mr. grosskreutz. at this point, mr. grosskreutz is i think probably thinking to himself, if i can get away, i will. until he realizes that the defendant is getting ready to fire again. in none of these frames is mr. grosskreutz's right hand with his glock pistol pointed at the defendant. you can see mr. grosskreutz is actually backing up with his right leg. let me go back a couple of frames here. this is frame 444. you can see his right foot is on the ground but it's starting to move back. now as i move forward in the frames 447, his right leg is moved back. this is someone who is about to retreat. his hands are in the air. he's backing away from the defendant. until, as he's testified, he sees the defendant start to manipulate that gun in such a way that it makes mr. grosskreutz feel like he's about to be shot. and only then does he take action. what action does mr. grosskreutz take? does he hold that gun with both hands, the glock that he's got, and point it at the defendant? no, never. does he even take the gun with o

mr. grosskreutz. at this point, mr. grosskreutz is, i think, probably thinking to himself, if i could get away, i will. until he realizes that the defendant is getting ready to fire again. in none of these frames is mr. grosskreutz's right hand with his glock pistol pointed at th e defendant. you can see mr. grosskreutz is actually backing up with his right leg. let me go back a couple of frames here. this is frame 444. you can see his right foot is on the ground. but it is starting to move back. now as i move forward, in the frames 447, his right leg is moved back. this is someone who is about to retreat. his hands are in the air. he's backing away from the defendant. until he's testified he sees the defendant start to manipulate that gun in such a way that it makes mr. grosskreutz feel like he's about to be shot. and only then does he take action. what action does mr. grosskreutz take? does he hold that gun with both hands? the glock that he's got and point it at the defendant? no, never. does he even take the gun with

mr. grosskreutz. come on, people. mr. grosskreutz has ten million reasons for not wanting somebody to go in his phone. the timing with the detectives and some of their actions are very important. they get down to antioch at 3:30 a.m. on the 26th. less than four hours after this happens. by 6:00, 6:30, giving them the benefit of the doubt, kyle rittenhouse is under arrest for first degree murder. there's not been any autopsy done, no witness statements taken. they have two or three videos. the bullets -- i should say it this way. all of the bullets have not been picked up from car source at this point. we're willing to make a decision. were they understand pressure? i'm sure they were. they're afraid there's going to be another night of looting, destruction in kenosha because of this happening and the way the word got out. he traveled across state lines. he was here. he brought his ar with him. the ar was here. he was a white supremist looking for trouble. nothing. nothing. that's why, ladies and gentlemen, when we picked y

mr. grosskreutz's arm.d for you, what would a reasonable person in the defendant's position at the time think? the good news is, ladies and gentlemen, you are going to tell us. as part of your decision in this case, you will represent the reasonable person of ordinary and prudent person and he will put yourself in the defendant'ss that night. i submit to you than at the time of the shootings, reasonable person in the defendant shoes would have known that he had provoked joseph rosenbaum by pointing his gun at someone else. the defendant but someone else at risk of dying by doing that. the defendant should have known that the crowd was aware of the fact that he just shot someone and they felt their lives were in danger. that is reasonable. it's also reasonable to understand that at that point, gaige grosskreutz just witnessed all of us. he heard the defendant shot someone and he ordered the defendant lie about it. he saw the defendant shoot at jump kick man in close range and miss. he saw the defendant kill

mr. grosskreutz; correct? >> also correct. >> amount of time that passes through observation number eight, joseph rosenbaum and final shot to mr. grosskreutz, observation number 26? >> i can again or just make sure that i have numbers again. we're looking for observation 26; correct? stop point? is that correct, sir? >> yes. >> okay. and your start point? >> observation eight to observation 26. >> one minute and 20 seconds. >> approximately one minute and 20ing seconds, the defend fired all eight shots that we see, is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> you indicated also, you measured the time between the first, the two shots that the defend fires at the person who jumps and tries to kick him in the face. >> yes, sir. >> the gap between that first shot to that individual and second shot to the individual was .602 seconds. 6/10th of a second? >> yes, sir. >> you have the ability with software you are using to give us the data that is generated by that software, separate report you can generate, is that fair to say?

mr. grosskreutz with his hands up. as i'm lowering my weapon, i look down, and then mr. lunges at me with his pistol pointed directly at my head. >> you heard mr. grosskreutz' testimony about reracking in. >> yes. >> did you rerack your weapon? >> i did not. >> could i have the exhibit, please? >> showing what's been previously marked exhibit 28, do you recognize this? >> i do. >> now, when somebody -- as mr. grosskreutz said, rerack, is that this? >> is that this? >> i call it charging. >> and to recharge you have to pull it all of the way back? >> yes. >> i would say that is about four inches? i'm asking if you agree with that approximation. >> how far do you think that is? >> three or four inches. >> and the weapon is loaded, and you rerack, what happens? >> if there is already a round in the chamber when you rerack the rifle a live round would come out, chambering a new round into the chamber. >> now it got to the point where he was standing in front of you and has his hands up? >> correct. >> are you aware that he is armed? >> at that point i do see a pistol in his h

mr. grosskreutz did not get four shots. the defendant has the ability to gauge what he is doing and to stop shooting. mr. richards talked about the threat being immobilized. what threat does someone 6 inches shorter than you already shot in the hip and already falling to the ground have? why do you have to keep tracking him and shootings him and end up with a kill shot in the back? hit him, kick him, knee him, anything else. and mr. rosenbaum and mr. rittenhouse are alive. because, the defense talks about games that the prosecution has played. let's talk about games. let's talk about how mr. rittenhouse on that night did not tell anyone about this grabbing of the gun did tell anyone i was afraid they were going to use the gun against me. that is because once mr. rittenhouse and his team understood that an unarmed person chasing him, and unarmed person chasing him later on would not be enough to meet this standard, to meet this privilege. they had to concoct a story. they had to concoct a story about how suddenly i was in gre

mr. huber goes down. grosskreutz flinches, freezes. stops. hands up. no pull. mr. grosskreutz is standing like this and all of a sudden, you see him kick his foot back and launch forward. he loads his back foot going forward at kyle. with a loaded glock handgun. kyle sees it coming, gets within a couple of feet. he fires. if he's got his hands up and wants nothing to do with kyle, like everybody else, just back away and you don't get shot. mr. grosskreutz decides he's going to take him out and his only regret, as stated in the facebook post, he didn't fire first and empty his clip into him. he's hit in the arm. he's shot at once. he's backing up. that's the last shot. that went through the quickness of the shots from the rock in the head to that fourth shot. he gets up. you still see this individual, arm with a board or 2 by 4 or fence post. doesn't shoot at him. this person he doesn't perceive as a danger. his hands are up. doesn't shoot at him. as he wields around, watch what this individual does. that was the end of it. kyle turns around. he turns. that individua

mr. rosenbaum before being told by others that saw it that he was the shooter and then he returned. so, gaige grosskreutzied on the statement of mr. rittenhouse. we're talking -- let's talk about a rush to judgment. mr. rittenhouse turned himself in. he is supposed to be days, weeks, months to charge murders who we know murdered people? it's a red herring as mr. binger said. it's throwing up red herrings, false hypocritical arguments and attacks on those that mr. rittenhouse killed to try to distract you from the fact that he was not in fear of death or great bodily harm and he was not privileged to act how he did. we heard from ms. carrie ann schwartz. now that talked about jail now we can smear mr. rosenbaum more even though there was no dispute that he came from a hospital. he is carrying a hospital bag. ms. schwartz testified that she talked to the hospital about how he would be released. that he went to this hospital. she knew he was coming home from the hospital. she knew what was in the bag. he showed that picture of it back lit against the fire trying to make it seem sinister. she talked about ho

mr. grosskreutz with his hands up and as i'm lowering my weapon, i look down and then mr. grosskreutz -- he lunges at me with his pistol pointed directly at my head. >> reporter: so, rittenhouse shot him once. >> what happens after you shoot him? >> he's no longer a threat to me. >> reporter: during cross-examination, the prosecution started with trying to paint a bottom line. >> everybody that you shot at that night, you intended to kill? >> i didn't intend to kill them. i intended to -- i intended to stop the people who were attacking me. >> by killing them. >> reporter: the prosecution pushed further. >> you intentionally used deadly force against joseph rosenbaum, correct? >> yes. >> you intentionally used deadly force against the man who came and tried to kick you in the face, correct? >> yes. >> you intentionally used deadly force against anthony huber, correct? >> yes. >> you intentionally used deadly force against gaige grosskreutz, correct? >> yes. >> reporter: but then, the prosecutor began to talk about the timing of rittenhouse's testimony. after rittenhouse has

mr. grosskreutz. osskreutz, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that what kyle did under those facts and circumstances is unreasonable. that he was not entitled to self-defense. consider all the events that occurred that evening, him being attacked, kicked in the head, hit in the head with a skateboard, other individuals running up on him and now mr. grosskreutz runs up on him. i'll go through the video later, but his first action is he's running in, the hand is coming up and the gunshot with huber goes off. the natural reaction is the flinch. he covers up. then he pulls his hands up. as he's standing with his hands up, look, he's not gripping the gun anymore in a pistol grip. hands up, hands apart. as he comes in to finish the job, the hand is on the gun going for mr. rittenhouse. he says it's an involuntary movement. the shot comes before it gets directly to his head. but the motion is coming, the shot. it continues on with that momentum. enough momentum to go through the bullet and point

mr. grosskreutz. as i lowered my weapon, i looked down. and then mr. grosskreutz, he lunges at me with his pistol pointed directly at my head. >> reporter: so rittenhouse shot him once. >> what happened after you shoot him? >> he's no longer a threat to me. >> reporter: during the cross-examination, the prosecution began to paint a bottom line. >> everyone you shot you intended to kill? >> i didn't intend to kill. i intended to stop the people attacking me. >> by killing them. >> reporter: the prosecution pushed further. >> you intentionally used deadly force against joseph rosenbaum, correct? >> yes. >> you intentionally used deadly force against the man who tried to kick you in the face, yes? >> yes. >> you intentionally used deadly force against daniel huber, correct? >> yes. >> you used deadly force against grosskreutz? >> yes. >> reporter: after rittenhouse had a chance to hear others testify in the trial and seeing video in the night's events, the judge interrupted and cited his fifth amendment rights. >> the problem is this is a grave constitutio

mr. grosskreutz with his hands up. and as i'm lowering my weapon, i looked down. and then mr. grosskreutz, he lunges at me with his pistol pointed directly at my head. his pistol was pointed at me and that's when i shoot him. >> how many times did you shoot him? >> once. >> reporter: during cross-examination, the judge asking the jury to leave the room twice. first when the prosecution asked rittenhouse about his post-arrest silence, a right solidified in the fifth amendment. >> the problem is this is a grave constitutional violation for you to talk about the defendant's silence. you're right on the borderline, and you may, you may be over. but it better stop. >> reporter: lashing out at the prosecution for attempting to ask rittenhouse questions related to evidence he already banned from the trial. >> don't get brazen with me. you knew very well -- you know very well that an attorney can't go into these types of areas when the judge has already ruled without asking outside the presence of the jury to do so. so don't give me that. >> reporter: the defense outraged, making this

mr. grosskreutz's interview. ten seconds after mr. grosskreutz was shot in regular and slow motion. prepare mr. rosenbaum shooting, fbi one with the aerial points of interest mark. drone video, zoomed in image, still frame after mr. rittenhouse put down the fire extinction are. where does that tell you the jury was focusing? >> john, what it means is they went as he would expect right to the place where the one legal question in the case meets the one real factual dispute which is, was there self-defense in the confrontation between rittenhouse and rosenbaum? the state suggested rittenhouse had been the aggressor. the defense all along has said that he was being chased and that he ran out of options and that's why he shot. that's obviously the jury needed to resolve. >> sandra: andy, if you could stand by. the judge is speaking. >> of course. >> sandra: bear with us, as this will go. there will be moments where they turn off their microphones but we are reminded get you in there as soon as that judge begins speaking because if you're just tuning in now, jury has reached a verdict in

mr. grosskreutz are described as heroes when it's on video that they attempted to murder me in the middleet. >> what's that message that you think the media are sending by describing them as heroes? >> the message that i get from it is that they are saying you can go out and riot and attack anybody and you will have the support from the media and the politicians to do whatever you want and kill innocent people and if you defend yourself -- if they defend yourself your name hero. that is the message i believe is being spread. >> that's scary. do you have any idea, where you are interested in before this? >> i'm going to get a lot of hate for this but i was a pretty big andrew yang supporter. >> [laughs] were you? you are part of the yang gang? >> i was part of the yang gang. he's a good dude. i wasn't into politics. i didn't know much about trump. i didn't know much about biden. i went to a trump rally because trump supports the police. he's a businessman. that's what i liked about trump. i didn't know much about politics..li i was just a 17-year-old kid. >> but you liked andrew yang. >> i

mr. grosskreutz had been convicted of a drim and mr. smith had been convicted of a crime, juvenile adjudication. i think you should say the witnesses -- something like that. >> okay. what page is that on? >> i'm sorry. 34. and we are asking for the -- >> you want the word "some" instead of "one" or "multiple"? >> that's fine. >> how many was it? >> two, that i recall. >> there actually were -- i don't think you asked this. there were other conconvictions but i don't think the question was asked, so two. >> what was the answer? >> two. >> all right. i'll put down two then. >> and then there were some conversations regarding a cautionary instruction regard plg armstrong. >> yeah, i really struggle with that. >> and we had proposed edd the instruction to the court, we took uf at like 245 or something like that. >> yeah. >> so we are asking based on his testimony that the court instruct with that modified 245 instruction as relates to him. >> did you want to be heard? >> well, i would stand by what i indicated over the weekend in my email,

mr. grosskreutz.lunges at me with his pistol pointed directly at my head. >> did you re-rack your weapon? >> i did not. >> reporter: that contradicted gaige grosskreutz testimony. he said rittenhouse tried to reload his gun. rittenhouse said he only fired at him when his life was in danger. prosecutors cross-examined rittenhouse. >> you are telling us the reason you wanted dominic to buy you an ar-15 as opposed to a pistol is the only reason was because you felt you couldn't lawfully possess a pistol? >> correct. >> you didn't pick out the ar-15 for any other reason? >> i thought it looked cool. >> reporter: the prosecution also tried to bring in evidence that rittenhouse had said he wished he had a gun to shoot shoplifters in the days before he arrived in kenosha. >> you would agree you are not allowed to use deadly force to protect property, correct? >> yes. >> but yet, you have previously indicated that you wished you had your ar-15 to protect someone's property, correct? >> reporter: the judge sud

mr. rittenhouse, this is immediately after gaige grosskreutz has stopped in front of you. and you are doing something with your firearm at that moment. do you recall that? >> yes. >> you were asked some questions about what you were doing at that moment. is it fair to say that you turn your firearm over and you are looking at it? you are examining it? >> yes. >> but your testimony is you didn't do anything to actually manipulate it at that moment? >> correct. s. that fair to say? >> correct. >> please continue. frame 500 shows you firing your ar-15 towards gaige grosskreutz. at this particular moment, he does not have that pistol pointed towards you, does he? >> he does. >> his left leg has stepped across in a -- not directly toward you but to the side of you, correct? >> yes. >> he's reaching in with his left arm towards you, correct? >> yes. >> he never steps back and puts the gun in both hands in a ready, aim position toward you, does he? >> he doesn't do that. >> he never takes that gun with his right hand and stands there and holds it out with his right hand in front

mr. grosskreutz could have stopped 20 feet away if you wanted to shoot you and fired his pistol at you, couldn't he? >> he could have, but he didn't. >> your testimony is that he ran up close to you and reached in with his left hand with his gun on his right hand, because that was his way of using the gun to shoot you? >> yes. >> did you think he was reaching into grab your gun? >> no. >> you didn't think he was going to take your gun away, did you? >> i thought he was going to shoot me. >> with his pistol? >> yes. >> which he never does. >> correct. >> he never fires that gun at you. >> no. >> in fact, in this entire sequence of events, no one ever fired a gun at you, did they? >> someone fired a gun from behind me. >> did he fire that gun at you? >> i believe so. >> what did you base that on, the video? did you see it? >> no. >> you are talking of the incident with mr. rosenbaum? >> correct. >> that happened while you were running across the storage lot, correct? >> correct. >> at that moment in time, you do not see him fire a shot, you customer you heard a gunshot, but have no idea who fired.

mr. grosskreutz, he lunges at me with his pistol pointed directly at my head. >> now, this is his best scenario, except, joey, in putting in those details, we never saw a picture of him having any injury, and you would have one if you got hit in the neck with a baseball bat slash skateboard, the way he describes it. however, to your point, the guy has a gun. he's getting hit. is that enough? >> i think so, because number one, you talk about the person who had the gun, that wasn't the clip there, but so he justifies that. now you pivot to the skateboard. as marilyn mosby knows because prosecutors do it all the time, anything could be a dangerous weapon. if you're using a skateboard as a baseball bat to hit someone, that's problematic. the final person that he shot was grabbing at his weapon. and so yes, that provides what you need in order to establish self-defense. last point, consider the context. consider the context of the people who were angry. there's fires, tensions are flaming, people are saying to get you, i need you, et cetera. and after that, what does he do? he turns himself in. so y

mr. grosskreutz. he lunges at me with his pistol pointed directly at my head. >> did you rerack your weapon? >> i did not. >> reporter: that contradicted grosskreutz's testimony w where he said rittenhouse tried to reload. rittenhouse said he only fired at him when his life was in dairmg. the prosecution tried to bring in evidence that rittenhouse said he wish heed had a gun to shoot shoplifters in the days before he arrived in kenosha. >> you'd agree that you're not allowed to use deadly force to protect property. correct? >> yes. >> but yet you have previously indicated that you wished you had your ar-15 to protect someone's property, am i correct? >> reporter: the judge suddenly sent the jury out and barked at the prosecutor admonishing him for his line of questioning which the judge said went against a pretrial motion about what evidence can come in. >> the problem is, this is a grave constitutional violation for you to talk about the defendant's silence. you're right on the border line. you may b

mr. grosskreutz? >> approximately 1 minute 20 seconds. >> in that 1 minute and 20 seconds the defendant fires all eight shots? >> reporter: a day after rittenhouse's at times emotional account of what happened in that minute 20 gaige grosskreutz the only survivor of those shot that night felt it wasn't genuine. >> to me it seemed like a child who had just gotten caught doing something that he wasn't supposed to. more upset that he was caught and less upset about what he had done and what he had taken and the numerous lives he affected. >>> all right. that is in kenosha. now to the trial of the three men who shot and killed ahmaud arbery a 25-year-old unarmed black man out jogging. cnn's martin savidge is covering the story for us and joins us live this evening. good evening. today we heard testimony from the owner of the under construction home that has been the central focus of this case. what did we learn? >> reporter: it's interesting, don, the entire day of the testimony was consumed by the interv

mr. grosskreutz?seconds. >> that testimony there underscoring just how quickly these shootings unfolded. >> let's bring in cnn legal anal analyst ariba martin. you heard them explain the time the shots rittenhouse fired. what stands out to you? >> yes, the significance of that testimony was to buttress the defense's argument this was a chaotic scene and that rittenhouse was responding in real-time to what he perceived to be real threats. now, the judge didn't allow this use of force experts to give his opinion about the reasonableness of rittenhouse's conduct. by showing how quickly the time shots were fired, it conveyed to the jurors as kyle himself testified and as other witnesses have testified, that he was under attack, and he was responding after he was being attacked. >> yes, of course the hope is all this is unfolding in a matter of seconds, the jury will feel more sympathy for him, more sympathy for the idea that he didn't somehow plan this, even though he crossed state lines, got a gun. there

mr. grosskreutz asked the defendant did you just shoot someone and the defendant said something about the

mr. grosskreutz and the person that was jumping over you, correct? >> yes. >> so you knew that this was a crowd that would not react very favorably to you going out there and trying to put out fires and interfere with that stuffer, you knew that, didn't you? >> i didn't. >> even after that incident, you still didn't have any idea that this is a crowd that's not going to take it very well? >> it seems like they were more mad at the part of him screaming what he screamed after, not putting out the fire. that's what it seemed like to me. >> and he screams to them, fuck around and find out. >> that's what he screamed to them. >> after they had just tried to light a dumpster on fire, right? >> yes. so. >> what did you interpret that to mean? >> i don't know. i didn't witness in the time. i just grabbed the dumpster a minute after and tried to pull it on to the property. >> because it seems to me he's saying you light stuff on fire, and i'm going to use my gun. >> your honor, that's a total mischaracterization. >> i'll withdraw the question. >> what it see

mr. grosskreutz's best friend in as a witness because he had posted something on facebook immediately afters. he testified, he couldn't find grosskreutz because he was under an anonymous name at the hospital. nobody knew who gaige grosskreutz was, who jacob marshall was. but he takes it upon himself to post a facebook message talking about how -- next slide, please -- just talked to gaige. only regret was not killing the kid. coward. here's a picture of them hugging each other at the hospital. and this is his posting. ladies and gentlemen, why does somebody post something like that? because that's what his friend told him. and he wanted to get gaige grosskreutz's word out. he didn't repost and say he lied but he took it down, but unfortunately, the internet has a memory. the next witness was kyle rittenhouse. we did recall the brothers but i've talked about that. kyle rittenhouse did not have to take the witness stand to tell his story. it was told through video. he wanted you as the jurors to hear his personal experience of the night of the 25th. he knew mr. binger would cross-examine him

mr. grosskreutz doesn't mention the fact he was armed with a firearm when he went off kyle.t's based upon one statement somebody from an m wrap saying we appreciate you guys. i don't think that's enough to show that kyle was acting under color of law or anything along those lines. >> mark richards, you said a lot of people were commenting on what you said. just to balance it out, we had an avalanche of people saying that you were shocking in terms of your candor, your straightness, and being very even in terms of what you see and what you don't see in this situation and why, so on balance in this day andage age, i think you came out of this pretty good so far. i appreciate you doing this interview and being straight with us once again. it's an important night. >> appreciate the time. i hope eventually we can fade into the dark. >> mark richards, have a very good thanksgiving. >> thank you, you too. bye. >>> now, to the newest wisconsin horror. it doesn't have anything to do with kyle rittenhouse. it doesn't really have to do with any of the things that we're struggling with,

mr. grosskreutz?1 minute 20 seconds. >> in that approximate 1 minute 20 seconds, the defendant fires all eight shots that we see, is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> reporter: judge bruce schraeder lashing out at the prosecution for the second day in a row, this time about admissible evidence. >> is there something that i'm seeing that draws the face that you're making? go ahead, say what you want to say. >> i have to say, your honor, yesterday, i was the target of your ire for disregarding your orders. i was under the court's ire. >> what i want to talk about -- >> fundamental fairness on the issue, your honor. >> say what you want to say. >> if i'm being held to obey the court's orders, i'm asking that the defense be held to that, too. >> i was talking yesterday about the constitution of the united states and how the supreme court has interpreted it for 50 years. >> reporter: the judge also making an offensive comment about the lunch selection. >> i hope the -- it's not one of those boats on long beach

mr. grosskreutz? >> approximately one minute and 20 seconds. >> in that approximately one minute and 20 seconds the defendant fires all eight shots? >> reporter: a day after rittenhouse's at times emotional account of what happened in that minute 20, gage grosskreutz, the only survivor of those shot that night, felt it wasn't genuine. >> to me it seemed like a child who had just gotten caught doing something that he wasn't supposed to, more upset that he was caught and less upset about what he had done and what he had taken and the numerous lives that he affected. >> omar, the judge was also heard making a comment right before they broke for lunch. what did he say? >> reporter: yeah, anderson. he said he hopes the asian food that they were getting for lunch wasn't on one of those boats in long beach harbor, which may have been reference to supply chain backlogs over there. but for ships that were likely coming from asia. it was perceived as anti-asian by some. at the very least just a weird time to ma

mr. grosskreutz. he lunges at me with his pistol pointed directly at my head. >> did you re-rack your weapon? >> i did not. >> reporter: that contradicted gaige grosskreutz's testimony where he said rittenhouse try today reload his gun. rittenhouse said he only fired at him when his life was in danger. prosecutors then cross-examined rittenhouse, questioning him about why he possessed a gun. >> so, you are telling us that the reason that you wanted dominic to buy you an ar-15, as opposed to a pistol, is -- is the only reason was because you felt you couldn't lawfully possess a pistol? >> correct. >> you didn't pick out the ar-15 for any other reason? >> i thought it looked cool. >> reporter: the prosecution also tried to bring in evidence that rittenhouse had said he wished he had a gun to shoot shoplifters in the days before he arrived in kenosha. >> you'd agree with me that you're not allowed to use deadly force to protect property, correct? >> yes. >> but yet, you have, previously, indicated that y

mr. rittenhouse's other victims, josen rosenbaum and gaige grosskreutz. he was shot but did not die. his bicep was blown off and he did take the stand in this case. we should also mention that the mother and father of mr. huber, anthony huber, were not in the courtroom watching all of this and they explained why, they could not take the emotional toll from sitting in trial however members of anthony huber's family were there. his aunt for example was in court watching all of this the machinations of this court and waiting for the jury's discussion. but you hear there from a family who felt that their son was trying to do something valiant and they feel like justice was not served here. you'll hear the complete opposite from kyle rittenhouse, his family and his attorneys who feel that kyle rittenhouse as the jury also decided was innocent of all of these shootings and did so in self-defense. i do want to talk to you a little bit about some of the things that we learned in this case while the trial was going on. that was not public knowledge or whats not widely known publicly. one of th

mr. grosskreutz asks the defendant, did you just shoot someone?mething about the police and then says, "i did not shoot anyone." this is similar to the

mr. grosskreutz. he lunges at me with his pistol pointed directly at my head. >> did you rerack your weapon? >> i did not. >> reporter: that contradicted gaige grosskreutz's testimony where he said he tried to reload. he said he only fired at him when his life was in danger. they questioned him about why he possessed a gun. >> the reason you wanted dominik to buy you an ar-15 as opposed to a pistol is the only reason was because you felt you couldn't lawfully possess a pistol? >> correct. >> you didn't pick out the ar-15 for any other reason? >> i thought it looked cool. >> reporter: the prosecution also tried to bring in evidence that rittenhouse said he wished he had a gun to shoot shoplifters in the days before he arrived in kenosha. >> you are not allowed to use deadly force to protect property, correct? >> yes. >> but yet you have previously indicated that you wished you had your ar-15 to protect someone's property. >> reporter: the judge suddenly sent the jury out and barked at the prosecutor ad

mr. rittenhouse's other victims, joseph rosenbaum and gaige grosskreutz. and they go on to say, we watched the trial closely, hoping it would bring us closure. and they say, that did not happen today. katy, again, you might hear the helicopters overhead. there are people here, both celebrating and people who are frustrated by this. of course this was a highly anticipated verdict. there are about five schools in the area, already went to virtual learning in anticipation of this. we know the national guard has been on standby outside of kenosha. the last we heard from the county sheriff is they feel they have things under control. a members of the religious leadership told me the difference between august and now is they're better prepared, they're organized, everyone is calling for peace. as far as we see here outside the courthouse, that peace is prevailing at this point, katy. >> shaq, a very interesting interview you were just having with the reverend there. i want to get to some of the points she was making. first i want to read a little bit more from t

mr. grosskreutz is saying is, you know, he created the conditions and essentially provoked the situation that caused him to then feel afraid. and that's not self-defense. that's what the jury is going to have to decide. >> and maya, you were last week kind of helping us understand the legal process that we're seeing in wisconsin. what about the issue of the mistrial, right? it was talked about last week. what is the judge going to do and when is he going to do that? >> yeah, look, i mean, technically, the judge still has time to decide whether or not he wants to call a mistrial. but the point here is, and i fall in the camp of people who don't believe there will be a mistrial. for there to be a mistrial, the judge has to decide that something so damaging and so unfair happened that it just simply taints the trial so badly, that there's no reason to give it to the jury. and i don't think we have that situation here, honestly. so while it's a possibility and it's certainly up to the judge, i don't think that's what we're going to see in this trial. >> maya wiley and gabe gutierrez, thank y

mr. grosskreutz pointed his 9-millimeter gun at kyle rittenhouse's head.on the house. >> steve: even the defense crucial. it comes down to reasonable doubt. did the prosecution prove their case yard. >> that's ultimately what it comes down to. ainsley: he said he wanted to protect property and he wanted to or first aid. closing argue. >>s are today. here is dave hancock. is hes spokesperson for the family. >> the actions of the prosecution in this case, have just been pitiful and abhorrent. they have violated his due process rights on several occasions, and i think are going to see an interesting morning in court today. i believe that the jury is paying attention. and they are taking in all the facts and they are learning a lot of new truths if they heard all the false media reporting over the past year. so it just, none of what they were saying was just true. it just was untrue. and that has come out glaringly. so we believe that there is going to be a not guilty verdict across the board. brian: do you know what else going to be part of this? so, if this

mr. rittenhouse continued to shoot, maiming gaige grosskreutz. the police let mr. rittenhouse leave the scene freely. mr. rittenhouse came to kenosha armed to kill. we are so proud of anthony, and we love him so much. we ask that you remember anthony and keep him in your prayers. again, that's from the parents of anthony huber who was shot and killed by kyle rittenhouse last year. mr. rittenhouse was acquitted on all charges today. we'll have more live from kenosha coming up in a few minutes. there's more to come in terms of these gut-wrenching, harrowing trials. and i mean more to come in very short order, more to come quite soon. right now the jury is out, we're waiting on a verdict right now in charlottesville, virginia, where two dozen neo-nazi and white supremacists and individuals and groups are facing a civil trial that accuses them of planning the violence that happened at the right wing white supremacist rally in charlottesville, virginia in 2017. the jury is out, they held deliberations today. they'll be back to start deliberating again on monday and we'l

mr. huber and grosskreutz on videos when it's clear in the video they attempted to murder me in the middleker: what's the message you think the media is sending describing them as heroes. >> the message i get from it they are saying can you go out and right and attack anybody and you will have the support from the media and the politicians to do whatever you want and kill innocent people and if they defend yourself, you are named a hero. that's the message i believe that's being spread. lawrence: talk about a criminal background. one of them had sexual assault of multiple children under the age of 9. the other one has domestic violence charges. and by the way as you can see in the film. the jury vindicated him. they tried to attack him, pulled a gun on the man and got shot for it so to describe this as this just goes to show you the new liberal media message as well as the progressives is no one should be behind bars. no one should be behind bars. if you attack someone, you should just let them shoot you first. lawrence: when that assistant district attorney started to paint one of the peo

mr. rittenhouse's other victims, joseph rosenbaum and gaige grosskreutz. you see the face of a young man exercising constitutional rights, showing up at a blm rally. with regard to biden, so folks know, he said, quote, i stand by what the jury concluded, the jury system works, we have to abide by it, while saying many are angry and he is among them. this is important conversation. we have two guests we had on before. i appreciate you leading off coverage tonight, britney and britney in this case, thanks to both of you. appreciate it. >>> there's a lot of other developing news, getting our first break of the hour. steve bannon, back in trouble, losing to the judge, awaiting jail sentence if he loses this case. an update with a special guest. >>> and speaker pelosi with a win that has people calling her the big goat. has people callin the big goat there's a different way to treat hiv. it's once-monthly injectable cabenuva. cabenuva is the only once-a-month, complete hiv treatment for adults who are undetectable. cabenuva helps keep me undetectable. it's two

mr. rittenhouse's other victims, joseph rosenbaum and gaige grosskreutz. to be clear, the juror has decided he did not commit murder, that he indeed was acting in self-defense, which is what the defense had presented to them, the prosecution obviously fighting against that. we, you know, we expect to hear from some more of these families. we expect to hear from the -- at least the attorney potentially for gaige grosskreutz who was severely injured in this, and who did take the stand. his testimony paramount in this case, as well as all of the video that this jury had and could watch as many times as it wanted. there was a lot of consternation by the defense in letting this jury watch the video, you have to be careful putting so much onus on one piece of evidence. the judge being very clear, that may apply to witness statements, but that should not apply to video that shows the action that they are deciding. it shows the very moments of these killings, and so the jury did so. they did take a look at the video again, and their decision was that he was not gu

mr. rittenhouse's other victims, joseph rosenbaum and gaige grosskreutz. we did not attend the child because we could not bear to sit in the courtroom and watch videos of our son's murder. we watched the trial closely hoping it would bring us closure. they say, that did not happen. today's verdict means there's no accountability for the person who murdered our son. it sends an unacceptable message that armed civilians can show up in any town, incite violence, and use the danger they've created to justify shooting people in the street. that's, again, from the family of anthony huber, the 26-year-old. and one piece of context for this is, anthony huber was the man reflected in the fourth count of this case, the most significant count, and it was that first degree intentional homicide. again, what is considered first-degree murder in pretty much any other state. i think it underscores the pain that you have from the families of those who were shot and killed by mr. rittenhouse, by kyle rittenhouse. of course the jury is saying that was justified, they acquitt

mr. rittenhouse with your gun. >> reporter: the defense honed in on that same moment but going to after grosskreutz's hands were up in your right hand. yes? >> that is correct, yes. >> you are advancing on mr. rittenhouse who is seated on his butt, right? >> that is correct. >> you're moving forward and your right hand drops down with your gun. your hands are no longer up and now the gun is pointed in the direction of mr. rittenhouse. agree? >> reporter: the defense presses further. >> when you were standing 3 to 5 feet from him with your arms up in the air, he never fired, right? >> correct. >> it wasn't until you pointed your gun at him, advanced on him with your gun -- not your hands down -- pointed at him -- that he fired, right? >> correct. >> reporter: prosecutors came back to specify with grosskreutz on the positioning of the gun. >> did you intentionally point your firearm at the defendant? >> no, i did not. >> did you feel there was an imminent danger that the defendant was going to kill you? >> yes, absolutely. >> is that the way you hold and point a gun when you're going to shoot it? >> no. >> reporter:

mr. huber. and they're also going to determine whether or not there was an attempted homicide. if more grosskreutz. so they have a lot to do. they're also going to have to see whether or not kyle rittenhouse's defense, which was put on, accurately depicted a self-defense. and whether or not the prosecution disproved it beyond a reasonable doubt. so this is their time to really go through the evidence. i anticipate that they're going to have a lot of questions. there's a lot of legal complexities and keep in mind that there are lesser included charges here. even on the first-degree, reckless homicide, or the first-degree intentional homicide for mr. huber, there are going to be lesser included. so if they don't find that the intention was to kill, they can say whether or not kyle rittenhouse was reckless. but then again, their inquiry does not stop there, because they have to really determine whether or not that self-defense was met. >> gabe gutierrez outside the courtroom, how are things there? >> hi, there, jose. we can tell you, we just got some information from a pool reporter, who was inside t