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

[megs1477]

That makes sense. But she should not have let it get that far. She needs to stop arguing with him and shut it down. He loves the attention.

She is giving him so much to ensure he has every opportunity possible and no chance of overturning anything on appeal.

 

[katydid23]

I watched several attorneys comment on this and they said it was the right thing to do. It needed to be put on the record.

My attorney brother said the same. He said she has to put it on record. And he thinks she is doing the right thing to 'debate' and engage with him, giving him the chance to voice his concerns and objections.

He says that if she put him in the other courtroom swiftly every time he interrupted, he could win a retrial on appeal for not having the right to be present at his own murder trial. Allowing him the chance to make his verbal objections and put his issues on record may help preserve his conviction from appeal.

 

[katydid23]

That makes sense. But she should not have let it get that far. She needs to stop arguing with him and shut it down. He loves the attention.

I think it is good for the jury to see him when he gets scary and angry. Theyt are making their decision based upon the fact that society needs to lock him up for our safety. Seeing his angry DEATH STARES is important, imo.

 

[katydid23]

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.

Yes, that issue is concerning. But it is a ploy on his part. When he says " I don't understand" he is referring mostly to things like 'why wont you explain jurisdiction?' and 'why wont you prove you have a law degree on the record?"

He is feigning ignorance just so he can appeal in the future.

 

[katydid23]

Below is a snippet of Brooks' police interrogation video after he drove through the parade, killing 6 and injuring 60. He's obviously faking a shoulder injury. This shows what a silly man-child he really is. Talk about arrested development! ...among other things.

Just like a couple days ago, he 'demanded' a nurse because he had a bruise on his wrist and a cut so small we couldn't see it. Meanwhile he seriously injured 60 people and killed 6. He does not know how to read the room.

Besides, what is a nurse going to do about a bruise? He just wants mommy to kiss the owie.

 

[BeckyF]

I think it is good for the jury to see him when he gets scary and angry. Theyt are making their decision based upon the fact that society needs to lock him up for our safety. Seeing his angry DEATH STARES is important, imo.

He has exhibited disruptive, disrespectful and argumentative behavior since the trial started. The jury has seen a good deal of it. He will be convicted on the evidence presented. There is no need for the judge to continue to argue with this petulant child. Make her ruling and move on.

 

[turaj]

My understanding is DB is bringing his momma to the stand to validate his claim that EP gave him the photos. I don’t understand what that has to do with the price of tea in China. He is on trial for the parade massacre. He is not on trial for the argument he had at Frame park with EP. It seems like he is trying to prove he was “right” in regards to that argument, therefore he is not responsible for the parade massacre.

All MOO.

well that would be pointless...jail house phone confirms he asked his mother to send them and she agreed.

 

[Weki]

If he brings his mother to testify on Monday the first question on Cross will be “Do you know the defendant sitting to my right?” “Yes.” “How do you know him?” “He’s my son.” “What is his name?” “Darrell Brooks”

Next will be a picture of him in the red suv as he was running through the parade. “Is that your son, Darrell Brooks?” “Yes.”

 

[mister happy]

Just like a couple days ago, he 'demanded' a nurse because he had a bruise on his wrist and a cut so small we couldn't see it. Meanwhile he seriously injured 60 people and killed 6. He does not know how to read the room.

Besides, what is a nurse going to do about a bruise? He just wants mommy to kiss the owie.

Yes I remember that! Brooks is a fascinating man-child.. diabolically fascinating.

 

[BeckyF]

I go back and forth on it. I'm glad the jury got to see him look at the judge like that, especially after the last Friday witness described the way he looked at her.

Yes, same here. Some days I honestly feel very sorry for her. He is very difficult and she desperately wants to avoid a successful appeal. I don’t know what else she can do. They are so close to the end of this.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

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.

That's what I worry about, but not from seasoned criminals, from other mass killers who don't have much chance for acquittal so just want to cause havoc. Or from terrorist types who will use the opportunity for political statements.

Next time someone is representing themself, they shouldn't televise it.

 

[Gardenista]

Yes, same here. Some days I honestly feel very sorry for her. He is very difficult and she desperately wants to avoid a successful appeal. I don’t know what else she can do. They are so close to the end of this.

I would not be surprised if he is a no-show Monday and I wonder how that would be handled.

 

[fred&edna]

Not only a he screwed in court I don't think he is going to be well liked in prison. He is a registered sex offender who ran over peoples families.

RSBM

I worry that some prisoners will find his courtroom <modsnip: language> "hero material".

jmo

 

[turaj]

If he brings his mother to testify on Monday the first question on Cross will be “Do you know the defendant sitting to my right?” “Yes.” “How do you know him?” “He’s my son.” “What is his name?” “Darrell Brooks”

Next will be a picture of him in the red suv as he was running through the parade. “Is that your son, Darrell Brooks?” “Yes.”

she has cooperated with state...gave them that video of him in her backyard with vehicle prior to parade disaster. He will be making a big mistake and bet he either tries to recall some of the witnesses (note when he is finished with a witness judge asks "any more questions" and he always says "not now"...or just rests. He will take up 1/2 with more crap

 

[turaj]

in watching the motion for delay back in April by his public defenders I am not sure what is going on but of course it was denied. It seemed that those attorneys had done little discovery at that point and were either extremely overworked or just did not want anything to do with him. They were talking experts etc. and it would have been sickening to watch. They wanted until March 2023 and with a guy like this you need a speedy trial...victims spoke and just listened...so the circus we see today is probably the quickest way to get him locked up forever.

 

[Trouble1321075]

I think she is afraid of a mistrial. This defendant is is horridly disruptive and manipulative that placing a co-attorney into the mix could implode the trial. This guy is too unpredictable and he could assault the guy, or do something to make things go sideways.

This is the last day of witnesses and then it goes to closing statements and jury instructions. Bringing in another attorney at this point could backfire in so many ways. JMO

He could also claim that his attorney was not doing as he asked thereby denying the defense he wanted.

 

[mothwings]

At 8:51:40, after DB said, "How are you even a judge?" once his last witness was excused, he says:

"This must be all about the [something?] trust you want to be the beneficiary of."

Anyone know what this means?

 

[Trouble1321075]

I think the jury will find for intentional homicide. He drove right into the parade, past the barriers, and accelerated INTO a crowd of women and children.

I don't know how you can say it was intentional. He was fleeing from unfair persecution from the police after being unfairly provoked by his evil ex-girlfreind and at great personal risk to himself he bravely decided to blow the horn which alerted police to his exact location for capture, because people stubbornly resisted getting out of his way.

Let's also not forget that whoever thoughtlessly barricaded the side streets off forced him to barrel forward. That whole damn community should be on trial. The only one who should not be is the defendant.

Furthermore this court is also acting outside it's authority by charging a sovereign citizen who it does not have jurisdiction over. Even if it did the state of Wisconsin can not bring charges because the state isn't a person and he has a right to face his accuser.

[/sarcasm]

 

[BUF]

At 8:51:40, after DB said, "How are you even a judge?" once his last witness was excused, he says:



Anyone know what this means?

I felt like he was always trying to insinuate that people were in cahoots with each other, insinuating that LE changed police reports, prosecutors were hiding things, and asking EVERYONE if they had a claim insinuating financial gain. I think this last time he just brought the judge into that mix. Ridiculous

 

[Thundar]

At 8:51:40, after DB said, "How are you even a judge?" once his last witness was excused, he says:



Anyone know what this means?

I about spit when he said this to the judge…..this refers to the judges personal affairs, I am sure it’s listed somewhere on the internet…she did not address this but she maybe should have, because it was not a threat but it was about the judges personal life. I wonder how that’s handled in other cases when a defendant brings something up about a personal matter concerning the judge or the prosecutors? Something that has absolutely nothing to do with this case or any other case in the court……