It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.
We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.
What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.
The timing makes it fairly self evident.
Makes
what self evident? That it's a trial tactic? I disagree.
Previously, Rittenhouse expressed strong admiration for abs aspirations to become a police officer. That’s a pretty big career switch with interesting timing.
When I was 17, I was seriously deciding between information technology, psychology, and law degrees. I sought advice from people I knew who were already in one of those courses. One of the responses I got was "those three things are very different". True though that was, I was interested in all three.
In any case, so what? Let's say he started an online course with the sole purpose of garnering jury sympathy. I would do the same if I were innocent and thought it would help.
