Rittenhouse trial should go to Jury today...

Judge tosses the Weapons charge

Closing arguments, jury instructions, and then deliberations. That is where we are at today. 

The fact that the judge dropped the weapon's charge is going to cause a lot of angst with liberal Kyle haters because they thought that was a slam dunk. But at the end of the day the weapons charge was a matter of interpreting the law, not a matter of any fact finding. The murky written law appears to hold a different standard for people under the age of 16 than it does for people under the age of 18. So open carry of a rifle is apparently not illegal if you are at least 16 years of age (according to the Judge's interpretation) or at least that appears to be the argument. 

So rather than the Judge allowing the jury to make a determination on what the law means (which is not ever their job), I think he did the correct thing in making the call. Whether you agree that he made the right call to drop the charges is another issue all together.

The Judges instruction are being read as I write this. This is many times the most important part of the trial. For the most part, it would appear that the Judge is not helping the prosecution too much so far. To the degree that he is explaining the law, he seems intent on pointing out the elements of self defense as he goes along, effectively repeating these elements. For instance here is the Judge explaining the charges of Reckless Endangerment (of one of the bystanders). 

Judge: Reckless, conduct creates risk of death, defendant knew was creating the risk, defendant disregarded the risk. Count 1, reckless homicide of Rosenbaum, with utter disregard for human life. [That's first-degree reckless homicide; if no utter disregard, can still be second-degree.] Caused death of another, conduct substantial factor, conduct was criminally reckless.Reckless endangerment, state must prove: 1. Defendant endangered other 2.Risk of death unreasonable and substantial 3. Defendant aware of risk of death .

So while the Judge follows the law and explains that Reckless Endangerment can be first degree (utter disregard for life) or second degree (reckless without that disregard). But that both of the required that the risk being taken must be "unreasonable" or "unjustified". 

The State's best chance of a guilty verdict (now that the gun charge has been dropped) is the reckless disregard, but even those charges are tempered by the idea that Rittenhouse must be unreasonable and unjustified in his risk. I think that if he is justified and reasonable in defending himself, that he will be considered justified and reasonable in that decision.