Bretz Reacts To Kyle Rittenhouse: 'Proper Verdict Was Not Guilty'

JOLIET, IL — Joliet criminal defense attorney Chuck Bretz said there was only one proper verdict for jurors to make in the Kyle Rittenhouse case: not-guilty on all criminal charges, including first-degree reckless homicide.

"I think with Rittenhouse, the takeaway is, it's important in any case not to rush to judgment," Bretz told Joliet Patch during an interview at his downtown Joliet law office, Bretz, Flynn & Associates. "There are different commentors that are making this into a political event, whether politics played any role in the charging decision or not.

"It is obvious these charges were filed before the facts were known. The evidence at trial, largely coming from the prosecution's own witnesses, established Rittenhouse was clearly acting in self-defense," Bretz said. "It was my feeling that from following the case, the proper verdict was not guilty."

Protests Planned In Chicago After Rittenhouse Not Guilty Verdict

On Friday, after three days of deliberations, a jury in Kenosha found Rittenhouse not guilty of all charges in the fatal shooting of two protesters on Aug. 25, 2020, during a chaotic night of protests in Kenosha, where cries for racial justice turned violent and a heavy police presence and armed civilians turned the streets into a militarized zone.

Rittenhouse was acquitted of first-degree reckless homicide, first-degree recklessly endangering safety, two counts of first-degree reckless endangerment and attempted first-degree intentional homicide in the deaths of Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, on the third night of protests sparked by the shooting of Jacob Blake, a Black man, by a white police officer.

Rittenhouse was also acquitted of attempted first-degree intentional homicide in the shooting that injured 28-year-old Gaige Grosskreutz.

Anthony Huber's Parents Speak Out After Rittenhouse Verdict

In many high-profile trials, criminal defense lawyers choose to have their client not take the witness stand to testify in their own defense. Having the defendant testify subjects them to a barrage of tough and difficult questions from criminal prosecutors.

Bretz, however, said the defense lawyers for Rittenhouse made the right decision by having Rittenhouse testify in his own defense last week.

"I believe putting him on the stand was the appropriate thing to do in this case," Bretz said. "We all know a defendant does not have to testify, and it should not be held against him. In this case, I felt it was important for Rittenhouse to look the jury in the eye and tell them what happened from his perspective."

That the jury was deliberating for three days left Bretz unsure how the verdict would go.

Bretz said he wondered if the jury had reached a deadlock and was unable to reach a unanimous decision as far as Rittenhouse's guilt for certain charges. If that was the case, maybe the jury was trying to reach a compromise and that's why the deliberations took as long as they did, Bretz said.

"But it appears the jury was taking their job very seriously," Bretz said. "They took the time they needed to carefully go through all the evidence and reach an appropriate verdict, consistent with the evidence and the law they were given by the presiding judge."

Joliet Patch also reached out to Will County State's Attorney Jim Glasgow for an interview on the Rittenhouse verdict, but Glasgow declined because he does not have possession of all the information in the case file, according to his office's spokesperson.

Related Patch coverage:

Photos: Kyle Rittenhouse Not Guilty In Kenosha Killings

Rittenhouse Acquitted In Fatal Kenosha Protest Shooting