three people, leaving two dead. Seems like everybody there that night in the middle of BLM protests had a cell phone. So there's plenty of video footage. And what it shows is this young man carrying a semi-automatic weapon was actually chased. So how can a teen vigilante who goes in loaded for bear, armed to the hilt, end up claiming self-defense. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace.

I want you to take a listen to what we have learned of that night. Listen to this. That's antifa, man. Oh, he got a gun, baby. Oh! They shot him. Oh! He shot him.

Hey, he just shot them! Hey, dude right here just shot them hey dude right here just shot them dude right here just shot all of them down there that dude just shot them right here yeah you're hearing sound that was provided by brendan gruden schwager via storyful.com. That is, as we say, natural sound happening at that moment. And the gunshots you heard, that was nobody firing into the air. That resulted in death. I'm Nancy Grace. This is Crime Stories. Thank you for being with us here at Fox Nation and Sirius XM 111. We are, of course, covering the trial as it is happening of Kyle Rittenhouse.

So the defense, self-defense. The video, the jury will have it, and I'm sure they will do what I have done, play it over and over in slow motion to try to understand what happened that night. With me, an all-star panel to make sense of what we know right now. First of all, high-profile lawyer joining us out of LA, Troy Slayton. Karen Stark, renowned New York psychologist joining us from Manhattan. Dan Corsantino, former police chief, former sheriff, U.S. Homeland Security Senior Advisory Board. Now PI at dancorsantino.com. Renowned medical examiner joining us from Madison Heights, Dr. William Maroney, author of American Narcan, Spencer Corson, founder, president, Corson Security. But first to Alexis Tereschuk, CrimeOnline.com investigative reporter.

Thank you for being with us, Alexis. Did court start on time? Because I predicted last night they'd be late. As of right now, it has not started. That live stream is showing the seal of the state of Wisconsin. So, no. Okay. And another thing on that, Troy Slayton, that doesn't mean anybody is a laggard.

It's not the judge's fault. It's neither of the party's fault that we know of. Once in a while, you have a juror trickle in late. They couldn't catch the bus. They couldn't drop their child off quickly enough and drop off at school. For whatever reason, everything has got to be primed and ready. So you always see delays, especially just before closing arguments, Troy Slayton, because the judge following closing arguments will instruct the jury on the law by which they are to judge this case.

For instance, will it just be a flat-out murder charge or will the defense agree to voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, negligent homicide? You just go down the list. My point is, Troy Slayton, it's nobody's fault that they're starting late. That's true, Nancy. There's a million reasons why the trial would not start exactly on time. All the best intentions doesn't mean that all the things line up at the right moment. But what's really important here, what Judge Schroeder is going to be doing. Yeah, I don't like him. moment, but what's really important here, what Judge Schroeder is going to be doing is instructing

the jury on the elements of both the crime and the defenses. Rittenhouse's defense of self-defense requires that the jury find certain elements, that he was in fear for his life and that the action that he took shooting these people was necessary to protect life or limb. Fear of immediate damage, immediately harm, immediate harm. It has to be real fear and has to be immediate and has to be of serious bodily injury or death. And Nancy, it's also that he can't have provoked it. There was a lot of argument on Friday about whether or not the judge should instruct the jury on provocation. And the prosecutors won that. And Judge Schroeder will be instructing the jurors that if Kyle Rittenhouse

provoked the attack on himself, if he was an aggressor in any way, if he was pointing the gun at people, causing them to attack him, then he loses the self-defense argument. You're right. Now, self-defense under our law is a complete defense. If a juror believes that he acted in self-defense when he shot three people, then he will walk scot-free. That's a mighty tall order. Self-defense once, probably. Self-defense twice, maybe.

Self-defense three times. Okay, to you, Spencer Corson, let's talk about why a teen is out on the street alone with this kind of weapon. Tell me about the weapon. Spencer Corson, founder, president, Corson Security Group. Nancy, thank you. The weapon has been identified as a Smith & Wesson M&P 15, which is a AR-15 styled semi-automatic rifle. It has a 30-round magazine, which is the magazine that Kyle Rittenhouse had loaded into the weapon on the night in question.

And semi-automatic, of course, means that one bullet is fired for every pull of the trigger. Now, that's important. And I'm going to go back to you, Troy Slayton, because Murder One requires malice forethought premeditation but under the law premeditation does not require a very prolonged period of thinking such as me poisoning you every single morning when you drive through starbucks till you just kill over dead premeditation can be formed in the blink of an eye the twinkling of a moment the time it takes you to raise the gun and pull the trigger that is enough time under the law to think about what you're doing, much less fire repeatedly. And what you're hearing from Spencer Corson is with this particular gun,

an AR-15 type weapon, it looks like a machine gun. That's what it looks like. You have to pull the trigger for each shot. In other words, that is time for him to form premeditation under the law, Troy. Yes, but the important word that you said was malice. And that's what it's going to come down to for the jury. Was he malicious? Was he trying to kill people? Was he doing this because of a depraved mind? Was he doing it with evil intent or what we call in the law mens rea?

Did he have this desire to kill? And that's what the jurors are going to be deciding. Wait a minute, Troy. Before you disseminate that, isn't it true, try to answer with a yes, no. Isn't it true that the law presumes you intend the natural consequence of your act. For instance, if I were to hold up a piece of fine china and throw it to a cement floor, the law would presume I meant to break

it. Do you agree with that? Yes, but... Yes, no. So if you point a gun... Cut his mic. If you point a gun and pull the trigger, the law presumes that you mean to shoot the person. This is just about self-defense. And the law deals with, do you mean to do the act? Do you mean to point the gun and

pull the trigger? The law presumes you intend the consequence of your act. So all we're looking at is does he intend to point the gun and pull the trigger at someone? The only defense here is self-defense. It's all he's got going for him. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. I want to talk about what we see on the video, Alexis Tereshchuk, because we don't have to tell the jury what happened. They can see it on video. Let's start with victim number one, chronologically, Joseph Rosenbaum. What I saw in the video, Alexis, FBI video, 8,500 feet up in

the air, grainy, but I can figure it out, is I see Rosenbaum chase Rittenhouse across the parking lot. A witness earlier says, Alexis, that Rosenbaum says, if I get one of you guys, talking about the guys there to protect the businesses, if I get one of you guys, talking about the guys there to protect the businesses, if I get one of you guys alone, I'm going to effing kill you. So we already know his intent. And then he chases Rittenhouse across the parking lot. Tell me about that video. So he does chase Rittenhouse across the parking lot.

And then he kind of stops, but he throws something at Rittenhouse. And you don't know what it is,, because it's dark as night time. Well, what it ended up being in, it's a plastic bag. So Rittenhouse then turns around because of the plastic bag thrown at him, turns around. Then he comes close to him.

Rosenbaum comes, comes up to him. In fact, so close that his hand is on the barrel of the rifle. This is not a small handgun that Kyle Rittenhouse was carrying. This is a gun that he was illegally not supposed to have, legally not supposed to have. He had it illegally and he is holding it and Rosenbaum is holding the front of it as if perhaps maybe to take it away, get it away from his face. And Rittenhouse opens fire on him, shooting him

four times. He chased him across a parking lot. Dan Corsentino, former police chief, former sheriff, U.S. Homeland Security Senior Advisory Board, now PI. What about that look? When I first heard this story and I hear one shooter goes the 25 miles at least from his home in Antioch, Indiana, to Kenosha to protect businesses with an AR. I'm like, uh-uh, N-O. He gets down three people, he's going to jail. But when I see the video, Dan Corsentino, it's not like that. The video suggests very strongly that there is an environment that's being created by both individuals, Rosenbaum and Huber in

regards to an imminent threat to Rittenhouse and it appears also that one of the questions becomes at least for the defense is the speed of the decisions of Rittenhouse when he was firing the weapon when he pulled the trigger numerous times or actually when he pulled the trigger numerous times, or actually when he pulled the trigger four times, I believe, in this situation. So, yes, there is a question about an imminent danger. There's a question about perception. And I think that this case is surely going to be decided on self-defense.

Absolutely. Guys, I want you to take a listen to this. It's our cut 11. This is Hillary Mintz, WISN 12. Listen. 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum, who prosecutors say was unarmed, was the first man shot by Rittenhouse, seen here in video edited and released by Rittenhouse's defense team. Rosenbaum, from Texas, was living in Kenosha. Friends called him Jojo. He had a daughter and fiance. As Rittenhouse took off down Sheridan Road, Rittenhouse falls to the ground, shoots and misses one man. Then Anthony Huber uses his skateboard and tries to take Rittenhouse's gun. He ran up on somebody with an assault rifle dude with nothing like he was just going to tackle dude to the ground. Rittenhouse fired killing 26 year old Huber who also lived in Kenosha.

He already killed someone. He killed someone already. And then he killed my. He loved my life, just ripped him away like. After Huber, Gage Grosskreutz of West Dallas in the crowd as a medic approaches Rittenhouse who is still on the Gage Grosskreutz of West Dallas, in the crowd as a medic, approaches Rittenhouse, who is still on the ground. Grosskreutz is armed with a handgun. Rittenhouse shoots him in the arm. He was the lone survivor. A lone survivor. A lone survivor that we learned originally left out the fact to police that he, the victim, the shooting victim, pointed a gun at Rittenhouse. I mean, you know,

bottom line, if we're having this much trouble, I don't see any way a jury is going to be unanimous in a verdict. To Dr. William Maroney, Dr. Maroney, thank you for being with us. Could you explain the injury to the first victim chronologically, Joseph Rosenbaum. Rosenbaum is the guy, and we see this on the FBI video, the aerial drone footage. It looks as if Dr. Maroney, correct me if I'm wrong, Alexis, just jump in. It looks as if Rittenhouse is walking by, and he has some kind of verbal interaction with Rosenbaum. Rittenhouse takes off across the parking lot. Rosenbaum chases him. And from what we understand, Rittenhouse hears a gun in the distance.

He turns around. He then sees Rosenbaum lunge at him, and he shoots. Tell me about the injuries. How did Rosenbaum get shot in the back? shot that destabilized his stance, went from the gun into his hip and groin area and shattered his pelvis. He spins around because he lost his balance and his back comes forward as he goes down. And that is when Rittenhouse pulls the trigger again, and the third shot grazes his head, takes off a little skin.

But that fourth shot, as Rosenbaum continues to spin around, goes into his back. It's approximately at the lower middle half of his scapula, right? That shoulder blade bone, that's how high it is. And it's said to go through and nick some lungs and nick some liver. But the problem is the speed, the power, the energy of that bullet is not going to just make a hole. It does something called cavitation. Cavitation is the energy shockwave, and in feet per second, its speed was 3,250 feet per second. If you do the math and you translate that in miles per hour, which we understand better than feet per second for energy, that's the distance from Atlanta to Vegas. That's 2,200 miles per hour. You take all that energy to travel from Atlanta to Vegas in one hour and compress it into a tenth of a second. That's why his lungs

obliterated on that fourth shot. He didn't shoot a man on the ground in the back. The two of them were in a position where the first shot in the hip destabilized Rosenbaum, and he spun around because he was falling from the shot that shattered his pelvis. And that final shot was the fatal shot. Sometimes they call it a kill shot. That kill shot was not a direct shot to a man running away. It was a man spinning into him. That's how that happened. You know, Dr. Maroney, you have a way of explaining things

that just stops everything. And your words are so powerful. And I'm thinking about Rosenbaum dying like that out in a parking lot between some cars. And my heart just breaks to think of that. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace.

To you, Karen Stark, the jury's got to grapple with what Rosenbaum, what Huber went through, they've got to reconcile that with the fact that both of them were chasing Rittenhouse. It's not easy when I hear Maroney explaining how Rosenbaum died. I want Rittenhouse to go under the jail. But then the video shows me Rosenbaum said, I'm going to F and kill you if I get you alone, and then chases him. I mean, that's why juries are always so torn up. They don't want to talk to anybody when they leave that courthouse. They just want to go home. This is why.

This is a particularly confusing case, if you ask me, Nancy. It's just so, it's just wrought with all kinds of perception. And when I think about it, I can't come up with a right or wrong, but what in the world was he doing, Kyle Rittenhouse, with that gun? Okay, whoa, whoa, whoa. See, you're falling in a trap, Karen Stark. All the years I've known you, and I think you're smarter than that. Well, okay. Actually, no. Because that is what every single person says that I ask.

What do you think about Rittenhouse? Well, he should have been out there. Well, that's true. But the issue is, is he guilty or was it self-defense? We all agree he shouldn't have been there, Karen. Of course he shouldn't have been there. I know that, Nancy, but that's why everybody keeps bringing it up because it seems like provocation.

It seems like you're asking for something to happen, that you're there to protect. You're saying you're protecting but you're doing it. Whoa, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Hold on. Alexis Terescha, Jackie, New York Studio. I just got notice that they may have dropped the provocation instruction.

And if that is true, that is a whole game changer. Back to you, Troy Slayton. Alexis, jump in whenever you find that out for me. Troy, that's a big deal. Now try to talk like a regular person. No Latin phrases. And to explain why this is going to be a big deal. Now try to talk like a regular person, no Latin phrases, and to explain why this is going to be a big deal. It's a big deal, Nancy, because it's really the prosecution's only avenue to try and convince the jury during their two and a half hour opportunity to speak to the jurors directly about the state of the evidence and to try and tell them why self-defense doesn't apply. No legalities. Just correct me if I'm wrong. All right.

Kyle Rittenhouse guns down three people in the middle of a BLM protest. He claims he's there to protect businesses and be a medic, but somehow he's running around with an AR semi on his back. Okay. These people run after him. Really, all three of them come after him. Nancy, can I? Yeah, do you have the answer? Yes, the state has withdrawn the request for the provocation.

Wow. I'm shocked. Okay, back to what we were saying. That's self-defense, whether we like it or not, whether we think he should have been there or shouldn't have been there. That doesn't matter. What matters is, was he the aggressor when he shot the victims or were they the aggressor? Was he acting in self-defense? Now, provocation, as Troy Slayton correctly said, is if Rittenhouse provoked them into chasing him, then you lose your self-defense. That's no longer really a defense.

Right. An easy way to think of it, Nancy, is you can't claim that you're defending yourself if you start a fight. Exactly. You can't start a fight or get somebody to attack you, let's say even in a bar fight. You can't get somebody to attack you and then beat them up, kill them, claiming self-defense. Why would they withdraw that, Troy? Well, I guess it means that they wanted to keep some sort of legitimacy with the jury. They felt maybe they were honest and moral prosecutors, and they felt that they didn't meet the elements for provocation. Maybe they felt that they just couldn't prove it.

OK, yeah, whatever bombshell, Alexis, Chuck, I know we're talking inside baseball here, but that is a huge factor and where this case is going to go. And I mean, let me just do a straw vote right now. Who on this panel and in this in this studio can tell me you have a verdict? Medea? Medea says he's guilty. Okay. Kara? Hung.

Hung. Jackie Hung. Troy? I think it's going to be a not guilty. How would you vote? That's the question. I would vote not guilty. Karen?

Not only on that. That's just one word. But also on the misdemeanor charge of possessing the question. I would vote not guilty. Karen? Not only on that. That's just one more. But also on the misdemeanor charge of possessing the weapon. Okay, cut his mic again. Karen Stark, vote. Quickly. I'm very. Hung.

Okay, so you're hung. Corsentino? Not guilty. That's how you would vote, right? That's how I would vote. Maroney? I say not guilty, and I was born and raised in Kenosha. He's going to walk on this

because... But you're saying not guilty, right? I don't care what you think. The jury's going to... Okay, Corson? Not guilty. Alexis? Guilty. Okay, I'm sorry, but you and Medea have just hung the jury. Okay, because I've got two guilties. Wait, did

Alexis say not guilty or guilty? Guilty. Yeah, the two of you. Okay, you just hung got two guilties. Wait, did Alexis say not guilty or guilty? Okay. Yeah, the two of you. Okay, you just hung the jury. My point is, if people are wavering, and this is the law, the judge will say this to the jury, look them in the eyes and say, if your mind is wavering, if you have uncertainty, then you must acquit. Why? Because it's the state's burden to prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt. If you want him to go to jail because he was in the wrong place,

no. You have to believe that he shot these three people. And I want you to hear this sound. Take a listen to our cut 14. This is Nancy Chan with CBS. Rittenhouse then shot and killed another man, Anthony Huber, after he says Huber hit him in the head. He grabs my gun and I can feel it pulling away from me and I can feel the strap starting to come off my body. And what do you do then? I fire one shot. At that point, Rittenhouse shot a third man, Gage Grosskreutz, who was standing over him with a gun in his hand. Why were you trying to get to the police? Because I didn't do anything wrong. I defended myself. On cross-examination, the prosecutor tried to pick Rittenhouse as an armed threat.

Mr. Rittenhouse, you're telling us that you felt like you were about to die, right? Yes. But when you point the gun at someone else, that's going to make them feel like they were about to die, right? Yes. But when you point the gun at someone else, that's going to make them feel like they're about to die, right? That's what you wanted him to feel. No. I also want you to hear our cut 17. This is Alexis Perez, ABC GMA. Take a listen to this. Rittenhouse also telling the jury that Rosenbaum threatened him before the shooting. You scream if I catch any of you alone, I'm going to kill you. Through testimony, the defense painting a picture of a young man who had been cleaning graffiti

and wanted to offer medical help to those injured during the protests that followed the police shooting of Jacob Blake. But in cross-examination, the prosecutor pressing Rittenhouse on his decision to go to Kenosha in the first place and why he showed up with an AR-15. Why do you need the gun when you go out there? I need the gun because if I had to protect myself because somebody attacked me. And playing this video in court. attempting to dismantle Rittenhouse's argument that he was in Kenosha that night to offer medical help you're not a certified EMT you're not an EMT of any kind you weren't on that night correct yes so you lied to him correct I told them I was I told them I was an EMT but I wasn't it's my understanding Alexis Tereshuk that Rittenhouse had volunteered with EMTs before,

and he had a medical pack with him when he went to Kenosha. That he did not use when he shot somebody. He didn't provide assistance. And in fact, somebody asked him to call 911. They thought he was calling 911, but instead he called his friends. And then went on to shoot and kill another person and shoot another person. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. Let me ask you a question, Alexis Tereshchuk. Have you seen the videos? Yes.

Okay. I've got you on cross right now, so try to limit your answers to yes, no. Alexis, in the shooting of Rosenbaum, Joseph Rosenbaum, age 36, did Rosenbaum chase Rittenhouse across a parking lot? I saw them both go across the parking lot. Oh, okay. So who was in front running? What do you mean in front? Who was ahead? Who was behind who? When you say they're running across the parking lot, they could be jogging together for all I know, but that's not what the video depicts. Why can't you just be honest about what you saw in the video? Because Rosenbaum is behind him.

He's chasing him. It cannot be an exact second. It's never an exact second. If a person shoots their husband because there's been 25 years of abuse, you have to take that into consideration. So you have to take this entire situation into consideration. It cannot just be one second. It has to be that this teenager illegally obtained a gun and came to a protest and was allegedly, and says he was defending an

auto body shop. He wasn't at the auto body shop anymore. Rosenbaum wasn't breaking into the auto body shop. Kyle Rittenhouse's social media talked about how he wanted to shoot shoplisters. And again, I ask you, if you can be honest and answer this. If you can't, I understand you've argued yourself into a corner. Alexis Tereschuk, who is chasing who in the parking lot? Rosenbaum is going after a person with a gun in the video. Do you know who that person is? Kyle Rittenhouse. Okay. He was illegally holding a gun. Right. You know, that goes to the old question, Spencer Corson. So a hooker goes in a bar and she gets raped.

Can a hooker be raped? Can a teen vigilante who's got a gun fire and self-defense? Are they mutually exclusive? Is it possible that they can both be true? Because I have prosecuted cases for hookers that got raped before and got a conviction because it doesn't matter who you are or where you came from. What matters is the time of the incident. Lady Justice is blind whether everybody wants to remember this or not. She doesn't care who you are. She doesn't care if you're black or white or you're some snot teen where you're at where you shouldn't be. You've got a gun you shouldn't have. When you're getting chased across a parking lot. You know, Alexis Tereshuk,

didn't I ask you off camera if somebody chased you across a parking lot with your son and you had a gun and they lunged at you, would you shoot them? And what was your answer? Yes. Oh, right. But that was just for you and your son,

not for Kyle Rittenhouse, right? You have to take the whole thing into the picture. Why would I have a gun? Why was somebody chasing me across the parking lot with my child? Why did I take my child? Because you stupidly went to the wrong place. What? Is that Spencer jumping in? It's Spencer, Nancy. If I could jump in with a quick analogy that I think will. So I have a friend who this weekend was renovating his kitchen. Right. He gets this refrigerator delivered. It doesn't fit. So he has to go to Home Depot to get a to get a tool that he needs to get it to slide in. While he's at Home Depot, his son goes into the garage, climbs up on the workbench, gets into the toolbox, pulls out a hammer, goes into the kitchen, starts beating the living daylight out of the refrigerator, all but ruining it. Dad comes home, sees the refrigerator, goes, what's going on? The kid with a smile on his face goes, daddy, I helped fix fridge. That's the story of Kyle Rittenhouse, a kid who wanted

to help, got his hands on something he shouldn't, and being ignorant of his own ability and having an improperly framed expectation of how the real world works, went out to save lives, but ultimately wound up doing more harm than good. How is a medic carrying an assault rifle? Do our EMTs have assault rifles when they go out to save lives? No, but the EMT who got shot the third time had a gun. Because he saw what he thought was an active shooter. Okay, see, Alexis, what you're doing is you're holding it against

Rittenhouse because he has a gun. Now, do I support gun control? Actually, yes, I do. I am a gun violence victim. But in our country, you can have a gun, including that gun, and the fact that he was under 18

makes it unlawful. You actually can't. He couldn't actually legally have that gun, which is why his friend bought it for him. As I was trying to say before I was so rudely interrupted, at his age, he should not have had the gun. That is illegal. But you can't treat him differently because he's in that location. What about all the other people that were there that night that should have been at home or should not have been creating mayhem? What about the people that were peacefully protesting? Are they in the wrong place at the wrong time? I mean, under your scenario, we should all stay at home under the bed. That's the only way you, Alexis Koreshchuk,

won't convict us. That's the reality of your reasoning. You got to take your reason and follow it through to a legal conclusion. And your conclusion is he's in the wrong place. He was carrying a gun, so he's guilty. That is not how the law works. I want you to take a listen to what we know about what was happening on the scene that night. Take a listen to Laura Schweitzer, WKRN, Our Cut 12. This is Rittenhouse on the stand. Listen. Kyle Rittenhouse breaking down on the stand as he began testifying in front of a courtroom in Wisconsin this morning. Rittenhouse is accused of fatally shooting two people and wounding another during a police brutality protest in Kenosha in August of 2020.

He told the courtroom he went to Kenosha to, quote, provide first aid after looting and vandalism broke out, bringing along his medical supplies and AR-style semi-automatic rifle. But when asked about what happened during the protest, he broke down. There were three people right there. On the other hand, let's think about what Alexis Terezchuk is saying. I heard one comparison that the hunter goes into the forest with a high-powered weapon. A bear charges him and he shoots him and says, I had to. You know, he charged me.

So what did he think was going to happen when he went in there? To you, Troy Slayton, how do you deal with that defense? Alexis has a leg to stand on. To a normal layperson, that would make sense. But under the law, a person has a right to defend themselves and even to use deadly force if deadly force is being used against them. So even though he may have been in the wrong place, even though we all agree that he should have been at home and that he shouldn't have been out there, if somebody was trying to kill him, he has the right to defend himself. Hey, Nancy.

Jump in. If I could interject for a second. This is Corson. Go ahead. You know, one of the things, this is almost a Kodak moment for the jury to take a look at the instant this situation was happening. We can recreate very easily the testimony of Frank Andrew Hernandez that clearly bifurcates the behavior of Rittenhouse versus the behavior of Rosenbaum and what led up to it. But what really counts is in that three seconds to five seconds, what was taking place and the fear factor that was in Rittenhouse's mind. And that I think is going to be the tipping point for the jury. Nancy? Jump in, Karen. I think

part of the problem of what's happening and what keeps happening in this case is there's a disconnect between the law, which is exactly what was said, what was going on in that very moment, right? And the psychological aspect that Alexis was bringing up, the whole context of what was he doing with the gun? What was happening there? Was he ready to be shooting somebody? But I think it really does come down to that very moment of was he really believing he was defending himself or was he just trigger happy? And I think it just gets very convoluted. Okay, now wait a minute, Karen Stark.

I mean, when you say he's trigger happy, or was he defending himself, are both true. We know he was a gun aficionado. We know that he did target practice. We know he wanted this gun. That does not preclude a self-defense argument. And you know what? I took a lot of heat for not coming down on one side or the other. But I am not going to whore out lady justice

and give in to one argument or the other if it's unclear. If it's unclear, that is a burden the state has not carried. Look, I'm a prosecutor, tried and true. But burden the state has not carried. Look, I'm a prosecutor, tried and true. But if the state has not carried its burden, I would not sacrifice a true verdict in order to just come up with a decision. I hear Alexis Tereschuk. I hear what everybody is saying. I hear what Troy Slayton is saying.

And the reality is it's muddy water. It is not clear. And that is why, as much as I hate it, I predict we will have a hung jury. We will soon be on a verdict watch. We wait as justice unfolds. Nancy Grace, Crime Story, signing off. Goodbye, friend. You're listening to an iHeart Podcast.