Judge Bruce Schroeder, who is presiding over the Kyle Rittenhouse case and he has a bone to pick with CNN and other fake news sites. He had to halt the trial the other day and send the jury out of the room before he laid into the prosecutors after they tried to enter false evidence into the preceding. The prosecutors played a video showing the rioters which the judge ruled was inadmissible because it was irrelevant and immaterial.
They showed the riots in which they claimed it showed Rittebhouse’s state of mind at the time of the shooting. But the video did not show Rittenhouse, just the rioters.
When prosecutors tried to enter it, they told the judge it was to show Rittenhouse’s state of mind, but the judge called it hearsay because it in no way referenced Rittenhouse.
The judge then had the jury removed and he berated the prosecutors and then went on to complain about CNN and other alleged news sites. On the matter of CNN, Schroeder referenced Brian Stelter and another lawyer who claimed his ruling on n0ot calling the rioters who were shot victims was described as incomprehensible.
However, in the case when the people who were shot were engaging in violence cannot be referred to as victims as it is prejudicial when a defendant is claiming self-defense. As lawyers, Stelter and the other CNN talking head should know that.
During jury selection, the judge also lamented the intentional use of bias to shape public perception of the incident.
This judge is hardly the first person who knew the press’s bias was used to shape the narrative of a story. Right, Nicholas Sandmann? He is the young man who got rich from lies CNN told about him and there are plenty of suits left for him to cash in on.
Schroeder also cited on Wednesday the media’s coverage of a 1998 trial he presided over, where a man named Mark Jensen was convicted of poisoning his wife, WTMJ-TV reported. A new trial has been ordered for that case.
“I’ve talked about inaccurate things out of the media, and one of the things that I’ve read over and over and over again is about how I messed up” in the Jensen case, Schroeder said. “Actually, I had it 100% correct in the first place.”
The judge also argued that the intense media coverage and the country’s divided reaction to the case meant it was crucial the public trusted the court’s findings.
“I’m gonna comment about the media again because there was a gentleman on TV night before last who said this is the most divisive case in the country to date,” Schroeder said. “So anything that undermines public confidence in what happens here is very important.”
