NOTE: I had forgotten about this and am just tuning in so I may have insufficient information to be as correct as I'd like to be on some things during today's hearing. Apology.
Law & Crime Network: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZD9Iyrj72wo
Potentially Criminal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1M5thdA6yI
Few details of the case;
https://archive.ph/s2PkF
->
https://www.nbc26.com/news/local-news/darrell-brooks-waives-right-to-an-attorney-second-hearing-scheduled-for-wednesday
Brooks is representing himself.
Judge in earlier pretrial hearing;
"No. Listen, Mr. Brooks. We are done here today. I cannot make a finding that you have an understanding of what you're charged with. The nature of these proceedings" said Dorow.
Scheduled today's (Wed) hearing for Wednesday (today) 1 P.M.
How I see it: this is used to push his insanity argument which will end up with him in a 4 star resort psychiatric hospital.
Currently as I write this;
Judge is going over court proceedings rules stating that;
- Juvenile victims and witnesses will have the requirement of showing chest down.
- Full audio allowed.
- Judge is claiming that due to the event being public it led to her decision of above ruling.
Defendant Brooks is playing the court and slow-reading the documents to waste time.
Current decision sounds as if the judge is mulling over allowing or disallowing victims from being in the audience or not. Something which is constitutionally mandated to be allowed. So I'm not sure.
The request is being gone over about witnesses attending or not. The DA went over how the ruling about restricting court attendance specificlaly excludes victims / witnesses. The judge then asked if the ruling should be made they can't discuss with each other which the DA stated was agreeable and something she had already instructed to those she had spoken to.
906.15 Exclusion of witnesses. (1) At the request of a party, the judge or a circuit court commissioner shall order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear the testimony of other witnesses. The judge or circuit court commissioner may also make the order of his or her own motion.
Judge makes a ruling;
- Victims can attend.
- They are obligated to not discuss things prior to them testimony or with witnesses who have not testified yet and are on the docket to testify.
.
TL;DR: Voir Dire is jury selection and questioning and the process of.
Whether or not potential jurors have formed an opinion due to advertisement of the trial on media etc.
Hearing concluded for Monday morning jury selection.
Anticlutch out, peace niggas.
#**NOTE:** I had forgotten about this and am just tuning in so I may have insufficient information to be as correct as I'd like to be on some things during today's hearing. Apology.
[Actually I don't care about you niggers, apology rescinded.](#spoiler)
**Law & Crime Network:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZD9Iyrj72wo
**Potentially Criminal:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1M5thdA6yI
Few details of the case;
https://archive.ph/s2PkF
->
https://www.nbc26.com/news/local-news/darrell-brooks-waives-right-to-an-attorney-second-hearing-scheduled-for-wednesday
**Brooks is representing himself.**
Judge in earlier pretrial hearing;
>"No. Listen, Mr. Brooks. We are done here today. I cannot make a finding that you have an understanding of what you're charged with. The nature of these proceedings" said Dorow.
>>Scheduled today's (Wed) hearing for Wednesday (today) 1 P.M.
How I see it: this is used to push his insanity argument which will end up with him in a 4 star resort psychiatric hospital.
Currently as I write this;
Judge is going over court proceedings rules stating that;
1. Juvenile victims and witnesses will have the requirement of showing chest down.
2. Full audio allowed.
3. Judge is claiming that due to the event being public it led to her decision of above ruling.
Defendant Brooks is playing the court and slow-reading the documents to waste time.
Current decision sounds as if the judge is mulling over allowing or disallowing victims from being in the audience or not. Something which is constitutionally mandated to be allowed. So I'm not sure.
The request is being gone over about witnesses attending or not. The DA went over how the ruling about restricting court attendance specificlaly excludes victims / witnesses. The judge then asked if the ruling should be made they can't discuss with each other which the DA stated was agreeable and something she had already instructed to those she had spoken to.
[Wisconsin Statute 906.15](https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/906/15)
>906.15 Exclusion of witnesses. (1) At the request of a party, the judge or a circuit court commissioner shall order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear the testimony of other witnesses. The judge or circuit court commissioner may also make the order of his or her own motion.
Judge makes a ruling;
1. Victims can attend.
2. They are obligated to not discuss things prior to them testimony or with witnesses who have not testified yet and are on the docket to testify.
[Current request is on voir dire process](https://www.douglascountyks.org/depts/clerk-district-court/faq/what-voir-dire-and-what-its-purpose).
TL;DR: Voir Dire is jury selection and questioning and the process of.
Whether or not potential jurors have formed an opinion due to advertisement of the trial on media etc.
Hearing concluded for Monday morning jury selection.
Anticlutch out, peace niggas.
(post is archived)