Kyle Rittenhouse's testimony was likely 'quite significant' for the jury, says legal analyst

Kyle Rittenhouse, who was charged with homicide after fatally shooting two individuals and wounding a third during last year's racial justice protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was, on Friday, found not guilty on all counts, bringing an end to a long and emotional trial that captivated the nation.

As for his acquittal, ABC News contributor and legal analyst Channa Lloyd believes Rittenhouse's emotional testimony may have made all the difference for the jury deciding his fate.

"I think for these jurors, it was quite signifcant," Lloyd said of Rittenhouse's time on the stand. "What they wanted to see was why he felt like he needed to be in this posture of self defense. And I think that's what they got from him."

The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.

Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.

Sign up

"I think these jurors heard his story and felt like he was in a mode where he had to defend himself, that he had no other choice," Lloyd added. "That was what he conveyed on the stand through his testimony and I think that is what the jurors did identify with."

"In these self defense cases," she concluded, "they want to hear it through the eyes of the person that was there because that is our legal standard."