I also wish someone would explain to him it is not necessary to interrupt objections from the state by saying "grounds" every single time. It is redundant, pointless and irritating.
I also would like if the judge would advise him that his objection to being called his legal name has already been recorded and does not warrant him stating the objection repeatedly ad nauseam.
His ignorance is astounding. What makes this such a difficult trial to watch, besides the obvious, is that the defendant is clueless as to juat how ignorant he is.
I am curious, does anyone know if this judge is not allowing side bars to curtail pointless arguments at the stand, or is it just her style to not have them?