- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Waukesha Christmas Parade Massacre Trial - Brooks Gets 6-Life Sent. + 762.5 yrs in prison
Posted on 10/25/22 at 10:21 pm to Scruffy
Posted on 10/25/22 at 10:21 pm to Scruffy
If Steve Gosney wants to up his YouTube/Rumble/whatever platform viewer count... as a criminal defense attorney in Florida... he should make a "defense of Darrell Brooks" video like tonight
Give a "how a lawyer would've handled his case" point of view
I'm sure he'd readily admit it was a losing case from the jump
Give a "how a lawyer would've handled his case" point of view
I'm sure he'd readily admit it was a losing case from the jump
1
Posted on 10/26/22 at 12:06 am to rt3
quote:Would definitely watch that.
If Steve Gosney wants to up his YouTube/Rumble/whatever platform viewer count... as a criminal defense attorney in Florida... he should make a "defense of Darrell Brooks" video like tonight
quote:Just to hear another point of view would be great.
Give a "how a lawyer would've handled his case" point of view
On a side note, I showed Brooks’ closing to my dad (lawyer) and he got stuck watching a whole day’s videos.
Got a kick out of it.
Posted on 10/26/22 at 2:03 am to rt3
First i've seen details over this.
Brooks shot his nephew over old cell phone
Daily Mail article with some details on past crimes I have not seen. LINK
"Not only did he try to run over the mother of one of his children earlier this year, but he also tried to knock down a cop who stopped him for not wearing a seatbelt, according to court records.
And after a separate incident both his grandmother and nephew took out restraining orders against him."
Brooks shot his nephew over old cell phone
Daily Mail article with some details on past crimes I have not seen. LINK
"Not only did he try to run over the mother of one of his children earlier this year, but he also tried to knock down a cop who stopped him for not wearing a seatbelt, according to court records.
And after a separate incident both his grandmother and nephew took out restraining orders against him."
Posted on 10/26/22 at 3:19 am to Scruffy
quote:
On a side note, I showed Brooks’ closing to my dad (lawyer) and he got stuck watching a whole day’s videos. Got a kick out of it.
I’m fascinated with this case and didn’t read about it until a couple weeks ago. I’ve been watching the daily full length streams of the trial in my office the last few weeks ETA Daily Mail is so much better than our media. Here’s the victim impact statement by his nephew:
And another person who had a bad experience on Mocospace
quote:
Winters, 29, said she hooked up with Brooks, who she met on the social website Mocospace, but they didn't seriously date. She didn't even know his real name until after the weekend deaths in Waukesha.
'I always knew him as Fly,' she said, referring to his rapper stage name mathboifly.
Weeks and months would go by without contact but then this summer, Brooks called her from prison where he was serving four months for non-payment of child support and he asked if he could see her when he was released.
And a traffic stop where he could’ve ran over an officer
quote:
He then began wrestling with (Brooks) to gain control of the vehicle. At one point he had to pull the wheel to the left to avoiding (sic) colliding with a parked car. He eventually was able to remove the key and the vehicle came to a stop. 'At that point (Brooks) took flight from the officer. He was eventually located inside a small children's playhouse.
This post was edited on 10/26/22 at 3:33 am
Posted on 10/26/22 at 6:57 am to TheAstroTiger
quote:
don’t see how the jury needs more than an Hour. I
Have you ever been on a jury? People will bring up irrelevant things, facts not in evidence. They’ll want to discuss things the judge explicitly told them to disregard, etc.
You probably will have at least one person really hung up on not knowing “why.”
ETA: Forgot about the one person who will be really insistent that they all take their duties seriously and give each charge the “consideration it deserves.”
This post was edited on 10/26/22 at 7:01 am
Posted on 10/26/22 at 7:13 am to Wayne Campbell
I've never been on one but I think I'd have to ask to be the foreman once deliberations started. There's no way I could let some dipshit steer us for hours with stuff like
This is a total assumption but I think an all-white jury from Waukesha that voted to remain at the courthouse after a COVID exposure has a pretty low chance of letting this guy walk. It just doesn't seem like a sample size where you'd get some twisted Karen who thinks Brooks was wronged in some way.
quote:
People will bring up irrelevant things, facts not in evidence. They’ll want to discuss things the judge explicitly told them to disregard
This is a total assumption but I think an all-white jury from Waukesha that voted to remain at the courthouse after a COVID exposure has a pretty low chance of letting this guy walk. It just doesn't seem like a sample size where you'd get some twisted Karen who thinks Brooks was wronged in some way.
Posted on 10/26/22 at 7:19 am to Ingeniero
So O/U Brooks moves for a mistrial this morning over the Reddit troll? Somebody has been coaching him behind the scenes it seems, maybe some sovcit through his nightly calls with mama. And will he purposely blurt it out in front of the jury?
Posted on 10/26/22 at 7:44 am to lachellie
There’s definitely going to be some shenanigans
Posted on 10/26/22 at 7:49 am to Ingeniero
quote:
This is a total assumption but I think an all-white jury from Waukesha that voted to remain at the courthouse after a COVID exposure has a pretty low chance of letting this guy walk. It just doesn't seem like a sample size where you'd get some twisted Karen who thinks Brooks was wronged in some way.
I was on an all white jury in a conservative area this year. It was an assault case with clear video evidence. The defense never even tried to raise the argument that it wasn't them. The whole trial proceedings from jury selection to verdict took less than 3 days and that was with a day in between voir dire and opening arguments.
We also had a COVID exposure.
The jury ultimately found on the lesser included charge because some people were hung up on whether or not the weapon (which was never found) could reasonably have been considered deadly. It was a 3-4 foot long solid wood rod (think clothing rod from the closet) that the guy el ca bonged over the victim's head from behind.
You put 12 people in a room and they will start to take on roles is all I'm saying.
They absolutely will convict. Some may be hung up on intent so they may go with the lesser includeds.
Posted on 10/26/22 at 7:53 am to LewDawg
how many of you are familiar with Ernie Wayne Tertelgte? he straight up walks about out court as a "sovereign citizen"?
"I am the living man."
"I am the living man."
Posted on 10/26/22 at 7:54 am to autauga
quote:quote:
he had a reasonable doubt case there with the “intent” argument
High speed through the crowd.
Never stopped.
Ran away after.
Pray tell exactly what case could even a competent lawyer have made?
So was the next item presented as evidence? As much as a stretch as "the car did it" is, it sure would be tough to claim this happens repeatedly, to the same person, with a long rap sheet:
quote:
"Not only did he try to run over the mother of one of his children earlier this year, but he also tried to knock down a cop who stopped him for not wearing a seatbelt, according to court records.
Posted on 10/26/22 at 7:54 am to Wayne Campbell
quote:
The jury ultimately found on the lesser included charge because some people were hung up on whether or not the weapon (which was never found) could reasonably have been considered deadly.
To quote the movie Let's go to Prison:
"The three scariest words in the English language: "Trial by jury." Juries are made up of 12 people who are so dumb they couldn't even think up an excuse to get out of jury duty."
Posted on 10/26/22 at 7:56 am to MidWestGuy
His previous charges and convictions were not entered into evidence as they were determined to be unfairly prejudicial.
I believe the only items regarding prior offenses entered in were the two bond agreements as two of his charges were for violating those agreements.
I believe the only items regarding prior offenses entered in were the two bond agreements as two of his charges were for violating those agreements.
Posted on 10/26/22 at 8:04 am to Wayne Campbell
quote:
I believe the only items regarding prior offenses entered in were the two bond agreements as two of his charges were for violating those agreements.
Wasn't that also used as the only potential motive for what caused everything?
He got mad she didn't pay for his bond or something and that's what led to the fight which led to him driving off in a rage through the parade
Posted on 10/26/22 at 8:10 am to Wayne Campbell
quote:
His previous charges and convictions were not entered into evidence as they were determined to be unfairly prejudicial.
I believe the only items regarding prior offenses entered in were the two bond agreements as two of his charges were for violating those agreements.
Too bad (though it shouldn't matter, they need to come to a guilty charge regardless).
I'm no lawyer, but it sure seems relevant in terms of showing a trend of behavior.
Another Question: Can a juror make a case for a mistrial? I know if I let some creep off because I didn't have some information that I thought was relevant, I'd be PO'd.
Posted on 10/26/22 at 8:20 am to MidWestGuy
quote:
Another Question: Can a juror make a case for a mistrial? I know if I let some creep off because I didn't have some information that I thought was relevant, I'd be PO'd.
If there is a hung jury the State can choose to retry the case if they want.
Posted on 10/26/22 at 8:22 am to Wayne Campbell
quote:
His previous charges and convictions were not entered into evidence as they were determined to be unfairly prejudicial.
unfairly prejudicial? what kind of crap is that?
You are who you are by your actions, as the DA said in her closing arguments.
I get that you want to judge them on this one act, but that's not how the world works at any level. There's a reason why a 2nd offense is harsher than the 1st, and the third offense is harsher than the 2nd, whether you got a DWI or you were talking in class in 2nd grade. You can't just ignore the past. Yea it does cause you to become prejudice, and that's fair. It's unfair to completely admonish a piece of shite of all the piece of shite things he did before his final act as the biggest piece of shite.
Posted on 10/26/22 at 8:29 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:
unfairly prejudicial? what kind of crap is that?
As I understand it, he has a previous charge for running over his ex girlfriend's foot with a car. If he has been convicted of that offense, then it probably would be admissible.
Using DUI/DWI as an example, if you have 1 conviction for DWI and are then arrested again for the same offense, the previous conviction can be used against you because while prejudicial, it's not unfairly so. However, if you were previously arrested under suspicion of DWI, but it was never proven/you weren't actually under the influence then it would be unfair to use that against you in the future.
The rules of law aren't always pretty, but they mostly exist to protect the rights of the people.
Posted on 10/26/22 at 8:29 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:
get that you want to judge them on this one act, but that's not how the world works at any level. There's a reason why a 2nd offense is harsher than the 1st, and the third offense is harsher than the 2nd, whether you got a DWI or you were talking in class in 2nd grade.
The idea is that you should be punished for the crime you committed in the instant act. If the entire criminal history comes in it’s like they’re convicting you for your propensity for criminal behavior and not the act itself
Posted on 10/26/22 at 8:33 am to Proximo
and we're on...!!
we got the curls out
we got the curls out
This post was edited on 10/26/22 at 8:35 am
Page 133 of 184
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News