The judge didn't merely ask whether any such thing was used. He continuously pressed his own uninformed opinion over the evidence rather than trying to educate himself on the matter, especially given "expert" testimony

https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/12/22778801/kyle-rittenhous...

That's throwing his own incorrect mistrust of the technology into things. It wasn't based on precedent or founded by rational examples.

He also didn't provide alternate means for video playback that he would trust. It's reductionist.

At the very least, a competent prosecution should have then pulled up content in VLC and said "the source code for zooming is here and verifiable"