There’s a theory that if you’re going to tell a loaded joke, you better be aware of who you’re telling it to. Well, it appears that one of the 20 jurors impaneled to hear the politically charged Kyle Rittenhouse didn’t apply such sound judgment.
One might think a potential juror would have enough common sense not to tell a tacky joke about Jacob Blake, especially to a bailiff working the trial. Blake is the black man who had multiple warrants for his arrest a year ago, August.
In a scuffle with law enforcement, Blake was shot seven times, triggering violence in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Kyle Rittenhouse came to Kenosha in the midst of violent protests and riots triggered by Blake’s shooting. Stores were being looted and property burned.
Only 17-years-old at the time, Rittenhouse was there to help defend the many businesses and private citizens who were being overwhelmed by the violence. All the while, the mainstream media continued to spew a false narrative about Blake being unarmed.
Rittenhouse is facing murder charges for shooting two individuals. Many legal experts insist Rittenhouse acted in self-defense. The 18-year-old is facing murder charges while the officers, and Blake, have been spared criminal prosecution.
As for the bad joke, Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger offered a general description of the joke. Evidently, the man asked “why Kenosha police only shot Jacob Blake seven times.” The sadistic punch line went something like, “because they ran out of bullets.”
Rittenhouse’s legal team initially objected to the dismissal. However, after the man refused to repeat the joke, the defense attorneys agreed it presented a bad appearance. Judge Bruce Schroeder agreed that appearances are critical in this case.
As he dismissed the juror, Judge Schroeder supported his decision by asserting, “The public needs to be confident that this is a fair trial.” This untimely joke has reduced the number of alternate jurors down to seven.
In a trial that will have political backlash simply based on its underlying narrative, Schroeder’s insistence that good judgment must prevail is vital. Anyone repeating such a tacky joke, in light of the drastic consequences Rittenhouse faces, has questionable judgment at best.
The dismissal leaves 19 jurors impaneled to hear a case that could produce a life sentence if Rittenhouse is convicted. The stakes for this young man are high. While the defense initially objected to the dismissal, it’s probably good that Rittenhouse doesn’t have someone with such poor judgment, potentially determining his guilt or innocence.