WAUKESHA, Wis. – Prosecutors on Thursday, Oct. 20 rested their case in the Darrell Brooks trial, charged in the November 2021 Waukesha Christmas parade attack. The state called 57 witnesses to testify over the two weeks of the presentation of prosecutors’ case-in-chief.
After the prosecution rested, the court took its lunch break for the day. Immediately following the break, Brooks cried as he delivered his deferred opening statement to the jury.
Brooks gets help preparing his opening statement
As court began Thursday, Judge Jennifer Dorow noted she gave Brooks an excerpt from her judicial bench book on opening statements that she believed “would be helpful to provide to Mr. Brooks as he puts together his opening statement.” She said this document contained references to Supreme Court rules, case law, manner and purpose, scope, etc. for his opening statement, which the judge said could help him to establish his roadmap/framework so that the jury can better understand his evidence.
She noted that his opening statement would need to be “based on the law and evidence you believe is properly admissible.”
She said his opening statement must not contain reference to subject matter jurisdiction, something Brooks brought up multiple times every day during the trial.
Brooks noted he was “pretty aware that subject matter jurisdiction wouldn’t be part of my opening or closing statement.”
“Okay. Great,” said Dorow.
“Even though it hasn’t been proven on the record, and it should be addressed,” said Brooks.
The judge noted it did not need to be proven on the record and again referred to her written statement on the matter issued Friday, Oct. 14.
“Jurisdiction was commenced when the complaint was filed,” said Dorow.
District attorney’s motion to amend the complaint
The court then addressed a motion Waukesha County District Attorney Sue Opper said was served on Brooks Wednesday night in jail.
Brooks said he did not look at the document.
“I accept for value and return for value the document…” said Brooks. “I don’t know what I’m supposed to say on that.”
In the motion, prosecutors moved to amend the information regarding the location of Count 76, which read “at Frame Park.” Prosecutors asked to change it to “near Frame Park.” This particular count relates to the fight prosecutors say Brooks was involved in with his ex-girlfriend, Erika Patterson, before the Christmas parade attack. Prosecutors argued that this change would be more in line with Patterson’s testimony.
They noted that “it’s a very small change in the charging documents.”
Prosecution in court Thursday, Oct. 20
Brooks argued that this case had been charged for “the better part of a year.”
“If there was one word that needed to be changed, there was ample time for it to be changed,” he said. “I don’t think one word, at this time, really has any bearing on the testimony or the actual charge. It’s been charged like this for a year, basically. The language hasn’t been referenced to being changed until (Wednesday). What is the significance now, at this point?” said Brooks.
Judge Dorow referred to statutes stating the amendment of a complaint may be allowed if such amendment is not prejudicial to the defendant, when it doesn’t change the criminal charge and when the offense/results are the same. Dorow granted the state’s request.
Brooks said he was looking to call Patterson as a witness and asked “what will happen if the testimony changes.”
Dorow said she would not speculate or give Brooks an advisory opinion on that.
Judge accepts state’s request to recall Detective Casey
The court then discussed prosecutors’ request to recall Detective Casey, who previously testified over two days earlier in the trial. Prosecutors noted there wouldn’t be any duplication in their questioning. Rather, they said his first testimony focused on the parade layout, and they now wanted to ask about victim identification, driver identification and vehicle identification — things that…
Read More: Defendant cries during opening statement