Kyle Rittenhouse prosecutors HELD BACK high-def drone footage of Kenosha shootings from defense and gave them low quality video - sparking them to file mistrial motion that could see teen walk free

• Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger initially shared low quality drone footage from the night of the shooting with the defense
• The defense claims Binger only shared the high-definition footage after evidence had closed on Saturday
• According to a motion filed today by the defense, 'The problem is the prosecution gave the defense a compressed version of the video'
• 'What that means is the video provided to the defense was not as clear as the video kept by the state,' the motion states
• Lawyers for Rittenhouse filed their motion for mistrial with prejudice based on this and several other grounds

Prosecutors in the Kenosha shooter trial withheld evidence from the defense that was 'at the center of their case,' only sharing the high-definition drone video footage on which they have hung their prosecution after the trial had concluded, DailyMail.com can reveal.

Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger played the enhanced drone footage to the jury during his closing statements and claimed that it showed Rittenhouse 'pointing his gun' at people – an assertion that opened the door to the state claiming Rittenhouse provoked the violence of the night of August 25, 2020.

Now, in the motion obtained by DailyMail.com, Rittenhouse's defense insist that the state only shared it with the defense after evidence had closed on Saturday November 13.

According to the motion, 'On November 5, 2021, the fifth day of trial on this case, the prosecution turned over to the defense footage of a drone video which captured some of the incident from August 25, 2020.

'The problem is the prosecution gave the defense a compressed version of the video. What that means is the video provided to the defense was not as clear as the video kept by the state.'

The motion goes onto explain that the file size of the defense video is just 3.6MB while the prosecution's is 11.2MB.

The motion states that this larger file was not provided to the defense 'until after the trial concluded'

It reads, 'During the jury instructions conference, the defense played their version of the video for the court to review. The state indicated their version was much clearer and had their tech person come into court to have the court review their clearer video. The video is the same, the resolution of that video, however, was not.'

In fact, the state did not provide the larger file until two days before closing arguments and after the evidence had been...

Read More HERE