The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha
-
Rittenhouse defense incorrectly claims iPad pinch-to-zoom modifies footage
A lack of technical knowledge may have just influenced an important court case. The New York Times reports the defense for shooter Kyle Rittenhouse incorrectly claimed that an iPad's pinch-to-zoom function could modify footage of the incident, "creating what it thinks is there, not what necessarily is there." That sparked a debate between lawyers and Judge Schroeder, who maintained the burden was on the prosecution to show the imagery remained in its "virginal state," not on the defense to prove manipulation.
The judge may have accepted the argument. He denied the prosecution's request for an adjournment and instead called for a 15-minute recess, suggesting the team could find an expert to support their claim in that space of time. They didn't, and The Verge noted that the trial resumed with the jury watching video on a Windows PC connected to the courtroom TV.
As you might imagine, the defense's claim played fast and loose with the truth. Pinch-to-zoom on all devices may use algorithms, but only to scale the image — it doesn't change the content itself. This was an attempt to prevent the jury from getting a clearer view of the action, not a genuine challenge to the integrity of the video.
I watched this exchange yesterday.
My thoughts? "Pinch to Zoom" is perfectly fine.
But...
If the prosecution enters evidence using the technology, and the defense objects, the burden is on the prosecution to prove that it's not altered.
It's a fine legal point, and I disagree with the judge's ruling, but, when you want to "enhance" evidence, it's up to YOU to prove that it's valid.
That said, if I were the defense, I would not have raised an objection to the tech.
wrote on 12 Nov 2021, 00:42 last edited by@george-k said in The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha:
and instead called for a 15-minute recess, suggesting the team could find an expert to support their claim in that space of time. They didn't, and The Verge noted that the trial resumed with the jury watching video on a Windows PC connected to the courtroom TV.
As you might imagine, the defense's claim played fast and loose with the truth. Pinch-to-zoom on all devices may use algorithms, but only to scale the image — itMr. Fingas is wrong. The pinch motion is a command, plain and simple. That command can be to zoom, but it can also be to play a completely different video. Typically, the original video would have been cleared as evidence AND an enhanced zoom video would have been cleared well in advance.
-
wrote on 12 Nov 2021, 00:43 last edited by
Yeah but what about all those kangaroo court indictments and trials of left-leaning people who run afoul of right-leaning pop cultural outrage, but who wouldn't have been indicted on weight of evidence alone?
Both sides are equal, I read it here, so there must be examples.
-
No, here’s the racist.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/politics-policy/sobbing-kyle-rittenhouse-won-before-ruling-rcna5114
Seriously? Stay safe George, Kluurs, and any other forum member in the general area.
wrote on 12 Nov 2021, 01:12 last edited by@lufins-dad said in The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha:
No, here’s the racist.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/politics-policy/sobbing-kyle-rittenhouse-won-before-ruling-rcna5114
Seriously? Stay safe George, Kluurs, and any other forum member in the general area.
-
wrote on 12 Nov 2021, 01:13 last edited by
Shit, my oldest lives in Milwaukee.
-
wrote on 12 Nov 2021, 01:15 last edited by
@mark said in The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha:
Shit, my oldest lives in Milwaukee.
D2 is in Germantown...
-
wrote on 12 Nov 2021, 01:33 last edited by
Defund the police!
-
wrote on 12 Nov 2021, 15:34 last edited by
-
wrote on 12 Nov 2021, 15:54 last edited by
I'm starting to think that maybe lefties use the race narrative to attract eyeballs and to generate outrage to consolidate votes.
I'm an eternal optimist and I try to see the positive side of every situation, but I can't help but feel that this is what is going on.
-
wrote on 12 Nov 2021, 15:58 last edited by
Want to teach something "critical" in public school? Teach critical thinking. Teach how to spot bias or loaded reporting. Teach students to look for what isn't said or written, as much as what is.
The Founders knew it took an educated populace to successfully make a republic. Educate the young minds of mush with what they need to know, instead of the flavor of the moment.
-
wrote on 12 Nov 2021, 18:51 last edited by
-
Want to teach something "critical" in public school? Teach critical thinking. Teach how to spot bias or loaded reporting. Teach students to look for what isn't said or written, as much as what is.
The Founders knew it took an educated populace to successfully make a republic. Educate the young minds of mush with what they need to know, instead of the flavor of the moment.
wrote on 12 Nov 2021, 19:02 last edited by@jolly said in The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha:
Want to teach something "critical" in public school? Teach critical thinking. Teach how to spot bias or loaded reporting. Teach students to look for what isn't said or written, as much as what is.
The Founders knew it took an educated populace to successfully make a republic. Educate the young minds of mush with what they need to know, instead of the flavor of the moment.
Indeed. if your side is right, they will see that. If you have to indoctrinate them you aren't right.
-
wrote on 12 Nov 2021, 19:26 last edited by
That lawyer needs a big boy haircut.
-
wrote on 13 Nov 2021, 15:02 last edited by
I just listened to Andy McCarthy's podcast on this.
There's one interesting comment: The guy who survived, Grosskreutz, pointed a handgun at Rittenhouse (which he denies on TV but admits under oath). His permit for such weapon was expired and therefore it was illegal.
McCarthy asks (rhetorically, I assume): Why isn't the state prosecuting him for a gun crime?
-
I just listened to Andy McCarthy's podcast on this.
There's one interesting comment: The guy who survived, Grosskreutz, pointed a handgun at Rittenhouse (which he denies on TV but admits under oath). His permit for such weapon was expired and therefore it was illegal.
McCarthy asks (rhetorically, I assume): Why isn't the state prosecuting him for a gun crime?
wrote on 13 Nov 2021, 15:27 last edited by@george-k said in The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha:
I just listened to Andy McCarthy's podcast on this.
There's one interesting comment: The guy who survived, Grosskreutz, pointed a handgun at Rittenhouse (which he denies on TV but admits under oath). His permit for such weapon was expired and therefore it was illegal.
McCarthy asks (rhetorically, I assume): Why isn't the state prosecuting him for a gun crime?
http://www.kenoshacountyeye.com/gaige.pdf
This was expunged. But at the time of the shooting, I think he was still a felon, which definitely makes the gun illegal.
-
wrote on 14 Nov 2021, 21:54 last edited by
-
wrote on 16 Nov 2021, 23:19 last edited by
-
@George-K I think I’ve only seen that guy’s name here and it was a discussion about him making shit up out of whole cloth.
I apologize in advance if I have the name wrong.
-
wrote on 16 Nov 2021, 23:24 last edited by
Yeah
-
wrote on 16 Nov 2021, 23:26 last edited by
Not to worry whether this entirely plausible thing might be true. not to worry that a little reflection would lead any reasonable person to conclude that retribution is on the mind of every one of those jurors, regardless of how much weight they try to give it. You are a centrist, and do not have to own anything having to do with either political side.
