Are you retarded? First off, the motion was to dismiss WITH prejudice. If you do not bring it, you can not move for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict if you do lose. And if you ARE confident you're going to win a case like that, you're a goddamn swaggering idiot. So you're suggesting Kyle's attorneys should have just ASSUMED he'd win and waive the chance to get rid of the charges even if there was an unfavorable verdict?
A motion to dismiss is filed in virtually every criminal case. It's absolutely fucking ignorant to claim that, in particular, was somehow a mistake.
Other motions were for mistrial, and again, it would have been malpractice not to file them. You had a corrupt prosecutor and a weak judge who allowed all kinds of fuckery. It would be better to roll the dice on another prosecutor and judge than have Rittenhouse in prison getting shanked for a few years while appeals went on. As for choices to object, that's a strategic decision. If you don't object enough, you could waive important issues. If you object to every single goddamn thing, you look like a bunch of desperate bitches, and again, this can influence the jury.
The fact that Barnes's dickriders agreed with him shouldn't be surprising. The fact there were also legitimate criticisms doesn't really make Barnes's sour grapes any more appropriate and, again, HE HAD AN ETHICAL OBLIGATION TO A FORMER CLIENT. Nobody else did.