John Pierce and the Rittenhouse Defence: Why He Withdrew in 2020

First published December 9, 2020.

John Pierce, a California lawyer who became the public face of Kyle Rittenhouse's defence in 2020, withdrew from the criminal case on 3 December 2020. He did so on the same day that Kenosha County prosecutors asked the court to keep him off the case, arguing that his money troubles and his role in fundraising for the defence created a risk of "self-dealing and fraud". Pierce said he would stay on as Rittenhouse's civil lawyer and fundraiser, while Wisconsin defence attorney Mark Richards took over the criminal trial.

Almost a year later, in November 2021, a jury acquitted Rittenhouse of all charges that went to trial. This article explains what the 2020 dispute over Pierce was about, which claims were documented and which remained allegations, and how the case ended.

Background: the Kenosha shootings

On 25 August 2020, during unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, that followed the police shooting of Jacob Blake, 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse shot three men with an AR-15-style rifle. Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, were killed. Gaige Grosskreutz, 26, was wounded in the arm. Rittenhouse lived in Antioch, Illinois, a short drive from Kenosha (some early reports wrongly said he came from Michigan, and even placed Kenosha in "Washington").

The rifle had been bought by a friend, Dominick Black, because Rittenhouse was too young to buy one himself. Prosecutors charged Rittenhouse with homicide, attempted homicide and reckless endangerment, plus a count of possessing a dangerous weapon as a minor and a curfew violation. His supporters described him as a volunteer protecting property; his critics saw an armed teenager who had no business at the protests. From the start, the defence argued that he fired in self-defence.

Who is John Pierce?

Pierce was the co-founder of the Los Angeles firm Pierce Bainbridge, which grew quickly and then collapsed amid debt and litigation. In late August 2020 he and Atlanta lawyer Lin Wood took on Rittenhouse's defence and promoted it heavily online and on television. Pierce called the prosecution political and predicted an acquittal.

The two lawyers were linked to the #FightBack Foundation, a Texas organisation that raised money for Rittenhouse. In November 2020 that money paid his $2 million bail, and he was released from custody. Pierce had left the foundation's board in September but kept urging his Twitter followers to donate. Wood, for his part, said the foundation would shift its focus to the 2020 presidential election, and told donors to send future Rittenhouse contributions to Pierce.

The prosecution's filing against Pierce

On 3 December 2020, Kenosha County District Attorney's office prosecutor Thomas Binger filed a motion asking the judge to stop Pierce from representing Rittenhouse in the criminal case. The main points, as reported by ABC News, were:

• Public statements. Pierce's frequent media comments, the filing argued, could prejudice the case and potential jurors.
• Personal finances. The motion pointed to the collapse of Pierce's firm "under a cloud of debt" and to lawsuits claiming he had defaulted on loans. It cited a 2019 family court filing in which he listed no income and about $1.05 million in federal and state tax debts, plus a $90,000 bank loan and a $27,000 personal debt. Taken together, those figures come to roughly the $1.2 million that was widely reported.
• Fundraising. Prosecutors argued that Pierce's ties to the donations raised "significant ethical concerns" and that the arrangement offered ample opportunity for self-dealing and fraud.

It is important to read this for what it was: a prosecutor's legal argument in an adversarial case. It did not accuse Pierce of having stolen any money, and no court found that he misused donations.

Prosecutors in Wisconsin are trying to block two California attorneys from defending Kyle Rittenhouse, alleging in a court filing that one lawyer’s involvement with a fundraising effort “provides ample opportunity for self-dealing and fraud.” https://t.co/weqsJtecWv

— Chicago Tribune (@chicagotribune) December 3, 2020

Pierce's withdrawal and new role

Pierce filed his motion to withdraw that evening, saying the legal team had been restructured and that he would act for Rittenhouse only as civil counsel. On Twitter he announced he was taking over all civil matters, including future defamation claims, and would run fundraising for defence costs, with Mark Richards continuing in Wisconsin.

So that it does not take Kyle’s supporters by surprise, effective immediately I am taking over all civil matters for Kyle including his future defamation claims. I will also be orchestrating all fundraising for defense costs. The terrific Mark Richards will proceed in Wisconsin.

— John Pierce (@CaliKidJMP) December 3, 2020

Pierce did not directly answer the prosecutor's allegations in his comments to ABC News. On Newsmax he described the case as possibly the most important self-defence case in American history and said millions more dollars would be needed.

Mark Richards, an experienced Wisconsin criminal defence lawyer, led the trial team from then on, and the case moved out of the television studios and back into the courtroom.

The witness-intimidation allegation

In November 2020, Mother Jones published an account from a woman who had worked as a volunteer medic at the Kenosha protests and said she saw the shootings. Using a pseudonym, she said that two men who would not identify themselves came to her former apartment building asking about her, then phoned relatives saying they worked for the firm representing Rittenhouse and wanted to depose her.

She said she asked Pierce to make them stop, and that the next day she received a silent call from his number. She filed a complaint with the State Bar of California. Pierce and his firm did not respond to the magazine's questions.

These were allegations. Investigators routinely seek out witnesses in criminal cases, and contacting a witness is not wrongdoing in itself. The question raised by the complaint was whether the manner of contact crossed into intimidation, which was never decided in court as part of the Rittenhouse case.

How the case ended

The trial ran from 1 to 19 November 2021 before Judge Bruce Schroeder. Before the verdict, the judge dismissed the curfew charge for lack of evidence and threw out the weapon-possession count after the defence showed that Wisconsin's law on minors and firearms, as written, applied to short-barrelled rifles and Rittenhouse's rifle did not fall into that category. The jury then found Rittenhouse not guilty on every remaining count. Under Wisconsin law, once self-defence is raised, prosecutors must disprove it beyond reasonable doubt, and the jury concluded they had not.

The verdict did not end the public argument. Supporters saw vindication; the families of Rosenbaum and Huber, and many others, saw a tragedy that should never have happened. Both reactions can be understood without rewriting what the jury decided.

What this episode teaches about high-profile defence funds

• Separate the lawyer from the fund. Ethics rules in most US states expect lawyers to keep client money and their own finances strictly apart. When the person raising money is also the person billing for it, independent oversight matters.
• Check who controls donations. Before giving to any legal defence campaign, look for a registered organisation, published accounts and a clear statement of what the money pays for.
• Treat court filings as claims. A motion from either side tells you what one party argues, not what a judge has found.
• Follow the case to its end. Early coverage of this story called Rittenhouse a killer before any trial; the legal outcome was an acquittal, and accurate reporting has to reflect that.

Sources: ABC News via ABC7: Controversial attorney withdraws from Kyle Rittenhouse criminal case (5 December 2020); Mother Jones: witness account about John Pierce's team (November 2020); Wikipedia: Kenosha unrest shooting; Chicago Tribune and John Pierce posts on Twitter (embedded above).