The trial of Kyle Rittenhouse was briefly halted today after he burst into tears as he described the events leading up to him opening fire on protesters in Kenosha, Wisconsin last August, killing two of them and wounding a third.

Rittenhouse said that he didn’t go to Kenosha looking for trouble and that there was no friction between himself and the protesters that evening, except for “the man who said he would kill me twice” and threatened to “cut his heart out.”

Rittenhouse then broke down in tears as he described the moments before he shot one of the protesters. The judge then halted the proceedings for a 10-minute break so that Rittenhouse could compose himself.

Following the break, Rittenhouse told the court that one of the victims began chasing the teenager. He then heard a gunshot behind him, turned around, and saw the protester grab the barrel of his gun. Rittenhouse shot him four times, killing him.

Rittenhouse said he then tried to run down the street where the police were, but a mob was chasing him. He fell to the ground and a second protester began striking him with a skateboard. Rittenhouse shot him once, killing him as well.

Finally, he saw a third protester lunge at him and point a pistol at his head, so Rittenhouse shot him too, injuring, but not killing him.

Rittenhouse has pleaded not guilty to six charges, including first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, and first-degree attempted intentional homicide.

During the prosecution’s questioning of Rittenhouse, the judge twice sharply berated the prosecutor for his line of questioning.

The first time was after the prosecutor asked about Rittenhouse’s post-arrest silence, which is a right under the Fifth Amendment.

“The problem is this is a grave constitutional violation for you to talk about the defendant’s silence,” the judge said. “You’re right on the borderline, and you may be over, but it better stop.”

The second rebuke came after the prosecutor’s questions about an incident that occurred two weeks before the shooting, which the judge had already said he would not permit to be used as evidence.

The prosecutor tried saying that he believed that the incident was relevant to the case, but the judge was having none of it.

“Don’t get brazen with me,” the judge said to the prosecutor. “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.”

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)