Will Kyle Rittenhouse testify? Legal experts spell out the risky decision

Legal experts say it is obviously risky for Kyle Rittenhouse to give evidence and testify before the court as a key stretch in the trial begins.

When George Zimmerman faced life in prison for killing Trayvon Martin, his lawyers chose not to have him testify, a decision some legal experts say contributed to his acquittal in 2013 in the last highly divisive civilian self-defense trial.

Kyle Rittenhouse, the teenager on trial for killing two protesters and wounding a third in Wisconsin last year, appears set to try a different tack. His lawyer, Mark Richards, said in court last week that he would take the stand in his own defense.

Legal experts say it is obviously risky for Rittenhouse to give evidence. For starters, it would open him up to wide-ranging cross-examination about his past statements and actions.

“The annals of criminal law are full of cases where defendants insisted on taking the stand and paid the price,” Daniel Medwed, a professor of criminal law at Northeastern University.

For example, California woman Jodi Arias was convicted in 2013 of murdering her ex-boyfriend and sentenced to life without parole, after testifying that she had done so in self-defense.

The potential upside for Rittenhouse is that jurors would be able to hear in his own words why he believed he had to shoot for his own safety.

Rittenhouse, 18, is charged with reckless and intentional homicides in the killing of Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, and attempted homicide for wounding Gaige Grosskreutz, now 27, with a bullet to the arm.

Like Zimmerman, Rittenhouse is a divisive figure. He is a hero to some conservatives who believe in unfettered gun rights and see the shootings as justified, while many on the political left have labeled him a vigilante killer.