Juror removed on Day 3 of Rittenhouse trial for making joke about Jacob Blake shooting to a bailiff

[demmiblue]

A juror who made a joke about the shooting of Jacob Blake was dismissed by a judge Thursday on Day 3 of Kyle Rittenhouse’s murder trial.

The prosecutor said it was his understanding that the joke was, “Why did the Kenosha police shoot Jacob Blake seven times? Because they ran out of bullets.”

The judge asked the juror if it was true that he made a joke while being escorted to his car, and the juror admitted it was. However, the juror did not repeat the joke when asked.

Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder told the juror telling the joke was poor judgement and showed clear bias.

https://wgntv.com/news/rittenhouse-prosecutor-will-move-to-remove-juror-caught-telling-a-joke/

How many other knuckle-dragging racists are on the jury?

[jimfields33]

1. Juries are supposed to be neutral. Hopefully the rest are

Look at evidence and let the decision be based on that only. Good thing that bailiff said something.

[2naSalit]

2. Too many.

[zaj]

3. How stupid of a racist do you have to be?

[Buckeyeblue]

4. I've never met a particularly smart racist

[Amishman]

28. I'm thinking this was intentional to try and get dismissed

After a couple days on the jury, he might have wanted out. Saying something so idiotic to the bailiff seems like a pretty surefire way to do it.

[zaj]

29. That could be. It makes sense

Stupid is perhaps equally possible.

[demmiblue]

5. MORE: "My feeling is that it was nothing to do with the case, it wasn't anything to do with Kyle..."

A Kenosha police officer shot Blake in Aug. 2020, leading to widespread protests that in turn lured Rittenhouse into the violent and destructive fray. Rittenhouse subsequently killed two people and injured a third during the civil unrest. Prosecutors say Rittenhouse purposefully agitated the first person he shot and then continued to fire on those who attempted to disarm him; defense attorneys say he fired in self defense to prevent himself from being killed by a violent crowd.

The juror was subsequently brought into court to answer questions for the record.

“I was told that while you were being escorted to the car the other day that you began to tell a joke about the shooting of Jacob Blake, and I wanted to see if that was accurate or not,” the Judge Schroeder said to the juror.

“It is?” the judge said in response to an inaudible response from Juror #7. “Are you comfortable repeating what the joke is, or do you just want to leave it alone?”

Juror #7 apparently answered that he did not want to repeat the joke when called to answer for it, though his comment was not audible on a live feed of the proceeding.

The judge was not amused.

“I will tell you that I’ve talked quite a bit about public confidence in the outcome of the trial, and regardless of whether the issue is as grave as you’ve presented it in terms of inner feelings, it is clear the appearance of bias is present, and it would seriously undermine the outcome of the case,” Schroeder said. “That, in itself, would be sufficient cause for discharge.”

Schroeder asked Binger and the defense if it had anything to add.

“His unwillingness could be taken in the worst light,” one of the attorneys present said off camera.

“Under the circumstances, I’m going to dismiss you from the jury, sir,” Schroeder said. “And we do thank you for taking the time to come down here.”

After being relatively mum, the juror decided to dig in.

“My feeling is that it was nothing to do with the case, it wasn’t anything to do with Kyle and his seven charges,” the juror said.

“I have to make judgments,” Schroeder responded. “I try to confine my judgments to the things I have to judge . . . I don’t want to get into that.”

The judge was attempting to articulate that an appearance of bias was present. A finding of actual bias was not necessary to jettison Juror #7 from the remainder of the trial.

https://lawandcrime.com/live-trials/live-trials-current/kyle-rittenhouse/judge-boots-juror-from-kyle-rittenhouse-murder-trial-for-making-jokes-to-bailiff-about-police-shooting-of-jacob-blake/

[maxrandb]

9. The juror calling the defendent "Kyle" seems effed up

"It wasn't anything to do with Kyle and his 7 charges"

I normally use first names when talking about my "friends".

Thank God they kicked this guy off the jury, but I get the feeling that if we can't, or won't hold TFG accountable, this guy is going to walk too.

But yeah, open season for killing people that don't agree with you seems like where our country is headed.

[Ohioboy]

18. I thought that too

Along with being OK with police emptying their guns into someone, the juror seems to have a soft spot for Kyle. The judge did the right thing.

[SergeStorms]

6. Well, so far...

we have a white supremacist judge and at least one racist juror. 🙄

This trial is going to be a joke. They'll do anything in their power to make sure that stupid kid is acquitted.

[Jedi Guy]

13. So...

The white supremacist judge dismisses a juror who made a racist joke about a Black man being shot by police, saying that it shows evidence of bias. If this judge were a white supremacist, wouldn't it make more sense for him to smile indulgently and give that juror a wink-wink-nudge-nudge "warning" and then allow him to stay on the jury?

Your assertion makes no sense whatsoever.

[quakerboy]

16. I think the judge is aware he is on trial as well at this point

CYA is a thing. Sometimes people have to do a thing they dont actually want to do, practically speaking.

[Jedi Guy]

27. Ahhhhh, I see.

So the fact that the judge removed a juror for telling a racist joke is evidence that the judge is racist? He's just going through the motions, clearly. Makes sense.

Less flippantly, thus far the only evidence that the judge is a white supremacist is that he's made rulings that DUers don't like. I guess that's all it takes these days.

[quakerboy]

31. I have my doubts about the judge

But time will tell. Hopefully hes just in over his head and floundering in a case with more public scrutiny than he is accustomed too. But ya have to admit the idea of an old white dude in a position of power being biased or racist isnt exactly a stretch to imagine.


Regardless, my point was that the judge being biased or not is not necessarily relevant to how he had to deal with the situation of this juror.

[Jedi Guy]

33. Hmm.

But ya have to admit the idea of an old white dude in a position of power being biased or racist isnt exactly a stretch to imagine.

See, I only imagine such things when I have reason to imagine them. I don't just look at an old white guy in a position of power, knowing nothing else about him, and say to myself, "Yeah, I bet he's biased or racist, since he's an old white guy in a position of power." Clearly a failure of imagination on my part.

[quakerboy]

34. Poorly chosen turn of phrase.

It doesnt actually require imagination, just the minutest amount of observational skills applied to life in the USA.

[intheflow]

22. Same judge has come under fire for not allowing the people shot to be identified as "victims"

while also allowing them to be called "looters" and "arsonists". So, yeah, judge is backpedaling to salvage his own reputation, probably more-so than attempting to make the trial fair.

[Jedi Guy]

26. Not entirely accurate.

He didn't allow them to be called "victims" because it would/might prejudice the jury against the claim of self-defense, that's true.

However, he didn't give the defense blanket permission to call them "looters" or "arsonists." The defense is only allowed to do so if they can prove they engaged in those behaviors. Otherwise they can't. So your claim is not entirely accurate.

From the reporting I've seen, the judge has a reputation for being tough but fair.

[intheflow]

30. Or entirely accurate, per WaPo:

Schroeder said that while he advised Rittenhouse’s team against using pejorative terms to describe the three men shot, such language could be used in their closing arguments if evidence shows the men participated in criminal acts. Schroeder said Mark Richards, one of Rittenhouse’s attorneys, could “demonize them if he wants, if he thinks it will win points with the jury,” according to the Chicago Tribune, the first to report the news.

“If more than one of them were engaged in arson, rioting, looting, I’m not going to tell the defense you can’t call them that,” the judge said. Grosskreutz, the lone survivor of the shooting, has not been charged with a crime from that night.

Schroeder’s ground rules reiterated his earlier ruling, in which he stated that the men shot by Rittenhouse could not be called “victims” because the term was prejudicial toward the teen. But on Monday, the judge also allowed the defense to use terms such as “rioters,” “looters” and “arsonists” to refer to those men.

“The word ‘victim’ is a loaded, loaded word,” Schroeder said. “ ‘Alleged victim’ is a cousin to it.”

Although such rulings are not uncommon in trials in which there is a dispute over self-defense, prosecutors suggested the judge was employing a double standard by allowing Rosenbaum, Huber and Grosskreutz to be called “rioters,” “looters” and “arsonists” but not “victims.” Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger questioned how Rosenbaum and Huber, in particular, could be so disparaged, given that they would never have the chance to defend themselves.

“The terms that I’m identifying here such as rioter, looter and arsonist are as loaded, if not more loaded, than the term ‘victim,’ ” Binger said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/10/26/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-judge-victims/

No paywall, via Internet Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20211026232902/https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/10/26/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-judge-victims/

[Jedi Guy]

32. Your characterization of his remarks was not accurate.

From your post:

Same judge has come under fire for not allowing the people shot to be identified as "victims" while also allowing them to be called "looters" and "arsonists".

From the WAPO article you just linked, emphasis mine:

Schroeder said that while he advised Rittenhouse’s team against using pejorative terms to describe the three men shot, such language could be used in their closing arguments if evidence shows the men participated in criminal acts.

You left out the crucial bit at the end, "if evidence shows the men participated in criminal acts" and made it sound as if the judge simply allowed the defense to make that assertion without proof. That is not accurate and it is not true.

[Evolve Dammit]

23. Yeah. Great start. The kid looks like an adolescent Al Capone to me.

[Wounded Bear]

7. Something tells me they're going to need all 8 of their alternates for this trial...

[bluestarone]

8. Just saying

How many juror's laughed at this joke? (11?) Wouldn't surprise me at all.

[Jedi Guy]

14. Probably none. The former juror told the joke to a bailiff who was escorting him to his car.

The bailiff then informed the judge. There's no evidence thus far that the other jurors heard it.

[bluestarone]

15. Ah. gotcha

TY

[inthewind21]

20. The fact he thought it was ok

to tell that joke to a Bailiff escorting him to his car from a high profile trial where people were killed says all you need to know.

[Jedi Guy]

24. It tells me the juror was dumb, and that's about all it tells me.

The bailiff relayed the remark to the judge and he took appropriate action. Not sure what deep sinister meaning you're seeing here.

[Initech]

10. This whole trial has been compromised.

[FelineOverlord]

11. This judge

Link to tweet

[demmiblue]

12. VIDEO:

Link to tweet

[Joinfortmill]

17. Mistrial.

[BeckyDem]

19. I am anxious about the presiding judge too.

[Traildogbob]

21. Really

This judge did not immediately appoint him Foremen of the jury to be. I hope the man that had his arm shot off is on the front row everyday, and they bring a civil suit to ruin the punks life after the mistrial or innocent outcome. I am certain the MAGA go fund we will cover all cost and offer another million for awards.

[ForgedCrank]

25. Seems to be a joke asserting quite the opposite

to me. Meaning, the police would have kept on shooting the black man had they not run out of ammunition.
The joke seems to be more anti-police to me rather than words from a "knuckle-dragging racist". Then again, I won't make assumptions about this juror because I know absolutely nothing else about him.
I agree with the judge removing the juror because it was the right call regardless.