Law&Crime Sidebar - Darrell Brooks Defends Himself in Waukesha Parade Trial (RECAP)

Episode Date: October 21, 2022

Darrell Brooks, the Wisconsin man charged in the Waukesha Christmas Parade tragedy, begins his case as he defends himself against homicide charges. Law&Crime's Angenette Levy recaps the biggest moments of Brooks opening statement, his first witnesses and who he wants to testify for him next. LAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergVideo Editing - Michael Deininger & Logan HarrisGuest Booking - Alyssa FisherSocial Media Management - Kiera BronsonSUBSCRIBE TO OUR OTHER PODCASTS:Court JunkieObjectionsThey Walk Among AmericaCoptales and CocktailsThe Disturbing TruthSpeaking FreelyLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. View Shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller

that will keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. When I'm confident that the evidence will show, I'm sorry, I'm getting a little emotional. When I'm confident, that the evidence would show is that this incident was not planned. This incident was not intentional. Daryl Brooks makes his opening statement to the jury breaking down after clashing with Judge Doro and prosecutors.

I'm Ann Jeanette Levy and welcome to Law and Crime Sidebar podcast. Brooks, of course, chose to represent him. He says that he is a sovereign citizen and isn't subject to the laws of the state of Wisconsin. He is facing more than 60 counts accused of killing six people by driving his vehicle into the Waukesha Christmas parade in Wisconsin last November. Now, through his questioning of the state's witnesses, Daryl Brooks seemed to suggest that he may not have been the person driving the red SUV that day, but during his opening statement, he practically conceded that. point that he was the driver. Obviously, I don't have any rehearsed or well-prepared speech, so I'm just going to speak from the heart.

I would just like to first say that I want to bring to remember in something I think everyone in this room has been taught pretty much as far back as we can remember is that there's always two sides to every story. And for so long now, roughly a year, there's only truly been once. side-toe of this story and I've sat back and watched from countless narratives that's been put out there the way this incident has been portrayed at times and finally everyone getting a chance to get the full story you won't hear me try to argue facts fact is this incident was tragic. Very tragic. That's not lost on me. The facts are that

there's still a lot of people healing, a lot of families healing on both sides. Brooks then went on to tell the jury that what happened that day was neither intentional nor planned. I think it's a easy to look at the magnitude or something like this and form of opinions. I think it's easy to disregard a lot of factors. And I think in reference to what I stated earlier, it's easy to forget the other side of the coin. There's been a lot of suffering involved in this incident a lot. Obviously, with the families, with the community,

and even the alleges, the ledge defendants family as well, there's been a lot of suffering. A lot of misunderstanding. And I just want you to keep in mind everything that will be presented in its totality, keep in mind the power that you have. Daryl Brooks throughout the trial, when questioned by the judge about it, has been adamant

about wanting to call 13 witnesses. The number 13 seemed to be very important to him. him. Well, his first witness that he tried to call was the state of Wisconsin. He has repeatedly asked people about the plaintiff in the case and about the state of Wisconsin. So Daryl Brooks says he's a sovereign citizen. He's not subject to the laws of the United States or the state of Wisconsin. So he tried to call the state of Wisconsin as his first witness. The defense would like to call the plaintiff's state of Wisconsin to the stand. The objection is noted. It is sustained. Call your next witness, please.

Reason for the sustained? Not relevant. And you haven't named a person to go along with that. The subpoena was accepted, Your Honor. I'll take the issue up outside the presence of the jury, if necessary. Call your next witness, please. Well, I would like to make an oral witness motion to dismiss for failure to appear by the plaintiff and for failure to state a claim from which relief can be granted. I will take that up outside the presence of the jury. Next witness, please.

So is the state not prison? Mr. Brooks, I'm not going to address that any further. While the jury's present, I'll take that up outside their presence. Call your next witness, please. Brooks's second witness was a man named Nicholas Kirby. He's actually a friend of Erica Patterson, who is Daryl Brooks's ex-girlfriend. And you'll recall that Erica Patterson, had an argument with Daryl Brooks before he drove into the Christmas parade and she said that

he even slapped her. So Kirby said that Patterson called him that day for help. Let's back up a little bit because that doesn't make sense. You stated that you had a description of the vehicle. Would that be fair to say? Yes. The question was how did you, how did you learn of the description of a vehicle at that point. Ms. Patterson told me over the phone that she was in a red SUV. There aren't many red SUVs with young women screaming for help

in Waukesha. Now, Daryl Brooks has made a big deal in questioning witnesses about whether or not they heard a horn honking that day. So he questioned his second witness, Heather Reamer, about whether or not, she heard that horn. Did you at any time during the commotion when you and your family were at the parade, do you call seeing anything that drew your attention in any way? Yes. And do you recall

what that was that you saw? I've read Ford SUV driving through faster than all the other cars in the parade. And what did you observe? vehicle doing at the time that it caught your attention? It was honking. Well, I heard honking. I'm not positive if it was the red SUV or another car. Thirteen. Did you notice any other vehicles around the vehicle you saw, following the vehicle you saw? Following no. It passed a float that had a vehicle in the parade. So it was by another vehicle, yes. And it was by It was passing the other vehicle you're referring to, correct? And you stated a reference to honking it.

In your opinion, strictly your opinion, why would the vehicle honk its horn? To alert somebody? Then on cross-examination, the prosecution made a pretty good point about what side of the road Brooks was actually. driving on that day. You saw Daryl Brooks driving that red SUV in front of that gas changes. Is that correct?

At that time I didn't know. At that time I didn't know. Called that name and it's speculative. Overruled, you may answer. At that time I didn't know his name, but yes. Now that you see him sitting in court today? Yes. That's the guy.

Yes. Objection, speculative. Overruled, the record will reflect the identification of the defendant as the defendant the driver of the red SUV she saw as depicted in this exhibit thank you may we please display for everybody exhibit number 15 which is also previously been received and published go ahead can we zoom in please on the intersection of Main Street and East Northeast Avenue rejection of relevancy I presume the question will provide the relevance so go ahead thank you you were sitting in

front of the Historical Society you testified yes Do you recognize this map in front of you? Objection, speculative. Overruled the witness may answer. No, I don't. Okay, would the historical society be near this intersection that I'm circling, East and Maine? Yes.

Okay, we can please remember that annotation, Adam Clerk. When you saw the red SUV drive by, you testified you could not see the driver, correct? Correct. Because it was going so fast? Yes. Did you ever see that SUV come to a stop at any point on Main Street? No.

In fact, did you see it accelerate as it traveled towards more people? Objection is spakling to you. Overruled, the witness may answer. It's not like you used me to say some stay. And then I remembered you had called the witness, not the state. So cross-examination is appropriate. Fair enough, though. Next question.

Did we get an answer on that? Yes. Okay. Thank you. That's all I have. Now, Friday morning, before court started, Daryl Brooks actually told the judge that he'd like to add another witness to his lits. He wants to subpoena his mother. Okay. The legal issue is this. A detective case yesterday testified for the second time under oath in reference to Exhibit 13 and 14. that showed the backyard of my mother's home, which he stated that he had been to the home, had seen the backyard, all this stuff, when he did not, in fact, even speak with my mother. It was brought to my attention that my mother, in fact, never spoke to any law enforcement from Waukeshaw.

Would you like to add her to your witness? less to call her. Yes, I would. All right, that's fine. That's how we'll address that. But that's not something we needed to address this. It needs to be addressed because of the issue of the subpoena. That's the reason why I needed to be addressed. That's the reason why I was trying to attempt to bring it to your attention. All right, so you would like, you're asking me to add Don Woods to the witness list for you.

Yes, but I also have a question about the subpoena. The subpoena for whom? For my mother. But I will also like to subpoena the phone record so it can be made part of the record of the conversation. Since the prosecution listens to all the phone calls, they should be able to have heard that phone call as well. So they should be on notice of what was said. I don't know what phone call you're referring to. I'm referring to a jail phone call.

I'm referring to a jail phone call that was made last night. October 20th, between 7.54 p.m. and 8.10 p.m., which I'm sure the prostitution has heard by now, and that also brings up the issue of perjury testimony. Sir, the way that you will address the issues that you're talking about are to call witnesses to challenge that or to present the evidence in support of your position. If you're telling me you need to add Dawn Woods to the witness list, I approve of that. You can fill out a subpoena, and I'll direct the state to serve that upon her, and at the appropriate time, we'll have her brought,

will indicate when in the order of folks she can be brought in. So I'll grant that request. In terms of the jail records, you'll have to subpoena the appropriate custodian or a witness who can testify to that. That's what I was trying to gain knowledge of. I can't give you advice. I'm not trying to ask for advice. I was, is the is can, is that needle for me for a I can't direct how you do that. I can't tell you how to do that. You are acting as your own attorney and you will need to figure that out. The interesting thing about Daryl Brooks

wanting to call his mother is because she's been on TV in Milwaukee on Milwaukee television stations basically saying that she knew from the time that Daryl Brooks was a child six years old or so that there was just something not right about him. And she said that she would never recommend him representing himself and that she doesn't watch the trial. So we will see if he indeed gets to call his mother as a witness. And that's it for this edition of Law and Crime Sidebar podcast. It is produced by Logan Harris and Sam Goldberg. Bobby Zoki is our YouTube manager. Alyssa Fisher handles our bookings, and Kiera Bronson does our social media. You can download and listen to Sidebar on Apple, Spotify, Google, and wherever else you get your podcast.

You can also watch it on Law and Crimes YouTube channel. I'm Ann Janette Levy, and we'll see you next time. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.