All the testimony so far has been from prosecution witnesses and it's been nothing but beneficial for Rittenhouse. They've given him good reason for being there, good accounts of his behaviour, credible proof of threats that would have motivated him, evidence of police accepting his presence and role there among dozens of others doing the same thing as him, and that's on top of all the well known footage which clearly shows him defending himself (again - introduced by the prosecution)... The one thing the prosecution supposedly has is evidence of Rittenhouse chasing Rosenbaum, from a tape that shows nothing of the sort, from an FBI guy in closed testimony who supposedly deleted some other critical evidence.

I'm not even sure what the defence is supposed to be arguing against, since there's been basically no case presented. It's like the US election in how flagrant it is. Are they even trying to conceal the gaslighting? It's barely even gaslighting, it's more like 'you know you have to find this kid guilty; why else would we all be doing this?'