Week 3 recap, judge threatens to end defense

WAUKESHA, Wis. – Darrell Brooks might name his mom to the stand and testify himself Monday, Oct. 24 earlier than jury directions start within the Waukesha Christmas parade trial. This, after a surprising finish to the third week of the trial, which noticed the defendant give the decide a “stare down” that she mentioned scared her to the purpose the place she needed to name for a break within the proceedings.

In the course of the third week of the trial, the state rested its case after calling 57 witnesses over 11 days. Earlier than resting, the prosecution targeted on Brooks’ arrest the evening of the parade assault and Brooks’ subsequent interviews with detectives. The jury was additionally taken out of the courtroom to view the crimson SUV.

Brooks then delivered his deferred opening assertion, crying as he advised the jury he was talking “from the center.” Brooks then started to name protection witnesses, representing himself.

On Monday morning, the primary day of the third week of the trial, prosecutors learn Brooks a pretrial provide which they mentioned was given to Brooks’ former attorneys in July 2021 and January 2022. Brooks fired his legal professional days earlier than the beginning of the trial. Brooks mentioned he by no means obtained this pretrial provide. The state famous it might contain Brooks pleading responsible to 67 of the costs within the case. He would then obtain six life sentences for the six murder fees filed towards him and unspecified jail on the opposite counts.

Brooks continued his subject material jurisdiction arguments Monday, as he has daily through the trial. It pertains to Brooks’ “sovereign citizen” arguments. The Southern Poverty Legislation Heart says “sovereign residents imagine they aren’t beneath the jurisdiction of the federal authorities and think about themselves exempt from U.S. legislation.” Decide Jennifer Dorow referred to a written ruling issued on this matter Friday, Oct. 14.

TESTIMONY: Sean Backler, Waukesha home-owner

The primary witness for the prosecution Monday was Sean Backler, who accused Brooks of “trespassing” in his yard the day of the Waukesha Christmas Parade. He recognized Brooks in courtroom because the individual he noticed in his yard that day. He mentioned one thing appeared “off” about Brooks.

“He was sporting a T-shirt. No footwear. Sweating. His eyes had been large. He was simply appearing — when he got here out from the storage, he requested if I might name him an Uber,” Backler mentioned.

Backler mentioned he did not name an Uber, telling Brooks to depart.

On cross, Backler mentioned he referred to as the non-emergency line to report this encounter.

“I mentioned the person was both black, combined or Latino,” mentioned Backler.

Backler added, “I used to be optimistic it was you.”

“Who’s you?” Brooks requested.

“You. I’m you,” mentioned Backler.

Backler mentioned the subsequent morning, he bought the police report and mugshot.

“I mentioned, ‘That’s the man,'” mentioned Backler. “You had been the man in my yard. I used to be curious in the event you had been the individual and the one who did the atrocities on the parade.”

TESTIMONY: Domanic Caproon, Waukesha home-owner

Domanic Caproon was then referred to as to the stand by the state and mentioned rooks got here up his driveway, lifted his shirt and mentioned he didn’t have any weapons and wanted a cellphone to name an Uber. Caproon acknowledged he handed him a cellphone.

Caproon positively recognized Brooks as the person he met in his driveway. He testified he remembered a tattoo above Brooks’ eye.

“He wasn’t sporting a jacket or footwear,” mentioned Caproon. “He was sporting blue denims and a crimson T-shirt.”

Caproon later indicated he supplied police along with his cellphone so investigators might see who Brooks referred to as on that date.

“He referred to as someone, which, on the time, I believed was Uber,” mentioned Caproon. “A girl referred to as me. I requested if she was an Uber.  She mentioned, ‘Is she an Uber?’”

He mentioned Brooks finally left.

TESTIMONY: Erin Cordes, Waukesha home-owner

Erin Cordes testified for the state subsequent on Monday, telling the courtroom she was close to the tip of the parade route when she noticed an officer fireplace “three pictures on the car.”

“Our youngsters had been in the midst of the highway selecting up sweet at the moment,” mentioned Cordes.

She mentioned they parked on Elizabeth Road close to Aries Industries. That is the place she and her household bumped into Darrell Books when he got here out of the bushes. She positively recognized Brooks in courtroom after he eliminated his masks.

“It was a windy, chilly evening,” mentioned Cordes. “He was shivering, had a crimson shirt on and no footwear.”

Cordes mentioned he requested for a cellphone, telling Cordes and her husband, “I’m not going to harm you. I simply want to make use of your cellphone.”

Cordes acknowledged Brooks seemed to be calling his mom to name him an Uber.

“There was a way of urgency, and he wanted it now,” Cordes mentioned.

Cordes additionally testified Brooks was chilly and requested her and her husband the place there was a spot he might heat up.

Video was proven of Brooks strolling as much as the doorways of Aires Industries earlier than turning away.

On cross, Cordes advised Brooks she could not see into the SUV and did not know if any of the bullets fired by the officer hit it.

TESTIMONY: Anthony Winters, Lyft driver

Anthony Winters, a Lyft driver, testified subsequent for the state. Winters testified he was referred to as for a journey Aires Industries.

“The fare got here in from Daybreak,” mentioned Winters. Daybreak is Brooks’ mom’s first title. “I used to be advised I used to be on the lookout for a Black man with dreadlocks.”

When Winters arrived on the pickup location, he mentioned the parking zone was empty. There was nobody there.

“I bought out of the automobile, knocked on the door, despatched a message saying there was nobody round,” Winters testified.

Winters mentioned he waited greater than seven minutes. No one confirmed up, and he then canceled the journey.

TESTIMONY: Daniel Rider, Ring digicam captured Brooks at his doorstep

The state then referred to as Daniel Rider, who gave Ring digicam footage to legislation enforcement and the media exhibiting Brooks at his entrance door after the parade assault.

“There was a person who rang my Ring doorbell, mentioned he was homeless and chilly and wanted my cellphone,” Rider mentioned, noting the person was sporting a T-shirt and no footwear.

Rider mentioned he invited the person in, made him and sandwich and supplied him a coat and a cellphone. He mentioned Brooks seemed to be on the cellphone along with his mom.

He mentioned after Brooks left, he got here again in as a result of he forgot his ID.

“The suspect got here again a minute later, asking to return again inside and that he left his ID. I went again in to search for it however didn’t let him again inside. There was nothing left in my home,” mentioned Rider.

On cross, Brooks requested Rider about the truth that the footage was on social media.

“I launched it,” mentioned Rider. “The information needed the footage. I believed this was good footage for this neighborhood to see the suspect in cuffs, so I launched it.”

He mentioned he was paid for the footage.

“We had been getting bombarded with media requests, and we labored with an agent and I don’t know what we bought on the again finish,” he mentioned.

TESTIMONY: Rebecca Carpenter, Massive Bend police officer, physique digicam footage of Brook’s arrest

The courtroom then noticed physique digicam video of Brooks’ arrest the evening of Nov. 21, 2021, when Massive Bend Police Officer Rebecca Carpenter was referred to as to testify.

Carpenter mentioned she to Elizabeth Road after listening to there was a person going door-to-door asking for individuals’s telephones to name an Uber. She mentioned she and different officers began on the lookout for this individual.

Officer Carpenter advised the courtroom that in her encounter with Brooks on Elizabeth Road, he recognized himself as “Darrell Brooks.” She first noticed him on Daniel Rider’s porch, sporting a T-shirt and no footwear.

“I used to be coming from the parade route. I’ve a pal over there. Did I do one thing?” Brooks requested Carpenter within the physique digicam video.

Within the physique digicam video, Brooks is heard asking Carpenter, ‘Can I please simply sit up?” He advised a second officer his title was “Darrell Brooks.” Carpenter requested, “The place are your footwear?” Brooks mentioned his flip-flops had been in Rider’s home. No footwear had been inside.

Carpenter mentioned she took an ID, a bank card and a automobile key from Brooks. Carpenter mentioned she discovered a sandwich in Brooks’ pocket. Rider made Brooks a sandwich after knocking on his door, telling Rider he was homeless.

No weapons had been discovered throughout a search of Brooks, who was taken to a squad automobile as a result of he “was not dressed for the climate.”

Carpenter testified Brooks was sporting “jogging pants.” On cross, Brooks questioned Carpenter about whether or not the pants the suspect was sporting within the physique digicam video had been actually blue denims.

He additionally requested concerning the police report.

“Do you recall writing the topic was being detained for investigative functions…” requested Brooks.

“On the time, I used to be not absolutely conscious of the circumstances,” mentioned Carpenter.

She mentioned she “knew individuals had been harm” and she or he knew pictures had been fired, however she did not know the “magnitude.”

“Simply that one thing violent had occurred,” she mentioned.

Brooks requested if she gave him a purpose as to why he was being detained. She mentioned he was knowledgeable he was being detained for investigative functions — “a solution that is acceptable for the circumstances.”

“I didn’t have a number of data to offer you, sir,” mentioned Carpenter.

“You retain saying ‘you,'” mentioned Brooks. “Who’s the ‘you’ that you simply preserve referring to?”

“You, Darrell Brooks. The defendant.  Seated on the protection desk,” mentioned Carpenter.

On re-direct, prosecutors requested whether or not Brooks was thrown to the bottom throughout his arrest. A police officer later testified Brooks was taken to the hospital complaining of accidents after his arrest.

“We didn’t,” mentioned Carpenter.

TESTIMONY: Garrett Luling, Waukesha police officer, responded to Brooks’ detention

Garrett Luling testified he responded to Elizabeth Road the place Brooks was arrested. He recognized the topic being detained as “Darrell Brooks.” He recognized “Darrell Brooks” because the defendant.

He mentioned he didn’t see Brooks slammed to the bottom or any use of drive towards Brooks.

Luling testified he searched Brooks earlier than he was positioned right into a squad and located a “black Ford key.”

Luling mentioned Brooks questioned why he was being detained. He mentioned he advised Brooks he was being detained as a result of he matched the outline from an incident within the downtown space. He did not point out the parade.

On cross, Brooks requested Luling whether or not Officer Moss mentioned a witness indicated they noticed a number of suspects exit the car. Luling mentioned two officers heard there could have been multiple suspect who ran from the car.

Brooks requested Luling what the individual being detained was sporting. He acknowledged a crimson T-shirt and blue denims. Brooks requested in the event that they had been jogging pants. Luling confirmed they had been blue denims.

The defendant requested why the individual was being detained.

“You had been being detained for being concerned in a crash within the downtown space,” mentioned Luling.

Brooks requested Luling, “The place is the footage of you discovering the important thing?” to the Ford SUV. Luling mentioned he was not sporting a physique digicam when he responded on Elizabeth Road.

TESTIMONY: Draelon Leija, Waukesha police officer, drove Brooks to Muskego PD

Waukesha Police Officer Draelon Leija testified about his transporting Brooks to the Muskego Police Division from Waukesha Memorial Hospital, the place he was taken for therapy of accidents he claimed to have sustained throughout his arrest on Elizabeth Road.

He mentioned Waukesha PD had no holding cells and Muskego was prepared to carry Brooks on mutual support.

As they drove, Leija mentioned Brooks, noticing the police presence because of the parade response, mentioned, “Rattling, it seems to be like they’re coping with one thing heavy.”

Leija mentioned he watched Brooks in a single day.

TESTIMONY: Detective Jay Carpenter, Waukesha Police Division, interviewed Brooks

Subsequent up for the state was Waukesha Police Detective Jay Carpenter, who was really marching within the parade with the Honor Guard unit. He then responded to the scene after the crimson SUV went by means of. He described how the incident developed into two completely different types referred to as for ambulances to are likely to the wounded whereas dispatchers additionally discovered somebody was loitering round 500 Elizabeth that some believed could have been a suspect.

“The descriptions… had been comparable, practically equivalent to the descriptions I used to be listening to for the motive force within the parade incident,” mentioned Carpenter.

He mentioned he heard officers from a separate jurisdiction had are available in contact with the suspect and that he was in custody, recognized as Darrell Brooks.

“Data that I heard over police radio was an African American male, blue denims and a crimson T-shirt,” mentioned Carpenter.

He mentioned when he responded to the scene on Elizabeth Road, Brooks was already in custody and handcuffed. Carpenter mentioned Brooks was positioned within the rear of a Waukesha police automobile, taken into custody for loitering and suspected as the motive force within the parade incident.

He was requested if he had any details about the car used when coming in touch with the suspect.

“Sure, a crimson SUV that was really a crimson Ford Escape,” mentioned Carpenter. “The car was parked over on Maple Avenue, which is about 2.5-3 blocks west of Elizabeth Road the place Mr. Brooks was situated and brought into custody.”

He mentioned he spoke with Brooks at a substation on Les Paul Avenue. He recognized the defendant as “Darrell Brooks.”

Carpenter was requested in Brooks appeared completely different in courtroom than he did on Nov. 21, 2021.

“On the time of the incident, Mr. Brooks had longer hair, braided fashion hair that in all probability went midway down his again,” mentioned Carpenter.

He mentioned Brooks had a beard on the time that was longer.

He mentioned he obtained gadgets that had been on Brooks’ individual on the time of his arrest, together with an ID card with Darrell Brooks’ title and picture on it, a Quest card with Brooks’ title on it, together with bank cards with Brooks’ title on them and an EBT card with Brooks’ girlfriend’s title on it. He added there was $4 in money and a Ford key.

Carpenter was proven a nonetheless picture from “the center of the parade” and recognized the motive force of the crimson SUV as Darrell Brooks.

Whereas talking with Brooks at a police substation, Carpenter mentioned he complained of accidents throughout his arrest, so he was taken to the hospital.

“Mr. Brooks advised us his shoulder was injured when he was arrested. He indicated the arresting officers slammed him to the bottom,” mentioned Carpenter.

He mentioned he reviewed Rebecca Carpenter’s physique digicam video of Brooks’ arrest and noticed “no” use of drive.

“There was no drive used in any respect,” mentioned Det. Carpenter. “Mr. Brooks was given verbal instructions by officers to get down onto the bottom, and he did so completely on his personal.”

On the hospital, Carpenter mentioned, “We escorted Mr. Brooks right into a room, attempting to maintain him away from the victims.”

Docs finally cleared him.

Carpenter interviewed Brooks on the hospital, recorded by means of hospital safety cameras and Carpenter’s cellphone for audio. Two FBI brokers joined him.

“The FBI grew to become concerned within the investigation early on as a result of we weren’t sure at that time whether or not this was a terrorist incident,” mentioned Carpenter.

He mentioned when the FBI brokers launched themselves to Brooks, Brooks was “very shocked.”

To start the day Tuesday, Brooks made his subject material jurisdiction arguments once more.

Decide Dorow famous a second copy of her written assertion on this matter was supplied to Brooks.

“I do know you noticed it since you tore it up yesterday,” mentioned Dorow.

There was then a warning from prosecutors about Brooks’ interviews with legislation enforcement that may be performed in courtroom. Deputy District Lawyer Lesli Boese advised the courtroom that excessive care had been taken to make sure no portion of those interviews could be performed containing proof that had beforehand been dominated inadmissible by the courtroom. Earlier than the trial, the decide mentioned no references to different circumstances (corresponding to earlier home circumstances involving Brooks’ ex, Erika Patterson) could be allowed through the parade trial. Boese made notice that, whereas Brooks would have the chance to cross-examine, ought to he select to play a portion of the video/audio that may “open the door” to the proof dominated inadmissible, she would really feel “compelled to handle it,” saying Brooks would accomplish that “as his personal threat.”

TESTIMONY: Waukesha Police Detective Jay Carpenter, interviewed Brooks

Detective Carpenter was then introduced again to the stand and audio was performed of his interview with Brooks on the hospital.

“FBI. FBI?!” Brooks mentioned within the recording.

“We’re simply type of serving to out as a result of we’re so short-staffed tonight, in order that’s all it’s,” an agent mentioned.

“Y’all for actual? The FBI for actual?” Brooks later mentioned.

“We get that response from most individuals,” the agent mentioned.

“No trigger it’s like, am I in a film proper now?” requested Brooks. “Y’all pranking me or one thing?”

Carpenter then started talking with Brooks, indicating he had “one aspect” of the story and wanted “Darrell’s aspect.”

In talking with Carpenter, Brooks had mild chatter, discuss that included Brooks’ youngsters, the place he went to highschool and even Brooks mentioning this was the primary time he had ever talked with anybody from the FBI.

“I used to be identical to, I must get a Uber. I’ve cash on my Money App card. I’m not attempting to rob anyone! I’m not attempting to interrupt in, and clearly, you may inform I’m not drunk. I’m not beneath the affect of something,” Brooks advised Carpenter, referencing reviews of somebody going door-to-door on Elizabeth Road.

Brooks finally advised Carpenter he didn’t wish to converse with him.

After Brooks’ transport from the hospital to Muskego PD, Carpenter responded within the morning and tried to speak to Brooks once more. Carpenter mentioned that morning, he discovered extra details about the Body Park home incident between Brooks and Patterson that prosecutors say preceded the parade assault.

“Solely factor I wish to know is why within the hell am I being charged with something?” mentioned Brooks, noting Patterson’s allegations towards him had been “whole BS.”

“She’s the one which acts the idiot, and I’m the one which pays for it!” Brooks added.

Brooks mentioned he got here to Waukesha Nov. 21 to look at the Packers recreation with a pal at a home, however he couldn’t present the tackle or the final title of his pal.

When requested about Patterson, Brooks mentioned he was assembly together with her as a result of she had been holding cash for him. He mentioned he advised her, “I am not presupposed to be round you.”

“I like you to demise. You my child mama. I’ll meet up with you to get the cash. I’m not going to have intercourse with you. I’m not going to hang around with you. None of that,” mentioned Brooks.

Brooks once more requested to know what he was being charged with.

“Pay attention, Carpenter, you’ve been straight with me. I simply wish to know what am I , so I can let my ladies know,” mentioned Brooks.

TESTIMONY: Juan Marquez, first witness for Brooks as he represents himself

Juan Marquez was referred to as out of order at this level within the trial because of the availability of a Spanish interpreter.

Juan Marquez testified that he was marching within the Waukesha Christmas Parade along with his spouse and son with the Catholic Communities of Waukesha. In some unspecified time in the future, he mentioned he felt one thing hit his leg. When Marquez was requested by Brooks if he remembered what that was, Marquez mentioned, “A car.”

Brooks let it slip that Marquez initially advised the FBI the SUV was black. Marquez advised the courtroom he couldn’t bear in mind what shade the truck was that struck him on the parade route.

On cross, Boese requested if Marquez ever heard a horn honking earlier than he was hit by the SUV. He mentioned “no.”

Marquez mentioned after he was hit, he was thrown between 15-20 toes and his physique “flew by means of the air.” He mentioned his son, David, was additionally struck. Marquez needed to have surgical procedure on his leg.

At this level, Dorow kicked Brooks out of the courtroom after warning him to “cease with the commentary,” noting 10 interruptions earlier than 10:30 a.m.

“Are you holding me in contempt?” Brooks requested the decide.

The decide famous Brooks “objected to each query by the state, and when the courtroom overruled, his commentary grew to become rather more audible, clearly exhibiting disrespect for the courtroom and proceedings.”

“It has been very obvious that any time the jury has been introduced in, Brooks has accused the courtroom of misconduct or bias,” mentioned Dorow. “This courtroom just isn’t doing any such factor. He has forfeited his proper to be current.”

Dorow addressed Brooks’ query of contempt, noting that he faces the opportunity of life in jail and “contempt just isn’t a viable path for the courtroom.”

“It will permit him to revenue from his personal wrongdoing. There could be a delay within the proceedings. That isn’t one thing this courtroom is even prepared to do,” mentioned Dorow.

TESTIMONY: Detective Carpenter, Waukesha Police Division, interviewed Brooks

After this, Detective Carpenter returned to the stand to renew testimony relating to his interviews with Brooks.

Brooks mentioned he got here in a Kia with a pal, noting he had a license however not a car.

“My mother doesn’t know find out how to drive,” mentioned Brooks. “She doesn’t have a automobile.”

Prosecutors say Brooks was driving his mom’s crimson SUV within the parade assault.

“Whose automobile did you drive out right here?” Carpenter requested.

“I did not drive in any respect,” mentioned Brooks.

Brooks talked about assembly with Erika Patterson and watching the Packers recreation along with his pal.

This interview passed off Nov. 22, at some point after the Christmas parade assault.

“Yesterday was a mistake,” mentioned Brooks. “I ought to have simply watched the sport.”

“You didn’t come out right here in a tan Kia.  You could have a key in your pocket for a automobile in your mother’s title.  For the love of God, for your self and household, inform me what occurred?” mentioned Carpenter within the interview.

“What am I being investigated for?” requested Brooks.

“We now have been cool this entire time…” mentioned Brooks.

“You could have lied to us. You got here out within the crimson Ford Escape. You had the important thing. I wish to offer you an opportunity to reset, begin over. You aren’t giving us an correct story,” mentioned Carpenter.

“All I wish to know is am I charged with something?” mentioned Brooks. “I’ll inform you something you wish to know.”

In his testimony, Carpenter famous that Brooks didn’t stroll to Body Park to satisfy Patterson, however fairly, took the identical SUV that went by means of the parade route.

Within the subsequent interview clip, Brooks acknowledged the crimson SUV for the primary time.

“It is my mother’s automobile,” he mentioned.

Within the subsequent clip, Brooks mentioned he was “getting railroaded,” once more demanding to know what was occurring and what he was being charged with.

“If I inform you… will you be straight up with me with every part that I’m going through?” mentioned Brooks.

Carpenter testified that Brooks by no means advised him another person was driving the SUV.

Within the subsequent video clip, Brooks finds out that “lots of people bought harm” on the parade.

“Are you critical?” requested Brooks. “Like, dangerous? A stroller? So a child bought harm?”

Brooks then made a joke and laughed.

Carpenter testified Brooks by no means requested how any of the injured had been doing. Carpenter advised the jury Brooks by no means advised them why he drove by means of the parade or what was going by means of his thoughts.

In a single interview, Carpenter confirmed Brooks a video on his cellphone, which he later testified confirmed the SUV going by means of the parade. Brooks would not watch.

“I perceive my life is over,” mentioned Brooks. “That is how my story ends.”

On cross, Brooks requested why the suspect was questioned on the hospital versus the police station. Carpenter famous that Brooks requested medical clearance and “there’s a threat” with any prisoner transport, in order that they needed to keep away from that threat. Carpenter famous that there have been 4 officers, together with himself, on the hospital, in order that they had been assured they might safe Brooks.

He additionally requested Carpenter about customary process in detaining individuals suspected of crimes.

“You simply mentioned you strive to not assume till you may have all of the information. Is it truthful to say all the knowledge you had earlier than you weren’t positive about?” requested Brooks.

“I wasn’t positive in the event you had been the motive force initially, however I used to be positive you had been concerned,” mentioned Carpenter.

“And also you knew that to be reality?” requested Brooks.

“Sure. The data supplied was that you simply had been concerned,” mentioned Carpenter.

Brooks requested concerning the significance of the FBI being current throughout his interviews. Carpenter once more mentioned there have been issues this was a terror assault.

Brooks requested what he meant by “this.”

“While you drove your car by means of the parade and struck individuals…” mentioned Carpenter.

Carpenter was requested if the FBI continued their investigation. The witness famous it was finally run strictly by Waukesha police. Brooks requested why.

“My understanding is there wasn’t a terrorism hyperlink,” mentioned Carpenter.

Brooks requested if Carpenter had ever performed an interrogation with the FBI current, and he mentioned not previous to this interrogation of Brooks.

Brooks additionally questioned Carpenter a couple of remark he made within the interrogation that the FBI was current as a result of they had been “short-staffed.” Brooks then requested for that portion to be replayed.

“They’re simply type of serving to out as a result of we’re so short-staffed tonight,” Carpenter says within the audio recording.

“From listening to the audio… do you recall saying the FBI was current since you had been short-staffed?” requested Brooks.

“That’s my voice. I don’t recall saying that within the second, however that’s my voice,” mentioned Carpenter. “We had been simply very quick on assets with what occurred down on the parade route and the mass casualties and the quantity of officers it took to safe that location. We had been very quick on individuals.”

Brooks requested if the FBI is often current in a “state of affairs of short-staffing.” Carpenter mentioned “no.”

There was then a dialogue about Brooks being learn his Miranda rights through the “first interrogation try” on the hospital, and Carpenter mentioned, “You indicated you did not want to converse with me.”

Brooks requested why Carpenter continued to document regardless that Brooks invoked his Fifth Modification.

“We’re skilled in our police division, if you do an interrogation, that the recording is to be left on just about till you have an effect on transport…” mentioned Carpenter.

Brooks needs Carpenter’s preliminary hospital interrogation stricken

Decide Dorow then dismissed the courtroom to take up two authorized points — first, police coverage (why Brooks thought it was related in regard to his questioning of Carpenter) and second, the questions he was asking, Dorow mentioned, went to a authorized problem the courtroom has already decided.

Brooks mentioned the police coverage was related as a result of he believed it needs to be acknowledged for the document why Carpenter continued his cellphone recording regardless of Brooks invoking his Fifth Modification proper.

“At that time, the interrogation has to cease utterly,” Brooks mentioned. “I imagine that if that’s, in reality, coverage, it needs to be confirmed. It needs to be confirmed that that’s a reality, that it’s an actual coverage. For all we all know, he might simply be saying that it’s a coverage…”

The decide mentioned he was assuming information that weren’t in proof, and she or he didn’t see the relevance. She mentioned Brooks was making assumptions.

“Frankly, his conduct isn’t on trial. We’re not right here on a police misconduct trial. I’m not saying that a few of this data may not be related to his credibility…Why do you imagine these insurance policies relate to a difficulty of reality on this case or in any other case go to your protection?”

Brooks mentioned he believed something associated to the primary interrogation should not be admitted as proof per his Fifth Modification proper.

The decide mentioned that was a authorized dedication she had already made.

“To make this trial about that interrogation, it’s not related,” Dorow mentioned. “I’ve already dominated on the admissibility. It’s a authorized dedication.”

Decide Dorow mentioned she gave Brooks some leeway in his questioning Carpenter and mentioned she believed he was questioning Carpenter on authorized points that aren’t related, attempting to illicit information out of Carpenter that’s not related.

“I do know the legislation on this space, and I do know when a topic invokes their Fifth Modification… since you solely invoked your proper to stay silent, they waited to query you till a enough period of time had handed, along with various different causes,” Dorow mentioned.

TESTIMONY: Detective Jay Carpenter, Waukesha Police Division, extra Brooks’ cross

As for the second interrogation at Muskego PD, Carpenter mentioned he defined to Brooks that that they had extra details about the home incident earlier than the parade assault, “and that is what I used to be seeking to converse to you about.”

Brooks questioned Carpenter concerning the Miranda rights, and Carpenter mentioned they had been learn quarter-hour into the interrogation.

“I’m not required to learn them instantly… I learn them earlier than I requested you any particular questions on that occasion,” mentioned Carpenter.

Brooks requested if there was any purpose why he wouldn’t clarify the actual purpose why the detainee was being detained.

“At that time, the (Body Park) home was a part of the explanation you had been being held in custody,” mentioned Carpenter.

Carpenter testified that, at a sure level, the parade grew to become the first focus of the investigation/questioning.

Carpenter did admit there was “data I withheld from you” through the interrogations.

“I needed to make sure the knowledge you gave me was truthful,” mentioned Carpenter.

“I feel it’s necessary to notice – and that is confirmed by proof – you lied to me about your mom proudly owning the car. You lied about popping out right here in a potential tan Kia,” mentioned Carpenter, including that Brooks additionally “lied about being body-slammed by officers” throughout his arrest on Elizabeth Road.

The defendant requested Carpenter about his exhibiting a video to the detainee in a “forceful” method.

“I used to be trying to point out you a video of if you drove your car by means of the parade route,” mentioned Carpenter. “I felt it was essential so that you can see the harm that was brought on by the incident.”

Carpenter testified about gadgets seized from Brooks’ jail cell to be examined for DNA proof.

Throughout questioning by Brooks concerning the arrest on Elizabeth Road Carpenter mentioned when he arrived, “I imagine you had been already within the again seat of a squad automobile. You had been detained.”

“The suspect,” mentioned Brooks.

“The suspect is you, Darrell Brooks,” mentioned Carpenter.

Brooks’ final query to Carpenter was whether or not there have been reviews of a number of suspects in reference to the parade incident.

“Sure. It was chaotic early on. There have been reviews of potential a number of suspects early on,” mentioned Carpenter.

On redirect, Boese requested about “excited utterances,” and Carpenter defined that this includes statements made by a person of their very own accord and never in response to any query. Carpenter mentioned “sure” when requested if it is very important seize these utterances and “sure” when requested if that is one purpose to think about a recording after an interview is over.

Boese requested if Brooks ever mentioned there was anybody else within the crimson SUV, probably Erika Patterson. Carpenter mentioned “no.”

Because the proceedings started Wednesday morning, Decide Dorow knowledgeable the courtroom that two jurors examined optimistic for COVID-19. She then introduced the whole jury panel in to query them as to any well being issues. All mentioned that they had “no” issues. Brooks questioned the decide as as to if all jurors needs to be examined since there was potential publicity. She mentioned she wouldn’t mandate testing, and famous Brooks had not been uncovered attributable to his distance from the jury.

TESTIMONY: Steven Schlomann, IT director at Waukesha College District

First to testify Wednesday was Steven Schlomann, Waukesha College District IT director. Schlomann advised the courtroom there are roughly eight cameras on a college district property at 222 Maple. He mentioned he was contacted by Waukesha police concerning the cameras and whether or not they had captured something on the day of the Waukesha Christmas Parade.

Schlomann mentioned he discovered video that could be useful to police and turned it over to them.

TESTIMONY: Robert Stone II, home-owner with safety digicam

Robert Stone II then testified for the state. He lives on Dunbar Avenue and has safety cameras. Stone advised the courtroom he retrieved footage from these cameras following the Waukesha Christmas parade incident and turned it in to police.

TESTIMONY: Andrew Amerson, home-owner with safety digicam

A 3rd individual with safety digicam entry was subsequent to testify for the state within the Brooks trial. Andrew Amerson lives on Dunbar Avenue and likewise has surveillance cameras.

“My cameras are evident from the road,” Amerson mentioned. “Police needed to have a look at them.”

TESTIMONY: Leonard Miller, home-owner with safety digicam

Leonard Miller, one other home-owner with a safety digicam, testified for the state. He lives on Central Avenue.

“I began wanting by means of my cameras. I noticed somebody operating up my driveway,” Miller mentioned, including that he didn’t acknowledge the individual

TESTIMONY: Kyle Becker, Waukesha Police Division, concerned in Maple Road search

Subsequent to take the stand for the state was Waukesha Police Officer Kyle Becker. Prosecutors indicated he was a part of a search staff canvassing the realm instantly following the Waukesha Christmas parade incident.

Becker testified concerning the gadgets that investigators situated at a residence on Maple, together with a blue sandal.

“I believed Mr. Brooks misplaced the primary sandal leaping the fence, “Becker mentioned. “I situated the grey hooded sweatshirt that Brooks was sporting within the parade, and in shut proximity was the opposite sandal,” mentioned Becker.

On cross, Brooks requested Becker if gadgets are “often stored for this size of time.

“Sure. Till the investigation is full,” mentioned Becker.

Jurors view crimson SUV

Round 11:30 a.m. Wednesday, jurors had been taken to see the crimson SUV in a safe storage that is a part of the courtroom complicated.

FOX6 Information was advised Brooks did attend that “jury view.”

There have been earlier discussions about whether or not Brooks could be current. Brooks advised the courtroom he didn’t want to be current and didn’t see the relevance of the jury view occurring in any respect. Dorow advised Brooks his lack of consent wouldn’t cease the jury view.

She initially demanded that he be current for the jury view, however a day later, she modified her thoughts, telling Brooks she thought of it in a single day and wouldn’t require him to be there.

In the long run, he did attend.

On-line courtroom information present Brooks did a “stroll round” of the car with a bailiff. Brooks’ restraints had been eliminated earlier than the jury entered. Jurors had been escorted across the car as soon as earlier than leaving the storage. Footage was supplied of the car within the storage after the jury view.

There was no speaking allowed through the viewing. Jurors weren’t allowed to take notebooks. The partitions of the Waukesha County Jail storage had been lined to keep away from any likelihood of bias in entrance of the jury.

TESTIMONY: Justin Rowe, Waukesha Police Division detective, mapped Brooks’ path

After the jury view, Justin Rowe, Waukesha Police Division detective, took the stand. He was tasked with going to the Maple Avenue space to seek for gadgets discarded by Darrell Brooks.

Detective Rowe mapped Brooks’ path the evening of the Waukesha Christmas Parade.

Rowe mentioned the dashed crimson line within the map is the trail Brooks took on foot.  It reveals Officer Salyers (who was off responsibility) in shut proximity to the place investigators say Brooks ditched the SUV.

Additional south on the map, Rowe mentioned Brooks stopped to try to get cellphones and “name an Uber.”  Prosecutors say Brooks was calling his mom.

The map and timeline present Officer Scholten fired pictures at Brooks at 4:39 p.m. Nov. 21 as Brooks left the parade route.  Brooks was arrested at 5:14 p.m.

Rowe mentioned there are some areas they don’t have video of Brooks touring.

On cross, Brooks requested how police know he crossed N. West Ave if there have been no cameras or witnesses current.

“You had been arrested on Elizabeth Road,” mentioned Rowe.

In different phrases, Brooks bought throughout the road someway.

TESTIMONY: Ryan Schultz, Wisconsin State Patrol, examined crimson SUV

Subsequent up for the state was Ryan Schultz, Wisconsin State Patrol mechanical inspector.

Schultz testified he appeared on the SUV to see if there was something fallacious with it previous to the crash that may have contributed to it crashing.

“The car had fairly a little bit of entrance finish harm, hood folded up within the air, there was fairly a little bit of particles caught on it…” he mentioned.

Schultz mentioned the brakes on the SUV had been in “good, working situation,” and the brakes nonetheless “absolutely” functioned after the crash. He mentioned the tires had been “evenly worn.”

He mentioned there have been no obstructions to the throttle pedal, which acted simply because it ought to. The ability steering system was additionally working correctly.

He testified he didn’t open the hood of the car due to the DNA proof on it.

Schultz mentioned when he ran the ignition, there have been no diagnostic codes that got here up. He mentioned there have been no recollects on this car, solely an prolonged service guarantee from Ford that elapsed because of the car’s mileage.

Schultz was requested if he noticed something that may have prevented the car from stopping of the brake pedal was utilized, and he mentioned “no.” Boese adopted up by asking whether or not he noticed something that may have contributed to the crashes the SUV was concerned in. He mentioned “no.”

On cross, the witness mentioned there was a coolant leak in that there was no coolant within the car. Brooks questioned Schultz a couple of free ball joint within the entrance left of the car. Brooks requested how this is able to have an effect on the car, and Schultz mentioned it might solely put on down, finally inflicting the wheel not to have the ability to steer, however the wheel on the crimson SUV was nonetheless steerable.

Brooks additionally questioned Schultz concerning the report he wrote, and Schultz mentioned the high-mount brake lamp was inoperable when he inspected it, that means somebody touring behind the crimson SUV wouldn’t have the ability to see the brake mild that is situated on the hatch of the SUV. His report acknowledged it was not identified if this was working earlier than the crash.

“I might don’t have any technique to inform when that mild bulb went out,” mentioned Schultz.

On redirect, Boese referenced the high-mount lamp and requested whether or not the left brake mild was working, and Schultz mentioned the left cease lamp was working. Boese then requested concerning the ball joint and whether or not you may safely function a car if the ball and socket joint just isn’t separated. Schultz mentioned “sure,” and he mentioned the ball and socket weren’t separated on this car.

Boese then requested if the engine controls acceleration, braking, steering or gear shifting. He mentioned “no.”

Boese then requested for clarification on what was leaking from the car, if something.

“Sure, so water pump, water coolant, it’s all interchangeable so far as the cooling system for the engine goes, and the cooling system was low on the time of the inspection and had been leaking, however from the place, I don’t know,” mentioned Schultz.

Boese then requested if that controls the steering, the braking or the acceleration, and Schultz mentioned “no.”

Lastly, Boese requested if the usage of the excessive beams on the SUV would have been any help if the car was developing behind individuals, and Schultz mentioned “no.”

Decide requires break: ‘I do not discover it humorous’

After sending the jury off for a 15-minute afternoon break, the decide requested Brooks what he was referring to when he mentioned, “That’s hilarious.” Brooks mentioned he was referring to the very fact he noticed among the questions he requested had been overruled, however the state might ask, and his objections had been thrown to the aspect.

“I simply assume that’s humorous,” Brooks mentioned.

“Effectively, sir, I don’t discover it humorous,” Dorow mentioned.

Dorow famous Brooks made disparaging remarks throughout Schultz’ testimony.

Boese mentioned she took notice of certainly one of Brooks’ feedback. His response was, “Cease attempting to be slick.”

“Sure, I did say that,” mentioned Brooks.

TESTIMONY: Chris Johnson, Wisconsin State Crime Lab, carried out DNA analyses

Subsequent up for the state was Chris Johnson, chief of the Workplace of Crime scene response for the division of forensic sciences throughout the Wisconsin State Crime Lab. He talked about how he was referred to as out to Maple Road to course of a car deserted in a driveway. He responded with a criminal offense scene response photographer.

“It was reported to me that the car was greater than possible concerned in operating by means of the Waukesha Christmas Parade,” mentioned Johnson.

He talked about how he collected “fragile” gadgets from the SUV, together with some examination gloves and a winter hat, together with a headscarf across the driver door mirror of the SUV, which was damaged. Johnson famous throughout transport, this merchandise would have most certainly fallen off.

He mentioned the entrance bumper of the SUV needed to be lifted up with bungee cords and resecured for the tow truck transport in order that it might not be additional broken.

Johnson mentioned from Maple Road, the SUV was taken to the Waukesha County Sheriff’s Division’s safe facility.  

Johnson mentioned the within and out of doors of the car had been inspected for DNA proof.

He mentioned he discovered a hat on the entrance passenger seat cushion.

He mentioned a removable hood from a jacket and a winter hat had been discovered pinned to the windshield by a windshield wiper arm and the “crumpled hood.”

He mentioned there was paperwork contained in the car that had the title “Darrell E. Brooks” on it.

Brooks admonished once more

The decide excused the jury for a authorized dialogue, and Brooks practically bought eliminated to the adjoining courtroom attributable to his interruptions. Brooks was upset after it was famous that Opper positioned some proof on the desk for Johnson, the witness.

“Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. On the desk? How did it get on the desk?” Brooks requested.

“Nobody is doing one thing that’s prohibited by this courtroom…” mentioned Dorow.

She warned him that if he interrupted the proceedings once more, he would forfeit his proper to be current in the principle courtroom.

Brooks responded by saying, “You may as properly take away me then.” Brooks advised the decide she didn’t know what he was attempting to do.

“You’re making a document of me attempting to look dangerous. It’s not going to work!” mentioned Brooks.

As Brooks yelled, Dorow suggested Brooks to be respectful.

“Don’t no person inform me what to do. I don’t inform no person else what to do. I’ve by no means advised you to do something in any respect,” mentioned Brooks. “I’m a grown man with grown youngsters. Don’t no person discuss to me like that. No one.”

TESTIMONY: Chris Johnson, Wisconsin State Crime Lab, Brooks’ cross-examination

Brooks started his cross-examination of Johnson by asking concerning the DNA evaluation. Brooks particularly requested if Johnson, who didn’t carry out the DNA evaluation, knew the outcomes. Johnson mentioned he spoke with the investigator who carried out the DNA evaluation, however he mentioned “I do not know the precise outcomes, no.”

The witness was requested by Brooks concerning the headband on the car and the way it bought there. Johnson mentioned it possible bought there when the car got here into contact with one thing or somebody who was sporting it. Brooks requested if he knew that for positive, and he mentioned “no.”

He mentioned the examination of the car itself took “in all probability over 40 hours,” not together with the report he wrote, which was a abstract of his inspection.

“The car wanted a complete analysis, processing, examination of just about each aspect and floor of that car,” mentioned Johnson.

On redirect, Opper requested what Johnson meant when he mentioned the car was secured when he arrived on Maple Road.

“The perimeter was secured with crime scene tape, and there have been officers that had been standing on the location the place the car was,” mentioned Johnson.

He mentioned anybody that may have come as much as the car would have been stopped by legislation enforcement.

TESTIMONY: Trevor Naleid, senior forensic analyst, carried out DNA analyses

The state’s final witness Wednesday was Trevor Naleid, Wisconsin Division of Justice State Crime Lab senior forensic scientist within the DNA evaluation unit.

Naleid mentioned he developed DNA profiles from the swabs of the steering wheel of the SUV.

“It was a two-person combination with at the least one male,” mentioned Naleid, including that he was in a position to establish these individuals utilizing software program. “Based mostly on it being a two-person combination, Erika Patterson and Darrell Brooks are each very robust assist for inclusion.”

He mentioned the swab of the gear shift was a three-person combination with at the least one male contributor. The software program end result was “the identical because the steering wheel.”

“So Erika Patterson and Darrell Brooks are each very robust assist for inclusion,” mentioned Naleid.

In layman’s phrases, Naleid mentioned it was at the least one quadrillion occasions extra possible the DNA was from Brooks/Patterson (and another person for the gear shift) versus three random individuals.

As for the hat that was discovered within the SUV, Naleid mentioned it was a two-person combination with at the least one male contributor.

“Erika Patterson has a really robust assist for exclusion. Darrell Brooks has robust assist for exclusion. Wilhelm Hospel (Milwaukee Dancing Grannies volunteer killed within the parade assault) has very robust assist for inclusion. He’s above that one quadrillion threshold that now we have,” mentioned Naleid.

A sweatshirt was additionally analyzed. He mentioned a reddish brown stain on the best sleeve examined presumptive optimistic for blood. 5 hairs had been additionally retrieved. Naleid mentioned the DNA was a three-person combination with at the least one male contributor, with the identical combination on the cuff hyperlinks. The stain was a two-person combination with at the least one male.

Utilizing the software program, Naleid mentioned as to the collar and the cuffs, “Mr. Brooks has very robust assist for inclusion.” As to the stain, “Each Erika Patterson and Darrell Brooks have very robust assist for inclusion.”

On cross, Brooks requested for clarification on what Naleid meant when he mentioned DNA “combination.”

“A combination simply signifies that it’s multiple individual current within the profile,” mentioned Naleid.

Brooks questioned Naleid about why it took so lengthy for his evaluation to be accomplished. The witness famous the evidentiary gadgets weren’t obtained till January, and he accomplished his report in April. Naleid mentioned he generated 583 pages, and his remaining report was 15.

Brooks additionally questioned the witness concerning the means of acquiring the evidentiary gadgets and the place they went after he was completed with them. Naleid mentioned they had been unsealed when he started his evaluation, and so they had been returned to the proof technician and put again into storage when he was completed.

Brooks requested concerning the “three-person mixtures” and questioned whether or not there may be DNA that was discovered that’s nonetheless unknown.

“That is appropriate,” mentioned Naleid.

On redirect, Opper requested concerning the supply of the hairs on the sweatshirt. Naleid mentioned Darrell Brooks was the supply.  

The prosecution rested Thursday after calling 57 witnesses over 11 days. Then, Darrell Brooks cried as he delivered his deferred opening assertion and commenced calling witnesses, representing himself on this trial.

As proceedings started Thursday morning, the decide famous she supplied Brooks with an excerpt from her judicial bench guide to assist him put together his opening assertion, which she mentioned needs to be a roadmap/framework of his case to assist the jury higher perceive his proof.

She mentioned his opening assertion should not include reference to subject material jurisdiction, one thing Brooks introduced up a number of occasions daily through the trial.

Brooks famous he was “fairly conscious that subject material jurisdiction would not be a part of my opening or closing assertion.”

“Okay. Nice,” mentioned Dorow.

Prosecutors transfer to amend grievance

Prosecutors then launched a movement Prosecutors requested to vary it to “close to Body Park.” This specific rely pertains to the struggle prosecutors say Brooks was concerned in along with his ex-girlfriend, Erika Patterson, earlier than the Christmas parade assault. Prosecutors argued that this alteration could be extra according to Patterson’s testimony and famous it was “a really small change within the charging paperwork.”

Brooks argued that this case had been charged for “the higher a part of a 12 months.”

“If there was one phrase that wanted to be modified, there was ample time for it to be modified,” he mentioned.

The decide granted the state’s request.

State recollects Detective Thomas Casey

The courtroom then mentioned prosecutors’ request to recall Detective Casey, who beforehand testified over two days earlier within the trial. Prosecutors famous there would not be any duplication of their questioning. Fairly, they mentioned his first testimony targeted on the parade structure, and so they now needed to ask about sufferer identification, driver identification and car identification — issues that had been addressed in testimony since Casey was first on the stand.

Prosecutors argued that, “because the lead detective within the case,” it might help the jury in understanding among the issues on the again finish that he was concerned in.

Casey initially testified that Brooks hit him with the crimson SUV earlier than the parade assault, and he tried to cease the car. He was on scene after the parade assault and later grew to become lead detective.

Brooks argued that he felt the state had been “environment friendly of their presentation.” He mentioned their arguments gave the impression to be “an try to get extra questions in that might have been requested within the first place.” Brooks additionally argued that Casey was excused from his subpoena on this case after his prior testimony.

Dorow allowed the state to recall Casey.

Brooks prepares ‘counter’ plea provide

Earlier than the jury was introduced in, Brooks famous the state’s pretrial provide, which might contain Brooks pleading responsible to sure counts and receiving six life sentences for the murder fees plus unspecified jail on different convictions. Brooks claimed he by no means had that pretrial provide till the trial. Prosecutors claimed it was given to Brooks’ prior attorneys on at the least two events.

Brooks mentioned Thursday morning he was within the means of placing collectively “a counteroffer.”

TESTIMONY: Detective Thomas Casey, Waukesha Police Division, recalled by prosecution

Known as again to the stand by the state, Casey advised the courtroom that police detectives had been despatched to 5 completely different hospitals to establish potential victims as they got here in. As a part of the method, the detective mentioned, officers needed to provide you with parameters that may positively establish a real sufferer. He mentioned the victims needed to be on the street of the parade route and obtain hospital care. The detective mentioned individuals who had been injured after the very fact, from different cases, weren’t thought of victims. In different phrases, there have been extra victims from the parade assault than these related to the 76 whole counts filed towards Brooks on this case – together with 61 counts of first-degree recklessly endangering security associated to the injured victims.

The detective testified investigators obtained “300 to 400 movies” of the parade incident. He acknowledged he watched all of them and asserted Brooks was driving the crimson SUV by means of the parade in all of them.

“I’ve by no means seen anybody driving the SUV aside from the defendant. Not one of the movies we checked out confirmed anybody else within the car,” Casey mentioned. “By no means confirmed the car coming to an entire cease on the parade route.”

Among the movies captured the license plate of the crimson SUV concerned on this case. Casey testified police additionally discovered a music video on social media the place Brooks was recorded subsequent to the SUV with matching plates.

The detective testified that the SUV was discovered on Maple Highway and that officers bought a key from Brooks. At the moment, Casey mentioned, the crimson SUV was in processing, so he took the important thing there and it labored the door lock and the ignition lock of the car. Casey additionally advised jurors Brooks’ fingerprints, the three girls he has youngsters with and Brooks’ mom all recognized the suspect within the parade incident as Darrell Brooks. Nonetheless, Brooks objected to “being referred to as that title.”

“That is the title he is all the time passed by,” Casey mentioned.

The jury was proven video of the yard of Daybreak Woods, Brooks’ mom, which confirmed a crimson Ford Escape – the kind of SUV in query. That video was dated 1:26 p.m. on Nov. 21, 2021 – the afternoon of the parade assault. Casey testified that Woods gave police the video that evening. 

Brooks started his cross-examination of Casey round 10 a.m. Throughout this cross, Brooks argued nobody can inform who has their again to the digicam within the picture that had been proven in courtroom. Casey mentioned he watched the whole video, and he testified it was certainly Brooks.

The state initially confirmed a nonetheless from the music video with Brooks’ again to the digicam however later confirmed the entire video.

Casey additional testified that he discovered Brooks had use of the SUV on the time of the assault. He additionally mentioned he had been to Brooks’ mom’s home to speak to her and knew the video of the SUV within the yard on the afternoon of Nov. 21, 2021, was from that home.

Casey once more testified about what he noticed on the parade scene.

“I bear in mind a horn beeping and (Brooks) driving into me and never stopping once I pounded on the car,” mentioned Casey, describing Brooks as wanting offended. “I have been driving a very long time. When individuals beep their horns, they’re late or offended. That is why I concluded they had been offended.”

Casey added it was a chance that somebody would beep their horn to get out of the best way.

Brooks will get offended after state reveals music video

The decide despatched the jury out mid-morning Thursday for a authorized dialogue that targeted particularly on the video prosecutors say Brooks seems in. Casey testified it was taken from Brooks’ Fb web page. Brooks described it as “mind-boggling,” saying he had by no means seen that video earlier than, and it wasn’t beforehand admitted.

“When was this video made an exhibit?” Brooks requested.

Opper argued the exhibit was included with the preliminary discovery supplies despatched to Brooks’ former attorneys. Brooks once more argued this video was by no means a part of the knowledge he obtained.

“I see what you individuals are attempting to do, and it isn’t truthful, and it isn’t proper,” mentioned Brooks. “That video was not a part of (preliminary discovery).”

Decide Dorow mentioned she was happy with the state’s provide of proof that the video was beforehand submitted to counsel. Brooks requested if prior counsel might testify to that.

Dorow requested Brooks if he was conversant in the video, and Brooks requested what that needed to “do with it.” The decide famous it was a music video that Brooks was in, together with the crimson SUV.

“That video is related for various completely different causes,” mentioned Dorow, including that it might go to the identification of Brooks, the identification of the car.

The decide famous Brooks “opened up the door” to this proof throughout his cross-examination of Detective Casey relating to Casey’s potential to establish Brooks.

“And once I say identification — particularly as to Casey’s opinion of whether or not that is you within the video,” mentioned Dorow, including, “It is as much as the jury to find out that.”

“You straight attacked the credibility of Detective Casey by means of his data of it and his identification of you in it as a result of the nonetheless picture of you in it was your again,” mentioned Dorow.

Brooks needed to know why this video was made an exhibit “out of the blue” on Thursday morning.

Opper will get emotional

This led to an emotional assertion from DA Opper relating to Brooks’ actions in courtroom.

“He challenges the courtroom’s authority repeatedly,” mentioned Opper. “This courtroom completely has the power to inform him to sit down down and be quiet. You have not completed that, and we all know why you have not completed that. We respect that.”

Opper famous, as Dorow did, that the video was related based mostly on Brooks’ questioning of Casey difficult Casey’s potential to establish the individual with their again to the digicam within the nonetheless shot.

“Trials are fluid,” mentioned Opper. “When he opened the door to that, we got here up with the video, which Casey testified repeatedly as to how he know that was Mr. Brooks as a result of he had seen the remainder of the video.”

Opper mentioned she initially wasn’t going to ask for the audio to be performed however Brooks “pressed it once more.”

“His voice and his method of speech would assist the jury establish…” mentioned Opper. “You neatly requested me to play it with out the audio. That is all to the good thing about this defendant. He would not prefer it as a result of the proof is stacking up and stacking up. Every time it does, his response is to accuse you and the prosecutors of being unethical.”

Opper added that, “There may be nothing in legislation that stops me from pulling one thing out proper now and making an exhibit.”

“There is no such thing as a legislation that I can not make an exhibit on the fly,” mentioned Opper.

Brooks bought upset and began yelling concerning the prosecution laughing all through the trial.

The decide admonished each events.

Brooks responds

Brooks then argued Opper had been “laughing and speaking beneath her breath the entire trial,” telling the courtroom, “I am not an fool.”

“Why is one thing all the time humorous at that desk?” Brooks requested the decide.

“I feel I deserve an opportunity to rebut what was simply mentioned,” mentioned Brooks. “For her to sit down there and play this off…she should assume I am an fool.”

“That isn’t what occurred,” Dorow mentioned as Brooks lined the microphone and laughed.

He advised the courtroom that Opper had simply admitted on the document that she simply made the exhibit up that morning. The decide referred to as {that a} mischaracterization and requested for a authorized foundation for his objection.

“So I am simply presupposed to provide you with that off the highest of my head?” requested Brooks.

“Sure,” mentioned Decide Dorow.

“That is ridiculous,” mentioned Brooks.

“You are representing your self. It is not ridiculous,” mentioned Dorow.

The decide then put Brooks on discover relating to his interruptions.

Decide cuts off dialogue

Earlier than the morning break, the decide tried to handle two different points that got here up throughout Brooks’ cross of Casey. First, questioning by Brooks associated to Casey talking with Brooks’ mom, Daybreak Woods, in August, and references made to Brooks’ niece and nephew. An objection by the state was sustained by the decide throughout cross.

The second problem associated to questioning relating to Casey’s search of Brooks’ jail cell.

“Would you like the chance to query Detective Casey about these matters?” Dorow requested the decide.

Brooks wouldn’t reply the query and continued to argue with Dorow.

The decide finally reduce off the dialogue and put the courtroom into recess.

Music video exhibit addressed

Upon return from the morning break, the courtroom addressed Brooks’ arguments relating to displays, particularly the music video.

“I do not assume what I say would not a lot matter,” Brooks mentioned. “What I’ve to say about something would not matter.”

“This courtroom takes your place on authorized argument,” Dorow mentioned as Brooks interrupted. “You make disparaging remarks, roll your eyes. Simply earlier to the break I could not get a phrase in. You needed to debate choices already dominated on.”

“Did I increase my voice? Was I pissed off? I completely was,” Decide Dorow continued. “I simply needed to get by means of some points outdoors the presence of the jury. That is the correct process.”

“There may be nothing improper about what the state did, and I wish to make that document very very clear,” mentioned Dorow.

“Trials are fluid,” the decide mentioned. “Issues occur. Events can open the door to what could be inadmissible proof. For instance, this courtroom made pretrial warnings associated to different acts proof (this pertains to details about different circumstances involving Brooks not being admissible on this trial). You got here shut. I had the witness (Casey) flip to me and say, ‘I do not assume I can reply that.’ Casey understood his obligation to honor the pretrial rulings. I wager that is occurred a half a dozen occasions. That is to guard your rights, sir.”

Brooks’ opening assertion

After lunch, Brooks cried as he delivered his deferred opening assertion to the courtroom, telling the jury he was talking “from the center.”

In it, he did not present particulars about what occurred or lay out his protection, nor did he reveal who he could be calling to testify.

He started by telling the jury, “There’s two sides to each story.”

“I’ve watched for a 12 months concerning the numerous narratives, and eventually, everybody will get the possibility for the complete story,” Brooks mentioned. “You received’t hear me attempt to argue information. This was tragic.”

Brooks choked again emotion as he continued to current his opening assertion.

“This incident was not deliberate. It was not intentional,” Brooks mentioned. “There’s been a number of struggling concerned on this incident; loads, clearly, with the households.”

Brooks requested the jury to “remember” the ability that they’ve, saying it has been a “lengthy course of for everyone.”

“Lot of hypothesis, lot of ridicule,” mentioned Brooks, wiping tears from his eyes. “Phrases like ‘demon.’ Phrases like ‘monster’…I do know a number of the time I have been earlier than you, you have seen me with this masks on. I’ve had my causes for that, however I really feel now’s the time that it is necessary that you simply see me for who I’m. No masks. For who I’m. I feel that is the second for that.”

“I pray that your eyes and ears stay as open as potential. I perceive that you simply alone determine this case, this matter,” mentioned Brooks, addressing the jury. “The ability is in your fingers – all of you – to find out for your self what fact is. Thanks.”

TESTIMONY: Brooks calls “State of Wisconsin”

Brooks tried to name the state of Wisconsin as his first witness through the presentation of his case-in-chief. He had beforehand referred to as Juan Marquez out of order through the state’s case-in-chief presentation because of the want for a Spanish interpreter.

Dorow denied his request to name the State of Wisconsin to the witness stand.

TESTIMONY: Nicholas Kirby, with Kori Runkel (Brooks’ ex-girlfriend’s roommate) in Waukesha

Brooks then referred to as Nicholas Kirby, who was with Kori Runkel, the roommate of Erika Patterson, Brooks’ ex-girlfriend, on Nov. 21, 2021, in Waukesha.

Runkel testified for the state a couple of struggle close to Body Park that preceded the assault involving Brooks and Patterson. Runkel mentioned she was additionally current, together with a “Nick.”

“Did you ever go to a park?”

Brooks requested Kirby.

“No,” mentioned Kirby.

Brooks requested Kirby about making reference to understanding Darrell Brooks per week earlier than.

“She confirmed me your rap sheet…” mentioned Kirby of Patterson, whom Kirby mentioned he had identified for a pair weeks.

“I’ll cease you until you wish to go there – about priors,” warned Decide Dorow.

Brooks requested about Kirby’s assembly up with Patterson Nov. 21, 2021.

“We had been strolling in the direction of the realm the place Erika was strolling and saying she was being attacked,” mentioned Kirby.

Kirby mentioned previous to that, he bought a name from Patterson.

“When she mentioned she was in bother, I ran to the place she advised me to go,” mentioned Kirby.

Brooks requested if he supplied an outline to police of who was assaulting his pal. Kirby mentioned he had an outline of the car.

“Ms. Patterson advised me over the cellphone she was in a crimson SUV,” mentioned Kirby. “There aren’t many ladies in Waukesha screaming from a crimson SUV.”

As he approached the realm, Kirby mentioned he heard Patterson scream.

“That is what caught my consideration,” he mentioned.

He mentioned “Patterson would not know Waukesha” and that she knew she was on White Rock however wasn’t positive how far down she was.

“It wasn’t till I noticed the crimson SUV parked in entrance of the residences that I knew the place she was there,” mentioned Kirby.

Kirby testified that Runkel noticed Patterson earlier than he did and mentioned, “She’s over there.”

“We went throughout the road, and there was Ms. Patterson, hobbling down the road with fluid on her leg,” mentioned Kirby.

Brooks requested if, whereas strolling with Runkel, he noticed Patterson within the SUV. Kirby testified Runkel was with him when the cellphone name got here in about Patterson being in bother. He mentioned he would assume if somebody advised him they had been in a car, they had been in a car. He mentioned Patterson could not have been within the car when he bought there.

Referencing the video, Brooks pointed to individuals seen strolling within the space and requested if Kirby remembered individuals in that space close to White Rock College.

“I used to be solely targeted on the one, and that was the one at risk,” mentioned Kirby.

He mentioned he couldn’t see Patterson at that time.

Kirby mentioned he was on the cellphone with Patterson when he was close to White Rock and Hartwell, and she or he mentioned she was close to some crimson residence buildings. He nonetheless couldn’t see Patterson.

Brooks then pointed to Kirby and Runkel seen strolling previous White Rock College within the video. They nonetheless couldn’t discover Patterson. Kirby mentioned he was attempting to name her at that time, and she or he wasn’t answering.

“That scared me, so I advised Kori to maintain an eye fixed out and preserve on the lookout for her, whereas I stored calling her,” mentioned Kirby.

Kirby mentioned Runkel lastly noticed Patterson close to Body Park and a ship launch. They grabbed her and began to depart.

Brooks requested if Patterson was contained in the SUV. He mentioned she was not.

Brooks adopted up by asking when, if in any respect, he noticed Patterson within the car. Kirby mentioned she did when she went into the car to seize her issues.

Kirby mentioned the primary time he noticed the crimson SUV was after zig-zagging up White Rock with Runkel. He mentioned it was parked in entrance of some residences, and Patterson got here from the passenger aspect. He assumed she had simply gotten out of the car. Brooks requested if he knew that for positive.

“I’m not really positive if she was within the car at the moment,” mentioned Kirby. “I used to be simply going off of what she mentioned on the cellphone, so my assumption was that she was within the car.”

Brooks requested to play a distinct video beforehand admitted as a state exhibit to see if it would provide a greater view of Kirby and Runkel coming into contact with Patterson.

After the video was performed, Brooks requested if it confirmed Kirby and Runkel operating towards the SUV because it drove away. Kirby mentioned “sure.” He was requested the place Patterson was at this level.

“I didn’t see her straight away. Kori did, and she or he simply advised me she was in a crimson automobile, in order that’s what we had been on the lookout for,” mentioned Kirby.

Brooks requested if Patterson was contained in the car at the moment.

“I don’t recall,” mentioned Kirby.

He added that he did see the proprietor of the car get out of the car, “and that was my main concern.”

Brooks backed issues up, asking why they ran towards the SUV.

“Ms. Patterson is a mutual pal of ours. She mentioned she was in bother. I don’t mess around with people who find themselves in bother,” mentioned Kirby.

Kirby then testified concerning the “bodily altercation” between Brooks and Ms. Kori and Ms. Erika. He mentioned he was apprehensive about Patterson getting harm, so he stepped between then and advised Brooks he wanted to depart.

Brooks requested whether or not there was a knife concerned.

“No, that may be a miscommunication, and I’ll make clear that,” mentioned Kirby.

Dorow stopped Kirby, asking him to attend for Brooks to ask a query.

Brooks requested if Kirby noticed Patterson get again into the car. He reiterated that he noticed her attain into the car for one thing. He mentioned he didn’t see her get into the car.

Kirby mentioned his black jacket he was sporting within the video “hit the bottom” as quickly as Brooks “began going for the 2 girls.”

Brooks requested why.

“Effectively, if the courtroom don’t hate me for it, I’m simply gonna say it’s a superb factor there have been two girls in my method at that second in time,” mentioned Kirby. “Meaning when my jacket comes off, bother goes to occur, particularly if you’re going to attempt to assault a girl in entrance of me.”

Going again to the report of the knife being concerned on this struggle, Kirby mentioned, “That was not put right into a report. That was a miscommunication between me and an officer. I had been knifed earlier that week and had 12 stitches in a single hand. I mentioned, ‘Now, I’ve a pal being assaulted, and I want again up right here.’”

He mentioned when police stopped and requested if there was a knife, Kirby mentioned, “No, there was by no means a knife concerned.”

Brooks requested if Patterson ever mentioned the title of the one who assaulted her.

“She was assembly one person who day, and I knew precisely who it was as a result of she had proven me his image and rap sheet prior. Her baby’s father is who she was assembly up with that day, and I advised her a number of occasions, ‘That’s not a good suggestion. I’ve a foul feeling about this,'” mentioned Kirby.

Brooks requested questions concerning the police report, together with if Kirby recalled stating that the “alleged defendant” tried to punch and push him.

“The alleged defendant being you, sure — tried to,” mentioned Kirby.

Brooks requested whether or not the video confirmed that.

“No, it doesn’t,” mentioned Kirby. “It reveals me pulling two girls away from the state of affairs.”

Brooks requested why he would inform detectives that the “alleged defendant” tried to assault him.

“In all probability as a result of there have been three individuals’s fists flying,” mentioned Kirby, including he was attempting to guard the 2 individuals he cared about.

Brooks requested concerning the parade.

“I wasn’t attending the parade,” mentioned Kirby. “I used to be within the space that the parade route was in. My avenue is the parade route.”

Brooks requested if he noticed anybody injured that day.

“Sure, after I walked again by means of that space, I noticed a crimson SUV take off like a bat out of hell down Principal Road and undergo a crowd of individuals,” mentioned Kirby.

“The query was, did you see this happen?” mentioned Brooks.

“With my very own freaking eyes, sure. What number of occasions do I’ve to say sure so that you can perceive it? Y-E-S spells sure,” mentioned Kirby.

The defendant requested if the video confirmed three individuals throwing punches. Kirby mentioned three individuals had been throwing fingers: Erika, Kori and Brooks. He mentioned you will see three pairs of fingers go up towards each other within the video.

After the struggle, he mentioned they walked again down White Rock to Principal, reducing by means of the neighborhood to return in the direction of the Girls’s Heart in Waukesha the place Patterson and Runkel lived.

“Nonetheless, issues took a drastic flip when the crimson SUV that I’ve described a number of occasions went down the wrong way…then turned again round and got here again down…” mentioned Kirby.

The decide struck that response.

Kirby mentioned he was stopped by an officer partway down White Rock, and Kirby allow them to know they wanted to be looking out for a crimson SUV. The officer requested if there was somebody with a knife. Kirby mentioned he confirmed the officer the stitches in his hand and mentioned “no.”

“I am guessing that is the place the miscommunication with the knife got here in,” mentioned Kirby.

Brooks requested if Kirby was injured through the struggle. He mentioned he ripped three of the stitches in his hand, however he mentioned that was extra from pulling Runkel away from Brooks.

After dropping Patterson and Runkel again on the Girls’s Heart, Kirby mentioned he began operating again towards Principal Road to see if he might keep away from the parade site visitors.

“And that’s once I noticed the crimson SUV go down Principal Road,” mentioned Kirby.

The state had no cross.

In a one-on-one interview with FOX6 Information after his testimony, Kirby, a protection witness, mentioned he believes Brooks is “100% responsible,” and Kirby mentioned he, himself, feels chargeable for the parade assault as a result of he advised Brooks to depart after the struggle close to Body Park.

TESTIMONY: Heather Riemer, Waukesha Christmas Parade attendee

Brooks’ subsequent witness was Heather Riemer. Riemer was on the Waukesha Christmas Parade together with her husband, three associates and certainly one of their youngsters.

Following her testimony, we discovered Riemer was referred to as out of order by Brooks attributable to unavailability on Friday.

She described a “commotion” through the parade and a crimson SUV “driving by means of quicker than all the opposite automobiles within the parade.” She mentioned the horn was honking.

“Effectively, I heard honking. I’m not optimistic if it was the crimson SUV or one other automobile,” mentioned Riemer.

Brooks requested Riemer why somebody would honk a horn, in her opinion.

“To alert someone,” mentioned Riemer.

She mentioned she didn’t see the motive force of the car and couldn’t recall whether or not the home windows had been tinted. She was not in a position to see into the SUV. She didn’t get a license plate quantity. She couldn’t recall if the home windows had been up or down. She mentioned she didn’t see anybody harm by the car.

On cross, Assistant District Lawyer Zachary Wittchow requested Riemer to have a look at the defendant.

“Have you ever ever seen that man earlier than?” he requested.

“Sure,” mentioned Riemer.  “As we had been driving to the parade, we had been coming to a stoplight, and we noticed the crimson SUV coming down the fallacious method on the highway and I slowed down as a result of the automobile in entrance of me began to again as much as let him by means of.”

She mentioned this occurred outdoors a gasoline station.

Wittchow requested if she noticed Brooks at the moment. Riemer answered that she did not know the title at the moment however mentioned “sure.” She recognized him because the defendant in courtroom.

On redirect, Brooks requested Riemer questions referencing the map of the gasoline station. She mentioned “sure” when requested if the SUV she noticed on the gasoline station was the car she later noticed on the parade.

Brooks requested how she is aware of the motive force on the gasoline station was the motive force on the parade if she did not see the motive force on the parade. She mentioned the automobiles at each scenes had been the identical shade, make and mannequin — a crimson Ford Escape. She added that she is aware of “an honest quantity about automobiles.”

Brooks’ final query to Riemer was whether or not she knew whether or not the motive force of the crimson SUV was the identical on the gasoline station and the parade. She mentioned “no.”

Darrell Brooks introduced 9 extra witnesses for his protection to the stand in his trial on Friday.

On the finish of the day Thursday, there was discuss that each one testimony might be wrapped up by the tip of Friday. Brooks himself mentioned: “That is not gonna occur.”

By the tip of Friday, the decide mentioned everybody who had been subpoenaed to testify had completed so, however Brooks himself nonetheless had the best to testify or not. There was additionally discuss Brooks calling his mom, Daybreak Woods, to the stand.

As quickly as courtroom went into session on Friday, Brooks instantly requested the courtroom for paperwork he mentioned he was lacking associated to the primary witness he deliberate to name Friday. Brooks mentioned he wouldn’t name any witnesses till he had that paperwork in hand, however Decide Jennifer Dorow mentioned it was Brooks’ accountability to have what he wanted for his personal protection.

“So what am I presupposed to ask him?” mentioned Brooks. “Wish to come take a look at the field your self?  Attempting to all the time pull a quick one.”

Dorow demanded that Brooks “name your subsequent witness, please,” and Brooks advised the courtroom there was a “rush to judgment,” holding up Dorow’s oath of workplace.

“You might be refusing to name your witnesses,” mentioned Dorow. “It’s now 8:44.”

Brooks then introduced up Detective Casey’s testimony Thursday when he was recalled by the state.

“Casey testified yesterday for the second time beneath oath and confirmed the yard of my mom’s residence.  Casey mentioned he had been to my mom’s residence and didn’t even converse to my mom,” mentioned Brooks.

“You wish to add your mom to your witness record?” requested Dorow.

“Sure,” mentioned Brooks.

Dorow advised Brooks he might name Detective Casey once more if he needed.

TESTIMONY: Douglas Kolar, attended parade with daughter

First to take the witness stand on Friday for the protection was Douglas Kolar. He attended the Waukesha Christmas Parade along with his daughter, who was marching in it. Kolar testified about what he noticed involving a crimson car.

Neither Kolar nor his daughter had been harm within the parade assault.

“As we had been approaching White Rock I observed a car coming by means of the place the parade contributors had been going. It was a crimson car. It was honking its horn,” Kolar mentioned. “Between two of the teams, it veered to the left. A police officer tried to cease the car – reached for the door deal with. The car began to hurry off.”

Brooks requested Kolar if, because the car sped off, it appeared as if it had been attempting to keep away from hitting individuals. Kolar answered: “At that time, sure.”

Kolar testified after he noticed the car pace off, he grabbed his daughter and walked as quick as they might to their automobile.

The witness described the car as a “crimson SUV” – later including that the rear home windows had been tinted.

Opper requested a few questions throughout cross-examination. One referred to the style during which the crimson SUV was being pushed. Kolar answered “sure” as to if it was driving erratically.

Opper additionally requested Kolar a couple of description of the one who was driving the car. Kolar described the individual has a Black male with dreadlocks and tattoos.

TESTIMONY: Steven Guth, Waukesha police detective, talked with Patterson after struggle close to Body Park

Waukesha Police Detective Steven Guth was subsequent to take the stand. Guth beforehand testified for the state.

Friday, the detective testified about making contact with Erika Patterson, Brooks’ ex-girlfriend and mom to his baby.

“(Patterson) acknowledged she met with Brooks at Body Park, she didn’t give him cash, and he slapped her within the face,” Guth mentioned. “The subsequent day she clarified it occurred on (Nov. 21). He took her cellphone as a result of she thought he was speaking to different guys.”

Brooks requested the detective a couple of struggle close to Body park, and if he recalled recovering a knife:

Guth: “There was no knife.”

Brooks: “Reported as a knife struggle?”

Guth: “That is the way it was initially reported and communicated to dispatch…She didn’t give me all the small print of the incident initially.”

Brooks: “Do you recall why?”

Guth: “I do not know why she did not…She advised me she was extraordinarily afraid of you and that is why she did not inform every part.”

Brooks had no different matters for questioning Guth, and the state had no cross-examination.

Dispute over witness order

Mid-morning, after excusing the jury, the courtroom requested Brooks to offer his subsequent witness. It was anticipated to be Patterson, however the defendant seemed to be stalling.

Dorow advised Brooks she might drive him to name the subsequent witness, or she could be launched from her subpoena. Brooks questioned if the decide had that authority, and she or he defined that she did.

“I do not take that as a recreation. This isn’t a recreation for me. Nothing about this can be a joke. It is disrespectful to me that you simply’d – your life just isn’t on the road, mine is,” Brooks mentioned.

When the jury returned from break, Brooks once more raised the “subject material jurisdiction” declare that he has repeatedly mentioned all through the trial.

TESTIMONY: Erika Patterson, Brooks’ ex-girlfriend

After a break, Brooks referred to as Erika Patterson to the witness stand. Patterson had beforehand been referred to as to testify by the state.

The road of questioning from Brooks centered on an incident that occurred close to Body Park earlier than the Waukesha Christmas Parade. Patterson testified she had argued with Brooks. Brooks pressed Patterson, asking whether or not she was forthright with data when she spoke with Guth concerning the Body Park incident.

Patterson: “I simply didn’t inform him every part straight away.”

Brooks: “Why not?”

Patterson: “I don’t know, Mr. Brooks.”

Patterson continued to testify about how she is aware of Brooks, together with for the way lengthy and the place they met, matters additionally mentioned throughout her testimony for the state.

Argument over questioning of Patterson

When Brooks tried to introduce new photos into proof. Brooks was attempting to dispute testimony that there had been no contact between Patterson and Brooks for the reason that evening of the parade assault.

“You acknowledged there’s been no contact. How would the alleged defendant receive photographs in the event that they’d been no contact?” requested Brooks.

Brooks additionally requested Patterson, “When you’re so deeply afraid why ship photos?”

Brooks mentioned he had a doc that confirmed a battery incident involving Patterson on Nov. 20 didn’t occur.

“When did you obtain this doc?  I wish to see the doc,” mentioned Dorow.

That set off one other chain of exchanges between Dorow and Brooks.

“Cease it. You’re a public servant. Your job is to be the umpire,” Brooks mentioned.

Dorow famous the doc was in reference to Depend 77, a battery rely that was dismissed.

“She didn’t have any seen marks or accidents from that occasion,” mentioned Opper. “We didn’t wish to confuse the document if there was a battery on 11/20.”

“Now you might be saying there’s some doc that goes to the credibility of this witness,” mentioned Dorow. “I must ask just a few questions to find out the relevancy.”

“Why do you imagine the letters got here from Ms. Patterson?” requested Dorow.

“I’ve a toddler with this girl.  How would I not know her handwriting?” mentioned Brooks.

“Why do you imagine they’re from her?” requested Dorow.

“As a result of they’re from her,” mentioned a pissed off Brooks. “I didn’t get these photos from anybody else.”

Wittchow advised the courtroom he believed the photographs had been an effort to “make Patterson appear like a foul mother,” noting that Brooks impregnated Patterson when she was a minor.

Following this trade, the decide referred to as for an early lunch break.

“A tough day”

When courtroom returned to session after the early lunch break, Brooks was within the adjoining courtroom. Dorow defined why, noting that it had been “a tough day, to say the least.”

“In my virtually 11 years on the bench… to say that that is essentially the most difficult of my profession could be an understatement,” mentioned Dorow, noting Brooks’ “tone, demeanor and decorum.”

“It’s obvious when the jury enters and exits the courtroom Brooks references subject material jurisdiction. His objections have been famous — properly documented.   As soon as that objection is made, it’s preserved. Brooks brings this up in entrance of the jury to distract and delay. When there’s a ruling Mr. Brooks disagrees with, he has a sample now asking for verified legislation — debating the subject as soon as once more or turning us away from that by citing one other matter. He tries to divert issues down a distinct path to delay or disrupt.”

She referred to as Brooks’ conduct “unstable” and mentioned he was “blatantly pushing the bounds of the courtroom.”

After initially saying he didn’t wish to return to the principle courtroom, there was quickly a break to carry him again in.

Brooks was not in a position to present a suggestion of proof as to why the decide ought to permit the doc/letter mentioned in reference to Patterson’s testimony.

“What matters had been you usually going to query her about?” requested Dorow.

Brooks made hand gestures.

“There was a lot that occurred within the final hour or so,” mentioned Brooks.

“I want a suggestion of proof on the brand new matters,” mentioned Dorow.

Brooks advised the courtroom he did not recall what Patterson testified to when she was a state witness, indicating it was a very long time in the past.

“I belief you’re ready,” mentioned Dorow. “These are your witnesses.”

Decide threatens to finish Brooks protection — no extra witnesses

The decide finally ended questioning of Patterson.

“Man, I object to that, too.  I’d as properly have stayed over there. Simply put me over there.  You maintain me in contempt,” mentioned Brooks, of the adjoining courtroom.

“You’re not in contempt,” mentioned Dorow.

There was one other break to once more transfer Brooks to the adjoining courtroom, the place he requested about subject material jurisdiction.

“So I’ve to be quiet like a little bit child,” mentioned Brooks.

There was no cross of Patterson from the state, and she or he stepped down from the witness stand.

The jury was then excused but once more to carry Brooks again into the principle courtroom. This, after Dorow warned to finish his protection completely.

“When you don’t name your subsequent witness, you’ll forfeit your proper to name some other witnesses,” mentioned Dorow.

“Mr. Brooks, all I’m asking is you conduct your self with dignity, decorum and respect.  You’ll want to ask me to return again into the courtroom,” mentioned Dorow.

I merely do what I do as a result of I don’t have the understanding,” mentioned Brooks. “I really feel very, very disrespected. After all, it’s going to make me upset.”

Brooks was then introduced again into the principle courtroom, once more.

TESTIMONY: Deanna Aldrich, lives on Maple Avenue in Waukesha

Brooks referred to as Deanna Aldrich to the stand. She lives on Maple Avenue in Waukesha and testified she heard a “giant thumping noise in my neighbor’s yard.” When she got here out, Aldrich acknowledged she noticed an SUV that was “smashed to smithereens.”

Aldrich testified she didn’t have her glasses on, so she couldn’t clearly see the one who bought out of the SUV. She was “operating out and in” of her home to get her glasses.

Brooks requested Aldrich if she recalled whether or not the SUV had any tinted home windows; she mentioned she didn’t. Aldrich additional testified that she didn’t be taught what the loud noises had been earlier than she noticed the SUV.

Aldrich added that she was conscious of the parade, however didn’t attend it. There was no cross-examination from the state.

TESTIMONY: Christopher Bertram, noticed ‘smashed up crimson automobile,’ heard gunshots

Subsequent to testify for Brooks was Christopher Bertram, an individual acknowledged he noticed a “smashed up crimson automobile” on the night of the Waukesha Christmas Parade.

Bertram acknowledged he didn’t see if the car had any tinted home windows, and didn’t recall an outline of the motive force. Nonetheless, he testified he noticed the motive force attain down and seize one thing – probably a gun.

Brooks requested Bertram if he recalled telling legislation enforcement about listening to a number of gunshots.

“Sure, sounded prefer it got here from downtown,” Bertram mentioned. “A full journal.”

The state didn’t cross-examine Bertram.

Brooks stares down Decide Dorow: ‘Frankly, it makes me scared’

Brooks grew to become upset because of the state declining to cross-examine his witnesses. He additionally steered that the witnesses taking the stand had been coached by the prosecution on their solutions.

“The entire sudden the state doesn’t have questions – rush by means of the case.  I see by means of it.  I’m removed from an fool,” mentioned Brooks.

Moments later, Brooks slammed his hand on the desk and commenced staring very intensely at Dorow, who shortly referred to as for a recess.

“This man is having a stare-down with me,” the decide mentioned. “Frankly, it makes me scared.”

TESTIMONY: Jason Hayes, attended Waukesha Christmas Parade

After arguments over who could be his subsequent witness, Brooks referred to as Jason Hayes to testify. Hayes mentioned he went to the parade as a spectator along with his daughter and was not injured within the assault.

Brooks requested Hayes if “something uncommon” caught his eye the day of the parade, Nov. 21, 2021. Hayes mentioned a “crimson truck” got here by means of close to Principal and White Rock. He mentioned the car “honked and swerved,” however didn’t know why.

Hayes additional testified that it was a single “honk” and that he “noticed it proceed” by means of the parade. He described what he advised police in an interview “a pair days after” the parade assault.

“In your opinion, (the SUV) wasn’t attempting to strike the youngsters?” Brooks requested.

“Sure,” Hayes mentioned. The witness added that he didn’t see the car hit anybody.

Opper cross-examined Hayes, asking what he recalled concerning the incident – corresponding to if the car sped off and if he noticed police run after it. Hayes mentioned he thought he remembered seeing an officer run after the car and that the motive force had a “darkish complexion.”

On redirect, Brooks requested Hayes what he would think about a darkish complexion. Hayes simply repeated the outline, Brooks mentioned it was “type of laborious” to explain and requested Hayes if he observed the motive force’s clothes or hair. Hayes mentioned no, and was excused.

TESTIMONY: Abel Lazcano, attended Waukesha Christmas Parade

The defendant referred to as Abel Lazcano to testify Friday. Lazcano attended the parade along with his spouse and daughter and mentioned he got here throughout the crimson SUV parked on Maple.

Earlier than his testimony, there was a dialogue about whether or not there could be questioning about Lazcano’s legal historical past, and the events agreed he might be questioned relating to his seven prior convictions.

Lazcano recognized the motive force of the SUV as Brooks and mentioned he flagged down an officer on the scene. He didn’t recall if the SUV had tinted home windows.

“Do you bear in mind saying you noticed three Black males fleeing the car?” Brooks requested.

“I don’t,” Lazcano answered.

Brooks requested Lazcano how he discovered the car on Maple. Lazcano mentioned he was strolling along with his household again to their automobile, attempting to get them to security, when he noticed it. He added that he discovered it parked within the driveway of a house. He mentioned he noticed just a few individuals standing across the car.

“Do you recall stating that one Black topic was described as tall, blue and black pants, others described as two quick Black males sporting sweatpants?” requested Brooks.

“Barely, a little bit little bit of it,” mentioned Lazcano.

“Which of those topics do you bear in mind? The place did you observe these individuals?” requested Brooks.

“Standing by the car the place I noticed it,” mentioned Lazcano.

“Simply so now we have readability, describe the themes you noticed standing by the car,” requested Brooks.

“I don’t bear in mind them … I can’t inform you. That was too way back,” mentioned Lazcano.

“Do you recall why the report says that you simply suggested Detective Moss that there are three Black topics, particularly Black topics operating from the car?” requested Brooks.

“No, I don’t bear in mind,” mentioned Lazcano.

Brooks requested Lazcano whether or not he advised one other detective there have been three or 4 individuals within the SUV because it handed him.

“No, I do not do not forget that,” mentioned Lazcano. “Motive I got here up with three to 4 individuals…there have been two or by the car. I figured they will need to have been ones attempting to cover the car, standing in entrance of it or near it.”

“Did they appear nervous?” requested Brooks.

“They had been the one ones not doing a lot, so yeah, they stood out,” mentioned Lazcano, who famous everybody else within the space was operating or strolling quick.

Brooks adopted up by once more asking whether or not Lazcano remembered telling a detective that there have been three to 4 individuals within the automobile when it handed him through the parade.

“No, I do not do not forget that,”

“Any purpose why he’d report that?” requested Brooks.

“Like I mentioned, I noticed two to 3 individuals by car and assumed they had been with car,” mentioned Lazcano. “I noticed the motive force as a result of he hit someone proper in entrance of us.”

On cross, Opper requested Lazcano if he noticed the SUV hit individuals within the parade.

“It simply stored swerving, plowing all people out of the best way till it bought to the entrance of us and hit someone and did like a cartwheel within the air,” mentioned Lazcano.

Opper additionally requested about how Lazcano stumbled on the SUV. He was proven an exhibit and recognized the car and the realm it was in, in addition to the individuals who had been standing round it. Dorow sustained an objection from Brooks for hypothesis.

Once more, for the courtroom, Lazcano recognized Brooks as the motive force. He described individuals operating and mentioned he’d by no means spoken to Opper.

Upon redirect, Brooks requested Lazcano extra questions concerning the driver he noticed. Lazcano mentioned he noticed the motive force for a “couple seconds” and described the motive force as a Black man with a scruffy beard. He additionally, once more, described seeing individuals standing across the parked SUV.

After his testimony, in a one-on-one interview with FOX6, Lazcano, a protection witness, additionally mentioned he believes Brooks is responsible.

TESTIMONY: Kathleen Yourell, youngsters had been within the parade

Brooks referred to as Kathleen Yourell to the stand. Yourell testified that she dropped off her youngsters, who had been taking part within the parade, on the nook of Principal and East.

Upon questioning, Yourell mentioned she didn’t recall if there have been barricades arrange. She mentioned she left her youngsters and was leaving to get to the tip of the parade, so she might decide them up. She described what she noticed.

“At the moment a automobile was beeping and weaving by means of round a slight curve White Rock has after which continued on,” mentioned Yourell. “Began to maneuver ahead, then straight throughout, considering it might depart the parade route.”

Yourell mentioned she didn’t see the motive force, didn’t recall seeing anybody get hit and didn’t recall if the SUV had tinted home windows. She mentioned the car was rushing and was shut sufficient that it “might’ve simply clipped” her or the individuals she was with. She was not injured.

Wittchow cross-examined Yourell. She mentioned she was within the crosswalk and that it was clear to her that there was a parade route. She agreed that it was clear that the motive force mustn’t have pushed into the route.

Yourell grew to become emotional on the stand as Wittchow requested about her 4 youngsters, who had been all within the parade. She mentioned two of her youngsters had been marching with the Xtreme Dance Group. She didn’t see her different two youngsters for days, she testified, as a result of she was staying together with her two injured youngsters within the hospital for days.

TESTIMONY: Katric Babiasz, legislation enforcement dispatch supervisor, attended the parade

Katric Babiasz, a legislation enforcement dispatch supervisor who was on the parade, was the ninth and remaining witness referred to as to testify Friday. She testified that she noticed a crimson SUV and that it virtually hit her daughter.

“The car, the motive force, was honking the horn,” she mentioned.

Babiasz described “gesturing” from the motive force. Brooks requested for clarification, and she or he mentioned she took the gestures as attempting to inform individuals to get out of the best way. She mentioned she “appeared the motive force proper within the eyes” and the motive force “appeared, like, by means of me.” The witness described the motive force as having hair “like dreads” and facial hair. She additionally described seeing boundaries positioned alongside the route – however did not see if anybody was hit.

“I overpassed the SUV as soon as it went right into a bunch of individuals,” mentioned Babiasz.

Babiasz testified she left the parade after seeing the SUV. She mentioned she was injured – however later specified that she was not bodily injured. She mentioned she “did not wish to discuss to anybody concerning the traumatic incident” and didn’t file any claims.

Brooks requested Babiasz if she thought the SUV was attempting to hit anybody.

“Sure,” mentioned Babiasz. “I noticed that an officer needed to get out of the best way. He was trying to cease Mr. Brooks from driving by means of the parade, and he was – on the final minute – jumped out of the best way of the car, in any other case, he would’ve been struck.”

The defendant then started a line of questioning about Babiasz’s subpoena to testify. Dorow defined the state of affairs:

Dorow: “Mr. Brooks, she’s right here beneath your subpoena.”

Brooks: “What? That is mind-boggling.”

Dorow: “I am asking you to maneuver on.”

Brooks: “You are all simply ridiculous, man.”

All through the trade with the decide, Brooks tried to proceed questioning Babiasz – implying the witness was coached on her solutions. Brooks added “that is ridiculous” because the decide tried to maneuver him alongside.

The state cross-examined Babiasz, who mentioned she and her youngsters had been within the roadway when SUV drove by means of. She mentioned they noticed Santa, which marks the tip of the parade. Brooks’ interruptions continued throughout cross-examination – his objections overruled.

“After all, as traditional, it is all the time overruled,” he mentioned.

Babiasz additional described seeing police attempt to cease the SUV close to Principal and White Rock. She added that different individuals tried to cease it, too. She mentioned it appeared to hurry up and that it “drove side-to-side” because it went by means of the individuals.

Upon redirect, Brooks requested Babiasz to substantiate she noticed a number of officers attempt to cease the SUV. She mentioned she did. Brooks then referred to as Babiasz’s recollection into query:

Brooks: “There could also be some particulars you do not recall, so would it not be truthful to say you do not fairly recall the trail of the car?”

Babiasz: “No, that’s not appropriate.”

Brooks: “What different particulars do you not recall?”

A member of the state laughed, objecting, asking how it might be potential for somebody to state what they don’t recall.

Brooks: “Appears virtually as in the event you’re recalling what you wish to recall and purposely not.”

Dorow then sustained an objection that Brooks was badgering the witness. She ordered Brooks to not badger or intimidate the witness, explaining that his facial expressions counted.

“You’ll be able to’t be critical now? What have I completed to intimidate the witness?” mentioned Brooks, including after Dorow’s response. “How are you even a decide?”

Brooks continued muttering throughout jury directions.

He was then requested if he crammed out a subpoena for his mom, Daybreak Woods.

“If I need her to be right here, she’s going to be right here,” mentioned Brooks. “All I gotta say is come. She gonna come. That straightforward.”

Because the decide tried to get by means of some housekeeping issues earlier than placing the courtroom into recess, Brooks started yelling at Dorow, telling the decide, “Simply do what you bought to take action I can get out of right here.”

Brooks was then moved to the adjoining courtroom once more.

With Brooks out of the courtroom, Dorow continued to elucidate her rulings. She mentioned he was “disparaging the courtroom” and “standing for hours regardless that I directed him to sit down down.”

“It was very obvious to this courtroom and anybody watching that Mr. Brooks was not happy with the witness’ solutions. He’d roll eyes, make different gestures that, it was obvious to this courtroom he didn’t like her testimony,” Dorow mentioned of her badgering-the-witness ruling. “He was being very argumentative with that witness who once more, he referred to as.”

Will Brooks testify?

Earlier than going into recess Friday, the decide mentioned the courtroom bought by means of all of the witnesses that had been subpoenaed to testify for Brooks’ protection. Dorow mentioned Brooks gave permission to name his mom as a witness.

The one different witnesses Dorow mentioned she might establish for testimony could be Brooks himself, giving him the weekend to think about whether or not he would testify or not.

“It’s his determination and his determination alone on whether or not to testify,” Dorow mentioned.

If Brooks didn’t reply whether or not he wish to testify, the decide mentioned it might be interpreted by the courtroom as a “no,” that means he selected to not testify, given “how the trial has progressed.”

Prosecutors mentioned they didn’t plan to have rebuttal witnesses.

The decide advised the state to be ready for closing arguments throughout Week 4 of the trial and prolonged (greater than 100 pages) jury directions.

Earlier than courtroom ended, the decide requested Brooks if he had something to handle.

“Why have not I been given the possibility to supply my filings into proof? I would really like each single submitting I place into proof. Each final certainly one of them,” mentioned Brooks.

“You all want to chop it out, significantly. Cease it. Looks like all you wish to do is gang up, be biased, be prejudiced and gang up.

SIGN UP TODAY: Get each day headlines, breaking information emails from FOX6 Information

Brooks additionally accused the courtroom of constructing “false information” and violating his First and Sixth Modification rights.