By SAM CALDWELL and TREY GARRISON
Waukesha, WI – The 10th day of the trial of the accused anti-White terrorist Darrell E. Brooks started with more of Brooks’ pseudo-legal bickering and obstinance over “subject matter jurisdiction.” Waukesha Circuit Judge Jennifer Dorow seemed exasperated with Brooks’ typical behavior, threatening to remove him from the courtroom after indulging and mollycoddling the accused murderer to the point of farce on Thursday.
The court heard direct testimony Friday that Brooks was intentionally targeting parade goers rather than simply “attempting to flee” the scene, as prosecutors tried to argue in its opening statement.
Brooks, a black career criminal, and a registered sex offender is charged with intentionally driving his SUV through the annual Waukesha Christmas Parade on Nov. 21, 2021, striking dozens of White spectators and participants. Six White people died, and 61 were injured and maimed as the self-described anti-White terrorist accelerated into the barricaded parade route and veered into crowds for five blocks.
The state’s more than 70 felony charges against Brooks include six counts of first-degree intentional homicide with a dangerous weapon, 61 counts of recklessly endangering safety with a dangerous weapon, six counts of hit-and-run involving death, and two counts of bail jumping.
For the 10th day in a row, the prosecution did not mention or question Brooks’ extensive, documented history of anti-White statements and hate, which preceded the terror attack on the Waukesha Christmas parade.
Brooks also continued his crank “sovereign citizens” motions, questioning the court and state’s authority to bring criminal action. Sovereign citizens’ arguments hold that only individual people can bring legal action in court, not governments acting on behalf of their citizenry in the form of municipal, state, or federal prosecution or action for criminal or civil allegations. Despite an indulgence of warnings, Brooks would bring up elements of this in his cross-examination of witnesses multiple times throughout the day.
First Witness: Craig Liermann
Craig Liermann is assistant chief for the Franklin, Wis. police department who attended the parade as a civilian. He said he was near the Milwaukee Dancing Grannies and the Catholic Community of Waukesha group when he witnessed Brooks driving his red SUV through the crowd, revving his engine as he struck multiple parade marchers.
Liermann testified that Darrell Brooks ran over his victims, leaned out the window, looked backward to verify the carnage, then intentionally steered back toward more people on the parade route.
“Based on his body language, my heart sank because at first, I thought it could be a medical emergency, (but) it was clearly an intentional act,” Liermann, a veteran police commander, said.
Liermann then testified that then Brooks turned his steering wheel to the right, driving diagonally across the parade route and intentionally into the Catholic Community group.
Liermann’s testimony supports the testimony of several Waukesha police officers, who said they tried to direct Brooks away from the parade route. In turn, this undercuts the prosecutor’s opening statement that Brooks’ motivation was an escape, which is what the state is going with to avoid having to address Brooks’ explicit anti-White terror motivation.
“He seemed excited about what he was doing,” Liermann said.
On cross, Brooks tried clumsily to undermine Liermann’s credibility, but it was to no avail. Liermann looked indignant in response to Brooks’ questions and his presence.
On redirect from the prosecutor, Liermann reiterated his assessment of Brooks’ demeanor during the parade attack.
“I would describe him as being in an excited state, not in a state of panic. More excited or almost happy about what was going on, not panicked or scared,” Liermann said.
Second Witness: Ralph Salyers III
Ralph Salyers III, a police officer with the Wauwatosa police department in Milwaukee county, was at the parade with his daughter and his dog Elvis the night of Brooks’ alleged attack.
He testified he saw Brooks driving behind several houses near the parade route, where he heard a vehicle crash, and then saw the damaged SUV come to a stop moments later across the street. He witnessed Brooks get out of the vehicle, examine the damage, yell an expletive, get something from the SUV and flee on foot.
Salyers positively identified Brooks as the driver and verified the video of the scene. He tried multiple times to call 911 to report the crash, but the lines were tied up because of the volume of calls after the parade attack. It took four times to get through.
Brooks questioned Salyers, who was off-duty, outside his jurisdiction, and with his young daughter, about why he didn’t investigate the crash he heard since he is a law enforcement officer.
“I was with my daughter, and I would in no way put her in harm’s way,” Salyer said, clearly bristling at the implication. “Sometimes being a good witness is the best thing to do.”
Third Witness: Bryce Scholten
Waukesha police officer Bryce Scholten was working traffic control at the Christmas parade the night of the deadly attack. He was stationed near the end of the parade route and was the officer who fired three shots at the vehicle.
Before the attack, he says he heard radio chatter about a domestic disturbance possibly involving a knife – something Brooks denied and for which there is no evidence – and shortly after, Scholten heard heavy chatter about the SUV crashing through the parade, though it was difficult to piece together in the confusion. Then he heard screams and saw the red SUV smashing through the parade and making the turn where the parade route changed direction, continuing to drive through the route.
He said he could see the extreme damage to the SUV caused by Brooks hitting more than 66 people along the route.
“As the vehicle navigated its turn to go southbound, it accelerated towards me. That’s when I knew I had to use deadly force to stop the threat,” Scholten said. He said that while the easiest and most effective shot would have been to fire through the windshield, he knew there were people, including children, behind the vehicle that could be hit if he missed.
“So I waited until the vehicle went past me and tried to direct my rounds in the most southern as I could because there were less people in that direction,” Scholten said. The vehicle passed close enough that Scholten said he could have reached out and touched it.
The shots caused Brooks to swerve across a barricade and ultimately of the parade route.
On cross, Scholten wasn’t having any of Brooks’ nonsense about “not identifying as Darrell Brooks.” He consistently referred to Brooks as “you, the suspect in the domestic disturbance,” and “you, Darrell Brooks.”
“Well, my intention was to shoot you in the upper portion of the body. However, my intention was not to kill you. My intention was to stop the threat. The threat that you were posing to everyone in the downtown area at the Christmas parade.”Officer Bryce Scholten
The most dramatic moment of his cross-examination was when Brooks asked about Scholten discharging his weapon.
“Do you recall what you were aiming for?” Brooks asked.
Scholten replied flatly, “Yes. I do.”
“Can you state for the record and for the jury?” Brooks asked.
“You. Darrell Brooks,” Scholten said.
Brooks kept up with his legal mumbo jumbo about not recognizing his name, about how Scholten knew his name, and other time-wasting nonsense.
When asked why he fired at Brooks and didn’t try to shoot out a tire, which will not stop a vehicle, Scholten had the right answer.
“I’m trained to stop the threat. You were the threat. The vehicle was the weapon you used,” the 7-year veteran officer said. “That is why I shot at you.”
Scholten also reified that Brooks had every opportunity to leave the parade route at a number of places, including driving over the plastic barricades as he did.
Fourth Witness: Christopher Moss
The fourth witness was Waukesha PD Officer Christopher Moss, having 14 years of experience in the force. Moss was in the parade on the day of the attack, marching with the color guard. He testified to finishing the length of the parade and heading back to the department for his regularly scheduled shift. He stated that when he arrived back at the station, he heard multiple sirens and officers leaving to respond to a subject with a knife in Frame Park. Despite being off duty at the time, he got dressed in case he was called in.
He testified hearing fellow officers screaming “hysterically” over the radio, requesting people to respond to the downtown area at the parade route. He sprinted out of the department and immediately headed there.
Upon arriving, he described the scene as “absolute chaos,” seeing multiple civilian subjects lying on the ground in every direction, screaming and yelling. Moss then attempted to render aid to two elderly female subjects. He eventually met with Officer Scholten, who told him he opened fire on a red SUV fleeing the scene, and that they needed to find the vehicle. Due to the chaos surrounding the event, Moss noted it was incredibly difficult to use the radio to aid him in the search.
While looking for the car, Moss noticed a Hispanic male running towards him, waving his hands in an attempt to get his attention. The man told Moss that he knew where the red SUV was and was instructed to get in the squad car to lead him to it. After traveling across town, they arrived at Maple St., where Moss located that vehicle.
Moss noted that the SUV was heavily damaged, with clothing of parade goers embedded in it, as well as a bullet hole through the windshield.
Moss stated that he found paperwork inside the vehicle with Brooks’ name on it, and after running the license plate, it came back belonging to Dawn Woods, Darrell Brooks’ mother. He then stayed with the vehicle while listening to the police radio, and later heard a different WPD officer state that they were with a Darrell Brooks.
During cross-examination, Brooks tried to sow doubt regarding Moss’ interaction with Abel Lazcano, the man who led him to the vehicle. Ironically, Brooks’ line of questioning was filled with attempts to elicit hearsay from Moss, asking him what Lazcano told him during the car ride there, enough so that Judge Dorow eventually excused the jury to discuss the issue. Dorow explained that for the jury to hear what Lazcano said, he would need to subpoena him as a witness.
Brooks once again muttered under his breath, “clear bias, clear bias,” and expressed that he still doesn’t consent to being called by his name. As the jury filed back in, Brooks continued to mutter complaints under his breath. While asking Moss questions about the photos, Brooks was scolded by Dorow for “barking” orders at the clerk and was asked to treat them with respect, to which Brooks smugly asked if he would be granted the same.
Brooks suggested that the vehicle may have been manipulated after being driven back to the home before Moss arrived at the scene and that someone else may have been behind the wheel. Brooks then returned to his usual line of questioning of being unable to see the plaintiff in the courtroom.
“The jury deserves to know this, you can’t keep hiding stuff from the jury! If there’s no plaintiff how is there a case?”Darrell Brooks
Brooks went on to make multiple complaints of “biast” before being corrected by Judge Dorow and claimed he was unable to stay on task when the prosecution could seemingly ask anything they want to. Judge Dorow replied, saying “Your ignorance of the law is not a defense. For any of this.”
Fifth Witness: Carlos Arechiga Nolasco
Carlos Arechiga Nolasco was the fifth witness appointed by the state and was a resident of a different unit of the house where Brooks abandoned his car after the alleged attack. He testified to seeing Brooks drive home in the heavily damaged red SUV, exit the vehicle, and flee after jumping over the hood. The state showed closed-circuit TV footage of Brooks allegedly leaving and asked Nolasco to provide the context in relation to what he said that day.
Nolasco said he looked out the window after hearing a metallic screech and, from his second-story window in the duplex, saw Brooks exit the vehicle and flee.
The usual pointless cross followed until the judge finally dismissed the jury an hour earlier than usual.
Notably, the prosecution said it wants to schedule the jury visit to the impounded red SUV for Tuesday, which could be a signal that they plan to rest their case as early as Tuesday. Such site visits commonly, but not always, come towards the end of a side’s case.
The trial resumes Monday.
A live stream of the trial is available here. For background on Brooks and his alleged anti-White hate crimes, read a summary report by Justice Report’s Jack McKraken. To view the National Justice Party/Media2Rise documentary on Brooks and the Waukesha attack, click here.
The Justice Report’s ongoing reporting of the trial of Darrell Brooks will continue to be updated every day until sentencing.