Well imho thatidiotposter should be DarrELL's cellmate for a week or two or three.
jmho ymmv lrr
Maybe it's his coHorse
Well imho thatidiotposter should be DarrELL's cellmate for a week or two or three.
jmho ymmv lrr
Hmmmm. The edit in the post that it is a prank isn’t going to save the OPLook at the post in the story. It is edited and says it was a prank. Somebody must have gotten skeered.
Intent. My guessi am trying to figure the need to see that again as well.
now they want two more videos...it just seemed that these were shown so many times in all speeds during the trial..wow if that did not convince them not sure what would. Wish I knew why they need to view more?i am trying to figure the need to see that again as well.
certainly interesting it came in just as closings were coming and he was doing all possible to delay.Hahahhahaha as soon as judge announced it was being investigated it was edited! The way DB said quickly he had nothing to do with it makes me think he did! I wouldn’t be surprised at all if he set this up!
I think they are showing they are putting serious deliberation into reaching their decision. (even if they have already decided upon a verdict.) i.e. no rush to judgement...now they want two more videos...it just seemed that these were shown so many times in all speeds during the trial..wow if that did not convince them not sure what would. Wish I knew why they need to view more?
I wonder if he has a sicko fan club ?certainly interesting it came in just as closings were coming and he was doing all possible to delay.
Jury just came back in, think the judge is dismissing them
I’m sorry, but IMO he is not intelligent. He basically admitted to causing the ‘events’ that occurred that day during his closing arguments but it was not intentional. That is his defense; that he is not a murderer. He really, in the end, put on no defense. Anyone in his position could get in front of a jury and boo hoo thru a closing argument. He sounds pathetic, not intelligent, IMO.1.) People who blow their horns are not intending to hit anyone, they are trying to warn people.
But, the brakes worked.
2.) Their was a recall for this car, a manufacturing defect that caused the vehicle to surge forward and not stoppable.
Why not make this claim on 11/21/21? Why not call a lawyer about suing Ford? Why not a scintilla of evidence to suggest this car had that defect and, in fact, the only expert to testify said the throttle was fine, as were the brakes.
3.) Panic attack
Never mentioned before.
Mr. Brooks never said "I" or "me", but referred to himself as "the defendant". He has asked himself many questions about why this happened, but never questioned that it was intentional because he knows it wasn't.
Honestly, his closing was a great, well-delivered and researched statement. He repeated things from famous trial lawyers' closings. It was a great job. It also revealed how intelligent he is.
He is complaining about having to be back in court @8:30 am tomorrow.
He is complaining about having to be back in court @8:30 am tomorrow.