This was NEVER truly about the kid.
The judge laid that out early, it was about sending a message. It was about what is the order of things. From those being shot can't be labelled victims, but those on the streets can be 'rioters'. The judges reactions solely to the prosecutors. The judge deciding on what charges can be applied,
especially the dropped weapon charge. His behavior with his phone, that you know he would have railed on the prosecutors doing the same thing. Asian food. Having the court applaud a witness on Veteran's day for the defense, that was established earlier in the trial as a veteran. The judge's railing on the use of camera's in court, solely because his behavior became a focal point earning criticism Acting on the allegations of what MSNBC supposedly did, but he admittedly didn't know for sure & the police hadn't concluded yet. Watching the groups that championed & embraced the kid for actions they'd want any other kid shot on sight.
The kid became a side thought at one point & was nothing more than the title of a show to remind us how things work. There is an order to things, and the law ( in this judge's case ) would like to remind you how things REALLY work.
That was some literal 'thumb on scale' behavior on display, but a helpful reminder of how justice & the courts work for SOME.