Rittenhouse lawyers ask judge to declare mistrial over video

“We’re focusing too heavily on a technological glitch," prosecutor James Kraus said.

The judge said he had “qualms” about admitting the video during the trial, but because it had already been shown in court, he would allow the jury to rewatch it during deliberations.

But if it turns out the video should not have been admitted into evidence, “it’s going to be ugly,” Schroeder warned.

He said the mistrial request will have to be addressed if there is a guilty verdict.

If Rittenhouse is acquitted, the issue will be moot. But if he is found guilty, a mistrial ruling would essentially void the verdict.

Julius Kim, a Milwaukee-based defense attorney who has been watching the case, said a mistrial could be declared even if the judge finds it was an honest mistake or a technical problem.

But to win a mistrial, the defense will have to meet a high bar and explain to the judge why what happened actually hurt Rittenhouse, said Ion Meyn, an assistant professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School.

“You can’t just say, ‘The state gave me a lower-quality video and therefore I get a mistrial,’" Meyn said. “That’s a losing argument for sure.”

Earlier in the day, the judge criticized news coverage of the case and second-guessing from legal experts in the media, saying he would “think long and hard” about allowing televised trials in the future.

He took exception to news stories about his decisions not to allow the men Rittenhouse shot to be called “victims” and to let Rittenhouse draw the lots that determined which jurors were alternates. The judge also complained about criticism that he had yet to rule on the earlier mistrial request.

Schroeder said he hadn't had a chance to read the motion because he had just received it and wanted to give the state a chance to weigh in.

“It’s just a shame that irresponsible statements are being made,” the judge said of comments in a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel story from law school professors.