By SAM CALDWELL and TREY GARRISON
Waukesha, WI – The 11th day of the trial of the accused anti-White terrorist Darrell E. Brooks began, like most others, with Brooks arguing with the judge over the topic of “subject matter jurisdiction” before the jury was even brought in.
He was also informed that despite his claim that he was never given a pre-trial offer, the prosecution produced the offer made on July 5. It would have waived certain penalty enhancers and dropped certain charges in exchange for a guilty plea.
Waukesha Circuit Judge Jennifer Dorow continued her kid gloves treatment of the accused anti-White terrorist, even as he interrupted court through the morning and mumbled his crank legal theories under his breath.
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 11th 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.
After every break, Brooks argued using crank, pseudo-legal, sovereign citizen defense strategies that hold that only individual people can bring legal action in court—not governments—and that the court doesn’t have what he claims is “subject matter jurisdiction.”
Each of the state’s witnesses testified to seeing Brooks shortly after the attack, placing him at the scene before he was arrested by Waukesha police, tracing his movements along the way once he was on foot until the moment he was arrested. One witness even tried to bring up Brooks’ past criminal record, but the judge told the jury to disregard it. Brooks’ extensive criminal history was declared completely off-limits for the prosecution before the trial even began.
Annoying as it may seem, Brooks’ cross-examination questions actually appear to help the prosecution. He regularly asks questions he doesn’t know the answer to. He tries to undermine their testimony with dumb or irrelevant questions, and it allows the jury to hear their testimony against him twice rather than once.
First Witness: Sean Backler
Sean Backler, a Waukesha resident, testified that he saw Brooks trespassing on his property a short time after the parade attack. He confronted Brooks and told him to get out of his yard.
He said Brooks asked him to call an Uber, which he did not. Brooks lingered on the property, and he told Brooks again to leave, at which point Brooks raised his shirt and said, “I’m unarmed.”
On cross by Brooks, he tried to undermine Backler’s testimony, but couldn’t seem to do so in any meaningful way. In fact, it led to a number of questions and answers that underlined that Brooks was indeed the parade attacker.
Second Witness: Domanic Kaproon
Domanic Kaproon said he was at home the night of the parade attack, loading water jugs into the back of his truck with his two sons, 21 and 14 when he saw Brooks walking up the driveway with no jacket or shoes. Brooks said he had no weapons and asked to use his phone to call an Uber. Kaproon said he agreed to Brooks’ request and continued loading the jugs. Brooks returned his phone and then walked away.
Third Witness: Erin Cordes
Erin Cordes testified she was at the parade with he husband and her two children, where they stood near the end of the route. Her two children were in the street picking up candy being tossed by parade marchers when her husband saw Brooks tearing through the route. He told her to get their two children away from the street.
She witnessed Brooks drive past and then through the barricade. She also witnessed Waukesha police officer Bryce Scholten firing shots at the red SUV. She didn’t get a look at the driver.
She and her family were making their way back to their car when they saw Brooks barefoot and wearing a t-shirt despite the night’s cold. She described how she saw him come out of the bushes, whom she later identified in the courtroom.
She asserted that Brooks demanded to use her cell phone, claimed he wouldn’t harm them, and they ultimately gave him one. Brooks called his mother and asked for her to call him an Uber ride.
Fourth Witness: Anthony Winters
Anthony Winters was the Uber driver who responded to Brooks’ 5:15 p.m. CT call that night. He arrived around 5:30 p.m., but Brooks was nowhere to be found. He placed Brooks at the scene but little else. Brooks was remarkably polite to Winters—who is black—compared to the usually more hostile cross-examination of White prosecution witnesses.
Fifth Witness: Daniel Rider
Daniel Rider was at his Elizabeth Street home after a day of hunting when Brooks knocked on his door. He’s the witness who let Brooks into his house via the backdoor and provided the use of his phone, a coat for warmth, and even fed him a sandwich.
Brooks told Rider he was homeless and waiting for an Uber ride to pick him up, and simply needed a warm place to stay. After about eight or nine minutes, rather than a couple of minutes Rider expected it to take, and after seeing police cars racing up and down the street with their sirens lights running, he got nervous and told Brooks to leave and took back his phone and coat.
Much of this interaction was caught on Rider’s Ring video doorbell footage, as was the dramatic moment of Brooks’ arrest moments later.
Rider released the footage to the news media afterward, he said, because it would be “good for the community” and would provide some justice for Brooks’ victims. He was paid for the footage, some of which he donated to the victim relief charity.
Notably, on cross-examination, he characterized Brooks as very polite when he was on the porch, which was why he initially felt no threat. Jurors could take this as evidence of Brooks committing his crimes with cold calculation rather than out of desperation or passion.
Brooks opened the door to the prosecution getting to play the voicemail his mother left on Rider’s phone shortly after Brooks called her, further cementing him at the scene and as the person on video. The court then recessed for lunch.
Sixth Witness: Rebecca Carpenter
The next witness appointed by the state was Police Officer Rebecca Carpenter, who worked for the Village of Big Bend Police during the Christmas parade. She stated that she wasn’t aware of the parade on the day of the attack, but started hearing the chatter of the alleged attack on the radio during her shift. After heading downtown, she determined she would be unable to help attend to victims, and instead responded to a call from a man going door-to-door asking residents to use their phones to order a Uber.
She testified that she teamed up with two other officers and began searching for the man, later finding him while canvassing the area. The state showed footage from Carpenter’s body camera and showed it to the court. She noted that upon finding Brooks, despite the cold weather, he was not wearing shoes. In the footage, Brooks states that he was just there to see a friend, but when asked about the location of the friend, he admitted he didn’t know.
During cross-examination, Brooks asked Carpenter about her categorization of his pants, and about a sandwich that was on his person, He, again, tried to create ambiguity as to whether the person apprehended that night was indeed Brooks.
Brooks: At the time, you didn’t know. It could have been mistaken identity?
Carpenter: It could have been. It was not.
Brooks: You keep saying you. Who are you referring to?
Carpenter: You. Mr. Brooks. Darrell Brooks. Seated at the defense table.
Seventh Witness: Garrett Luling
The state then appointed Garrett Luling to the stand, a police officer assigned to work the Waukesha Christmas Parade. Luling was setting a perimeter of the area when he heard radio reports of the aforementioned suspect going door-to-door. Upon arriving at the detainment, he testified to observing Brooks being detained and noted that Brooks was not slammed onto the ground, nor did he experience a force in any way.
Luling stated that he found documentation on Brooks confirming his identity, amidst constant objections by Brooks over being referred to by his name. During cross-examination, he continued his routine of asking where the plaintiff was.
“Is an entity a living, breathing human?”
“Is the State of Wisconsin the plaintiff in this matter?”
“An entity is the plaintiff?”Darrell Brooks
The witness was then dismissed. During a small break, the specifics of Brooks’ upcoming defense were discussed. Judge Dorow told Brooks that he must produce an ordered list of the witnesses he plans to call. When Brooks asked why Dorow replied that because the state would be assisting him in procuring them. She told them that he would be responsible for getting the witnesses there if he didn’t supply this list.
Eighth Witness: Draelon Leija
The eighth witness called by the state was Officer Draelon Leija of the Waukesha Police Department. Leija testified that Brooks had to be taken to the Muskego detainment facility since the Waukesha PD was working out of an annex without a holding cell. Leija testified to observing Brooks while in custody and offering him food.
Ninth Witness: Jay Carpenter
The state then called Detective Jay Carpenter to the stand. Carpenter participated in the parade as part of the honor guard and completed marching through the parade route without incident. Afterward, he went back to the police department and heard about the alleged attack.
Carpenter testified to hearing that 30 to 40 people were down, with multiple possible casualties, and immediately left to head downtown. He noted that the situation was “unlike anything I’d ever experienced before.” He said two simultaneous situations were going on: the aftermath of the parade, and the person going door to door, both of whose suspects had identical descriptions.
Carpenter described the scene as “very, very chaotic,” even stating that they ran out of ambulances to transport victims to the hospital. He stated that Brooks told him about injuries to his shoulder from officers “slamming him to the ground” despite no footage of this on body cameras “he did so entirely on his own power.”
Carpenter testified that victims had to be moved to other hospitals as Waukesha Memorial lacked sufficient facilities to treat all the victims. She also noted that Brooks’ demeanor was very calm, similar to how he was acting currently, stating, “you’d have never known he was in custody for doing something so serious.”
After the medical examination was complete with Brooks was cleared, he was handed over into police custody. Brooks then asked for information as to why he was in custody and talked sports with the on-duty officers. Eventually, Brooks brought up the scene for which he was brought into custody for, and was asked why he was in the neighborhood that night.
The state then moved to play an audio recording from Carpenter’s phone while Brooks was in custody, but due to the length of the clip, and the presumption that questions would follow, Judge Dorow decided to adjourn for the day and resume tomorrow.
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.