LIVE: Waukesha Co. court hearing for Darrell Brooks
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 жов 2024
- Darrell Brooks, the man accused of driving an SUV into the Waukesha Christmas parade last year, appears in Waukesha Co. court seeking a change of venue for his trial.
How was this guy ever let out of jail to be able to kill these people? He had active charges in 2 states, with several charges in total. Some of which were also serious and likely meant he'd have to serve some years in jail. Yet here he was,...free to commit yet more crime on a more serious level.
Low bond amounts. We need to advocate for higher bonds for repeat offenders.
He was bailed out 2 weeks prior for attempting to run over his girlfriend with the SAME car (he broke her foot with the tire running it over when she tried to escape him running her over) His Mother still allowed him use of the car once he was out again. She is definitely accountable to some extent. If she didn't allow him use of the car it is very likely the attack wouldn't have happened).
Voting in democrat, liberal loony prosecutors who won't prosecute
@@---C_B--- That was my same thought about the mother. She knew he had already used her car to assault the gf so why was she allowing him use of her car yet again. She had obviously enabled the personality disorders he suffers.
@@---C_B--- his mother was a enabler I felt. Then she spoke on zoom in court about him having mental illness. She didn't want to fight with him so she just let him be. He's a narcissist and he abuses the women in his life.
DB definitely demonstrated the ability to shut his gob during this hearing
Yes but it was probably driving him crazy not being the one to do the talking because that's how he tries to take control of a situation. He probably couldn't wait to get rid of the lawyers. They were probably glad to get rid of him also. You know he was probably just as much of a problem to them as he was to everyone else.
@@mothershelper1981yea his strategy was to try wordplay the court with nonsense and if that failed then resort to his go to which is bully the judge/DA . Neither of which worked.
@@MrGST360 yep. Shows how highly he thought of himself. I never heard the expression word salad used so many times in so many descriptions before this trial.
Imagine having to live with someone like that!
He committed those crimes in Waukesha so it should be held there the venture should not change after all the judge has jurisdiction over the case
And that's verified PRUFF
Groundz
And with him later representing himself? And him always challenging the jurisdiction. Can you see how that would of gone, if they did move it?😮😮😮😮😮
DB could have had this trial at the gates of Heaven..and still been found guilty.
You mean at the gates of hell, but I get what you’re saying
Dudes commentary in beginning is hilarious. Crazy how the world didn’t acquiesce just to him!!
I lived in NY and moved to Florida and never have lived there and I would fry him. So logistics have nothing to do with it.. had he had any remorse I probably would feel better but he still murdered 6 ppl ..LOGISTICS has no bearing
Prosecutor is exactly right..Brooks selected where to do his crime …with thousands of ppl witnessing his crime …..no reason to go to another county..everyone in the world knows what he did. How about he admit and skip trial. Be a man, for once
OMG this lawyer rambles on and on just like DB during trial. It doesn't matter where he would have gone. There were so many people that witnessed him doing this.
Dadgum man, I donated to one of the fundraisers and I live in Georgia.
I couldn't help but laugh at the little commentary and back and forth between the cameraman and the beginning 😂😂😂
Begging didn’t get them anything they wanted.
This public defender makes me sick to my stomach because of people like him we have evil running free
One of the fundamental tenets of this country is that everyone deserves to have their rights protected and to receive a vigorous defense when they are charged with a crime. If you don't avail that to everyone, eventually no one will get it- the line that separates people who deserve representation from those who don't will constantly get redrawn until everyone charged with a crime is on the wrong side of the line. Public defenders are heroes who preserve rights for everybody by making sure the worst criminal's rights are protected. People who kick sand on them are often stupid and reflexive demagogues who would certainly want their own rights protected and to be well-represented if they were charged with a crime. Nevertheless, they want to lead the way in determining for everybody who deserves protection and who doesn't. Go back to digging the lint out of your belly button and leave the thinking to those who are better equipped to handle it.
The lady is the one that makes me sick I think they were announcing the 6th charge for little baby Jackson. And she puts her arm around and passing on the back like he deserve some kind of compassion I hope they all rot in hell
I agree with Brian - the right to Defence is essential for our rights. Ronda is also right. You can defend him, but don’t coddle him. I think she fancies the rat.
He's just doing his job
Camera guy’s comments 😂
Needs to learn how to edit
Yeah. Who is this clueless self absorbed tool? Seriously? All his exasperation is what's ridiculous.
Is that who's talking? Lmao😂😂😂
I know right?? What the hell....comical
Did you see his side eyes as he was walking out
Like a hawk ready to pounce on his prey.
Thank you
There is CLEARLY ppl out in there if there was not then they would not have the crime of murder!
Ooohhh la la Sue's hair looks really good here. ❤
Society must Make--and Enforce--Laws that EUTHANIZE "REPEAT OFFENDERS" / "CAREER CRIMINALS", immediately after only their Third Conviction (Misdemeanor or higher).
Yeah, that's gonna be a hard NO, but thanks for playing.
Never gonna happen.
@@slactweak And those Parasites who get Arrested into the HUNDREDS OF TIMES?!?
Your solution for that is???
@@Justcallmerita There's Always Hope...
@@bluewater3783 It sure as HELL ain't killing people, willy nilly, because I believe it should be so. ANYONE who commits, or SANCTIONS, such actions is no better than the criminals.
I wanted to comment on some other videos but starting with this one I see how dirty and that his hair he is at one point when the trial got started probably in the third week he was complaining about a shower he probably did not even want to take a shower if I were those bailiffs I would not want to touch him he probably smell also I see in the latter part of the trial his head was bald I read out of so many negative adjectives none of them were nice
His hair was gross
This recording is poor. You should not be able to hear the comments or sighs of the cameraman.
Atleast this wasn't considered a hate crime. 😁
Not yet
@@copper4441 it probably wont be
Charges will be dropped and a statue of Mr Brooks erected over the ruins of the police station.
He should have went for hose Karens heads like Thor did in Endgame
@@deanlayman9200 yes we shall see if black privilege yet again blatantly raises it's racist head . Perhaps another thousand dollar vond too . Exactly how many black.people did he run down ? Hate crime , not in Woke America. WILL Black Felons Matter Rush to this poor thugs rescue .He does after all fit their criteria.
X😊
Mr Brooks Bell was 5 million
That’s a pretty expensive bell
Learn to spell !!
@@naddygam6490 I mean, you'd think you were buying the Liberty Bell or something for that price. Lol.
bail not bell 🤔🤦🏻♀️
@@beautifuldisaster139 tell that to marvin clark
I thought defense argument was brilliant while prosecutor’s weak and unconvincing; I guess it was clear from the first time this motion was filed, judge and prosecutor didn’t want to “move” anywhere for a month but if any case qualified for change of venue, that would be this one
The defense's argument was without merit. You are owed to a change of venue.
The publicity of this case was worldwide. The county is large enough to find an uneffected jury. The venue changing only changes the jury pool. The judge and prosecutors remain the same.
He isn't entitled to no prejudice, he's entitled not to unfair prejudice.
The judge follows case law, not your emotion.
@@notthefather3919 MY emotion?… that’s stupid.. look at Vallow/Daybell case, and change of venue granted, and cimpare cases-intellectually, buddy- plus the time passage in Vallow/Daybell case compared to not even a year in this case until trial started. Not even comparable as far as effect on community and publicity goes
@@polishgrlinvegasso that’s what the Daybell Vallow judge decided to do. The population there isn’t comparable to the Brooks case.
The accused isn’t the only one with rights to consider. The community has been offended against as well as the families, victims, survivors of the parade attack. When someone offends in a certain city, county they offend against everyone there. Not to mention the expense of moving a trial of that size with that number of victims.
There was a great deal to consider besides Mr Brooks “rights”.
Speaking of Mr Brooks, esp now that we’ve seen the plethora of still images, and video footage showing him behind the wheel of that car, and we know it was mechanically sound, we know he never attempted to stop. We know he slowed to toss people off the hood and then ran the bodies over after they hit the ground in front of the Ford Escape he drove. Now that we know there was a plethora of eye witnesses that placed him behind the wheel …..I could go on and on.
The fact of the matter is that no matter where that trial was held they had mountains of evidence against the man that people all over the world knew about or would see and be able to easily discern the man was as guilty as guilty could be ! He should be glad he didn’t commit that crime in the SOUTH then go up to people the way he did as he fled on foot ! He wouldn’t have been treated as nicely as the kid who made him the sandwich ! He’s lucky the police got to him first !
@@SouthernNurseAndTheLaw I agree with preponderance of evidence, and number of witnesses and victims to testify.
Yet, a change of venue would not have impacted the outcome. I am pretty sure he knew that and was only forcing his lawyers to file that motion just because he could? Possiblly, he thought it might gain him some advantage, where there really was none to be had.