GUILTY WI - Darrell Brooks Rams Car Into Holiday Parade Crowd - 6 dead/61 Injured - Waukesha #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
shotgun09 said:
I watched the entire replay of yesterdays "trial" last night before going to sleep. ( Not recommended by the way)

Towards the end, Brooks was in the other courtroom ranting. He is desperately trying to keep this trial from the inevitable, keeping his big monster toes in the way of the door being shut. And, he's loosing the battle.

He actually said.." It's four against one!", (while internally screaming for Momma!!)

If Momma does indeed show up in court on Monday, on behalf of and in defense of her son, I expect a day like yesterday. I can see DB attempting to slay the dragon that he thinks is EP through Mommas testimony. The state and the judge will not allow that, and the tantrums will continue. Delay the end at all cost.
Then the decision of whether he takes the stand....?????
Dude will not agree to either.....There will be no decision given freely by DB, IMO.

Hopefully, Judge Jen is getting some rest this weekend. Along with some strong legal advice on the way to proceed moving forward. This isn't over. And, Momma warned us all.
Click to expand...

Brooks is a brat. He’s 40 year old brat. We are watching a 40 year old man who has been living like a toddler his whole life having tantrums because he’s not being allowed to do exactly what he wants.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
StarryStarryNight said:
Brooks is a brat. He’s 40 year old brat. We are watching a 40 year old man who has been living like a toddler his whole life having tantrums because he’s not being allowed to do exactly what he wants.
Click to expand...

Oh, but he IS being allowed! This has been shown daily...over and over. Who is really in control of the courtroom, right now?

Welcome to the DB show.

IMO, The People of WI, and Waukesha specifically ought to be fully aware of this sickening and victim harrassing fiasco, and judge (and vote) accordingly to change things. IMO, this abhorrent show will not stop in Waukesha County. Because of the notoriety NOW of this case, I expect more DB - like behaviors from many seasoned criminals, across this country. Buckle up Court rooms!! And, if you...The people... want to change things, you know what you need to do!
 
Mr. Brooks has no defense. He has not presented a scintilla of reasonable doubt. The jurors are not ignorant of this fact.

Trying cases is hard even when one is a trained trial lawyer. Mr. Brooks thought it was easy because trial lawyers make it look so being educated and trained to run the trial in a smooth and orderly fashion. He could not have been more wrong.

Mr. Brooks does not understand that the judge can not give him trial advice, legal advice or trial strategy advice. It is prohibited as it would put her in an adversarial role and her position is to be neutral.

Subject matter jurisdiction is settled, it is lawful law.

There is no method by which the judge can force counsel upon him. So, let that idea go.

Did he decide to not call the remainder of his witnesses? Kinda confused as he had 12-13 and has only called 3, yet I am reading that jury instructions and closing arguments are scheduled for Monday and Tuesday.
 
TeaTime said:
Mr. Brooks has no defense. He has not presented a scintilla of reasonable doubt. The jurors are not ignorant of this fact.

Trying cases is hard even when one is a trained trial lawyer. Mr. Brooks thought it was easy because trial lawyers make it look so being educated and trained to run the trial in a smooth and orderly fashion. He could not have been more wrong.

Mr. Brooks does not understand that the judge can not give him trial advice, legal advice or trial strategy advice. It is prohibited as it would put her in an adversarial role and her position is to be neutral.

Subject matter jurisdiction is settled, it is lawful law.

There is no method by which the judge can force counsel upon him. So, let that idea go.

Did he decide to not call the remainder of his witnesses? Kinda confused as he had 12-13 and has only called 3, yet I am reading that jury instructions and closing arguments are scheduled for Monday and Tuesday.
Click to expand...

He called all 12 of his witnesses. The 13th was the State of WI which was denied.
 
Chelly said:
Thanks, wasn't aware his mother was just added yesterday. So, I guess she received a subpoena and likely has no choice about testifying.
Click to expand...

Not sure. The prosecution told the judge and Brooks that if he wanted to call her that he was responsible for serving her a subpoena. Then Brooks had another hissy fit and said she would be there no matter what - that if he told her to be there, she would be there period.
 
Gardenista said:
Not sure. The prosecution told the judge and Brooks that if he wanted to call her that he was responsible for serving her a subpoena. Then Brooks had another hissy fit and said she would be there no matter what - that if he told her to be there, she would be there period.
Click to expand...

Yes. That’s what I remember.
 
Descriptions of his witness‘ testimony also in this article…

Darrell Brooks trial: Defendant calls 9 witnesses, outbursts continue

The judge asked if Brooks filled out a subpoena for his mother, Dawn Woods, to testify.

"If I want her to be here, she's going to be here," he said. "All I gotta say is ‘come.' She's gonna come, that simple."
……
The judge said the court got through all the witnesses that were subpoenaed to testify for Brooks' defense. Dorow said Brooks gave permission to call his mother as a witness, but she had not been subpoenaed.

The only other witnesses Dorow said she could identify for testimony would be Brooks himself. She said she wasn't looking for an answer Friday, but that he could "contemplate over the weekend." He has the right to testify, the judge explained, and the state has the right to question him.

"It is his decision and his decision alone on whether to testify," Dorow said.

If Brooks does not answer whether he would like to testify, the judge said, it will be interpreted by the court as a "no" – meaning he chose not to testify – given "how the trial has progressed."
 
I think he may be relying on his mother to be there by choice and I am not so sure that will happen. She has been watching this trial. She would be in a position of having to answer the question "did you send those photos to your son of that baby?" and I assume she would have to answer yes which then shows her son in one of many lies. That whole deal really told the jury much about the person on trial. DB should know enough to know his phone calls are recorded.
 
The following was from court yesterday, during one of many intense disruptions from DB. Judge Jen was attempting to 'put on the record' what had just happened in court. ( We all saw and heard it)

Her words...

"I need to take a break," this man right now is having a stare-down with me. It's very disrespectful, he pounded his fist, frankly, it makes me scared and we're taking a break."
 
I am watching a pretrial hearing where he is going on about not understanding. He was of course put in the next courtroom. It was clear from the beginning his game plan here..based on that early behavior I think in order to proceed he should have been required to have counsel. This is not going to end up costing the State of Wi probably three times what it would have and give him more potential appeal issues. The "I don't understand" for the record is non stop all thru the trial so far.
 
Gardenista said:
Not sure. The prosecution told the judge and Brooks that if he wanted to call her that he was responsible for serving her a subpoena. Then Brooks had another hissy fit and said she would be there no matter what - that if he told her to be there, she would be there period.
Click to expand...
Well, I guess we know who is in charge and he is despicable
 
To me, this case has really hit close to home living in Wisconsin my whole life.

Yesterday, I couldn't stop watching this trial as I saw a demon unleashed. While some may consider the glare he had when the judge called him out the most frightening, I thought the stares at the jury and then judge right before his last witness was released were, to me, the most harrowing and nightmarish.
6v1ka0.png

He was starring at the jury in this one correct? What was he trying to do?
Also, the camera did miss Brooks throwing his fists downs but it also sounds like DB exhaled a breath of hell fire, right? Anyone hear that?

SO creepy. Those poor victims. He knows what coming. And he knows who is sentencing him. I honestly have never seen anything like DB in all my years working in corrections and recidivism programs and I would venture to guess he is a mutation of the human race towards evil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 112 more.
Total: 1,862 (members: 113, guests: 1,749)

Online statistics

Members online
113
Guests online
1,749
Total visitors
1,862
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,053
Messages
18,103,129
Members
230,976
Latest member
jessiw1234
Back
Top