Darrell Brooks Trial — Scheduling His Sentencing Hearing

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: Case number 21, CF 1848, may have the appearances, please. Stayed by Leslie Basie and Zach Wichel. Sir, please state your name for the record. [00:00:10] Daryl Brooks: I'm here as a third-party intervener in that matter appearing as authorized representative for my client. I accept the value in return for value of all of the charging instruments in this matter and make my exemption available for discharge of all obligations and charges connected with this case. I do not dispute any of the facts in the charging instruments and state for the record that I do not identify by the name state. [00:00:33] Speaker 1: The record should reflect that the individual known to this court as Daryl Brooks is present in custody in person. He is appearing in jail attire today. The court is here to address a couple of things. Of course, the scheduling of sentencing. I also want to address a letter that was sent to the parties late last week on the 28th regarding the unsealing of search warrants, a filing from Mr. Brooks, and then an issue just as it relates to the record and the use of restraints during the trial, given a statement that was made by Mr. Brooks when the jury was coming out after they had reached their verdicts. So, I'll start with the search warrant issue. The parties should have received the letter dated October 28th advising the parties that the court will be unsealing all of the search warrants tomorrow, November 1st, unless there's an objection that is raised. Of course, that's based in law. In fact, and I indicated in that letter, we would address any objections at this hearing. So, I'll start with the state. Do you have any objection to that? No, Your Honor. All right. Mr. Brooks? [00:01:51] Daryl Brooks: I have not received anything. I'm quite sure, or I don't know if you knew, but the very second that I left your courtroom Wednesday, Your Honor, I was placed on suicide watch, I was told that it was per jail administration, that it was policy, that it was nothing I could do about it. They immediately took me right from court, stripped my cell. So, I talked to mental health, they changed me right over into the smock, and I was basically placed on that. They just gave me regular clothes, maybe 10 minutes before I came to your courtroom, Your Honor. [00:02:31] Speaker 1: So, I haven't, I wasn't allowed any deal. We'll give it to you. [00:02:36] Daryl Brooks: Huh? [00:02:36] Speaker 1: I had the letter printed off, and we'll give it to you now, so you can take a moment to review it. It really says everything that I just put on the record just now, as well. [00:02:45] Daryl Brooks: I accept for value and return for value of this document. When was, when was this letter, because like I said, I've been on watch, so I haven't been able to obtain any mail whatsoever. Not, not from the courts, not personal mail, not, not anything. [00:03:08] Speaker 1: So, that was signed on Friday, and then sent over. I'm not sure if it was emailed, or if it was just delivered to the jail. I don't know if Madam Clerk has any information. It was done by my other clerk. But, in any event, you have it before you. I had, at the request of the parties, and with the consent of all parties, sealed, or continued the seal on all of these documents. And the previous order indicated that everything would be unsealed, either November 30th, or at the conclusion of the jury trial, whichever came first. Of course, the jury trial is now concluded, even though the case hasn't gone to sentencing. So, my intent would be to unseal everything tomorrow. Unless you have an objection, and it's based in law. [00:03:58] Daryl Brooks: I have, like you said, this is my, I didn't even know that this was even sent over to the jail until right now, until you told me. [00:04:10] Speaker 1: Understood. Do you have an objection to what I propose to do, sir? [00:04:13] Daryl Brooks: I don't even understand. What do you mean by sealed and unsealed? [00:04:16] Speaker 1: It would become a matter of the public record, and anyone could review those search warrants, if they make a request. [00:04:24] Daryl Brooks: Search warrants for, what, property? [00:04:27] Speaker 1: There's a number of search warrants that have been sealed, as it relates to this case. [00:04:33] Daryl Brooks: I don't see why they need to be unsealed at this point. Everything's pretty much been public already. [00:04:41] Speaker 1: All right, well, I am going to unseal them effective tomorrow. The next issue I want to address is, I want to make a record, specifically, as it relates to the restraints that the Sheriff's Department utilized during this case, given a comment made by Mr. Brooks when the jury was coming out the very last time. I don't recall if you said something about a stun belt or shock shackles or something to that effect, but it was inaccurate. I have asked the Sheriff's Department to provide photographic documentation of the shackles that were utilized in this case. An inmate who's in custody, but in trial, a soft restraint system is utilized, primarily so it's soft and not heard, and then it's attached to the table, so that it confines the inmate to a small area with that table. Obviously, during the trial, Mr. Brooks was able to stand. His hands were free, but I felt it important to have a thorough record of the restraints that were utilized. The photographs that have been provided are on a compact disc. They will be filed as Court Exhibit 3, but they will remain under seal. And that is because of the security concerns related to how the Sheriff's Department secures inmates during a trial. That certainly is an overriding interest, overriding any public interest to see what those restraints are. And I would just further note that during the trial when Mr. Brooks would be brought from the holding area into the courtroom, this courtroom was closed to the public, and that was really to maintain that privacy, if you will, or secrecy, if you will, regarding the restraint system, and that will be available, of course, to the court and the parties. And if there is an appeal, any attorney that may represent you can certainly look at that, but it will otherwise be under seal. So the record is very clear on the restraint system that was utilized during this trial. [00:06:47] Daryl Brooks: I have a question to that. Okay. Why is that remaining sealed, but everything else being open to the public? [00:06:57] Speaker 1: I've indicated my reasons are on the record. I'm not going to restate them. [00:07:00] Daryl Brooks: Well, I think that the public, if they're allowed to see search warrant information and things like that, then I think that they should know that it was a shock device on my ankles that was hurt. [00:07:12] Speaker 1: There was no shock device on your ankles, sir. [00:07:14] Daryl Brooks: It was a shock device. I was told it was a shock device. Mr. Brooks, that's why I'm making the record. It was covered up by a black cloth so the jury purposely could not see it and so that the public could not see it. I was told that a chair had to be placed on my side so that no one can see that I was shackled with ankle shocks. I think the public should know that. The jury should have known that. That's what they were. [00:07:39] Speaker 1: Mr. Brooks, I've made my ruling. Your characterization of those as black cloth. [00:07:42] Daryl Brooks: I respect the ruling, but it should be noted. [00:07:45] Speaker 1: Your objection is noted for the record. [00:07:47] Daryl Brooks: It should be noted that I had a shock device on my ankles. That's a fact. [00:07:51] Speaker 1: It is not a fact. [00:07:53] Daryl Brooks: It is a fact. I'm the one that had them on my ankles. I inquired about what they were. Obviously, I'm going to require about what's being put on my body. I was told that there were a shock device, which I know how a shock device looks because I've been through this before in Milwaukee. So I know what a shock device is. It was clearly a shock device that was purposely not shown to the jury or to the public. Purposely not. And then now you're saying that it's going to be sealed. Well, why should it be sealed? The public deserves to know about things pertaining to a search warrant, but not the fact that I was limited by a shock device, that if I moved the wrong way, I could have got shocked with all this voting. [00:08:42] Speaker 1: It's absolutely false that you have a shock device, I'm certain. That is not false. [00:08:45] Daryl Brooks: And you know that it's not false. [00:08:46] Speaker 1: Well, I have the photographs. Well, show the photographs. That will be part of the record. [00:08:50] Daryl Brooks: Where's the photographs? [00:08:51] Speaker 1: And they will be sealed. You just said they will be sealed. [00:08:53] Daryl Brooks: Why do they need to be sealed for the reasons that I already indicated? Why do they need to be sealed for the public? [00:08:59] Speaker 1: Mr. Brooks, I need to move on to scheduling. [00:09:01] Daryl Brooks: Can we move on to subject matter jurisdiction that hasn't been proved for the record? Can we move on to that? [00:09:06] Speaker 1: Mr. Brooks, I really don't want to remove you from the courtroom today. [00:09:10] Daryl Brooks: I don't want to be removed, but you're not going to sit here and tell me on the record what was on my body when I was told what it was. That's inaccurate. At a later point in time, I refuse to sit here and let you make an inaccurate record. When you know that it was, in fact, a shock device, that's why I had the black cloth in front of the table so it couldn't be shown. That's why I had a chair sitting on the side of me that was told needs to cover up the fact that I had a shock device on my ankles. And I think it's very, very, very unfair, and it's dishonorable to get on the record and not tell the truth. I'm not trying to dishonor you, Your Honor. I'm not trying to disrespect you. I'm not trying to disrespect your court. I just want the truth to be told. That should not be sealed. If everything else could be open to the public, then the public should know that I had a shock device on my ankles. That was purposely not shown to the jury or to the public. They should know that. [00:10:09] Speaker 1: All right. Thank you, Mr. Brooks. I disagree wholeheartedly with your characterization. Well, it's not true. Mr. Brooks, I didn't interrupt you. [00:10:14] Daryl Brooks: Please don't interrupt me. It's not true. Mr. Brooks? Well, I'm quite sure there's cameras rolling right now because there are always cameras rolling. There's always audio on. [00:10:23] Speaker 1: Mr. Brooks, I need to move on to scheduling. [00:10:25] Daryl Brooks: There's public in the courtroom. I had a shock device on my ankles, and they purposely did not want to show that to you guys or to the jury. [00:10:35] Speaker 1: Mr. Brooks, I'm advising you here or here. [00:10:39] Daryl Brooks: Mr. Brooks, I'm advising you. And I always had the chair right here. Everybody that came to this courtroom seen that I had a chair right here, even though I had no counsel. What is the reason for me to have a chair right here? [00:10:48] Speaker 1: Mr. Brooks, any further interruptions will result in you being removed to the office. Okay, and you don't need contempt. Mr. Brooks, move on to scheduling. [00:10:57] Daryl Brooks: Is it civil contempt or criminal contempt? [00:10:59] Speaker 1: Mr. Brooks, one more interruption, and you will go to the other courtroom. Mr. Brooks, they need to know that. Stop. [00:11:03] Daryl Brooks: Mr. Brooks, they need to know that. They need to know the truth. [00:11:05] Speaker 1: Mr. Brooks, I'm going to ask the state some questions. If you interrupt when I do that, you will be removed to the other courtroom. Okay, remove me again. Mr. Brooks, remove me again. [00:11:13] Daryl Brooks: Mr. Brooks, it's not going to stop the fact that they need to know that. Mr. Brooks, he has interrupted. [00:11:17] Speaker 1: I'm sorry, everyone. We'll have to clear the courtroom. He'll be removed to the other courtroom. I'll make this for a great finding. [00:11:22] Daryl Brooks: Tell the truth, though, Your Honor. Tell the truth. I had a shackle. I had a shock device. I didn't want to actually see you. We're off. [00:11:30] Speaker 1: Appearances are as they were before. Mr. Brooks, if you interrupt me, I will mute you so that I can make an record, an adequate record regarding... Don't mute me. [00:11:38] Daryl Brooks: He's going to mute me anyway, Your Honor. [00:11:39] Speaker 1: All right, he interrupted. I will mute him. I need to make a record of his removal. The court did warn Mr. Brooks repeatedly that if he continued to be disruptive, the court would remove him to the other courtroom. It was my sincere hope that that would not need to take place today. I gave him the final warning, and then I indicated I would be turning to the state to ask them some questions, and if he interrupted that process, he would be removed. He immediately interrupted that, and so the courtroom was closed. He was put into the other courtroom. He was audible for a little bit when I first went on the record, but he continued to be disruptive, and so I did utilize the mute function of the technology so that I could make an adequate record. Although this is really a scheduling hearing today, I will make a finding under Illinois v. Allen. He was disruptive. He interrupted multiple times and challenged this court when this court was making a record regarding the restraints that were utilized throughout this trial. It is absolutely false that a stun belt of any kind was used on Mr. Brooks. I don't know if he's receiving that information from other inmates, but that was not utilized in this case. It was a soft leg restraint setup, if you will, where he was shackled his ankles with the soft restraints and the soft strap so that it did not make noise. That was all attached to the table, and it is absolutely true that there was a black table skirt on the tables, both the state's table, the defense table, in this courtroom, despite Mr. Brooks believing that it was not done for his benefit. It was to shield that information from the jury. We don't, frankly, need inmates doing research or the public doing research on what these restraints are there's an important security aspect related to keeping courts safe, keeping inmates safe. And that is why I'm sealing that information from public view. As far as Mr. Brooks being in the other courtroom, again, I did that pursuant to the authority found in Illinois v. Allen. I did not hold him in contempt, frankly, because it's a scheduling type hearing. I could simply have him taken back to the jail and he could appear by phone, but I've chosen to have him appear by video and audio means from the other courtroom. With that, I am going to address scheduling. I will be asking each party in turn how much time they believe they need to present their various sentencing remarks and whether anyone will be speaking on behalf. So I'll turn to the state first. [00:14:35] Speaker 3: Thank you, Your Honor. To date, we have indications from the victims or their families that 36 people would like to either have a statement read or they'd like to read it themselves. We have approximately five to ten others that would like to submit one in writing, which obviously wouldn't impact the time that we would need on the sentencing date. I would think that the state's comments would be between a half an hour to 45 minutes in total. So we're looking probably at about four to four and a half hours. We will need some time to rotate victims out of the courtroom as they come in to speak because we can't fit everyone in the courtroom at one time. And speaking with the families and the victims Wednesday after the verdict, I think there's a strong desire to have the sentencing before the anniversary of the parade incident. [00:15:32] Speaker 1: Sorry, I have unmuted you if you could speak to scheduling. [00:15:38] Daryl Brooks: I know you're well aware that I have ongoing matters in Milwaukee pending too. I have to be in court there in two weeks and those cases aren't scheduled for trial as well. I haven't had the opportunity to speak with my representation over there because of the protocol that I've been on. If it pleases the court, if it pleases you, Your Honor, I would at least like to get a disposition on what might happen there. I go to court there in two weeks. I'm sure that I would learn a lot more at that time. I'm not sure if I'm going to have the same representation at this point or if something's going to change with that. [00:16:25] Speaker 1: Do you know the specific date that you're scheduled? [00:16:28] Daryl Brooks: The 17th. That's for both cases. I don't know why they put both cases on the same date. And like I said, I don't know if anything's going to change between now and then. But both of those cases are scheduled to go to trial. And like I said, with the representation there, I don't know what's going to happen with that. As of yet, there's been issues for months with that. I know that's something that Milwaukee has to deal with and not your court. But it would be a great help to me to at least be able to find out what I can find out about what can possibly happen there. And to also do any work that I may need to do on my end to prepare for that. [00:17:20] Speaker 1: So I have looked at the dates. You are right. There's a hearing on the 17th at 2 p.m. The trial, though, in that case is not scheduled until December 12th. So my belief would be I could certainly see the judge in that case understanding if we had to go to sentencing or I chose to go to sentencing on those dates. And it looks like, again, both cases are scheduled for those same dates. [00:17:48] Daryl Brooks: Yeah, it was kind of weird to me. I don't, I don't, the way they scheduled both cases on the same day was just kind of like, I didn't, I didn't really understand why they did it like that. And, uh. [00:18:02] Speaker 1: Well, let's talk about a related issue. And that is, do you anticipate anyone speaking on your behalf at the time of sentencing? [00:18:10] Daryl Brooks: I do. [00:18:11] Speaker 1: All right. I do. And do you know how many people you anticipate speaking on your behalf? [00:18:16] Daryl Brooks: Um, I don't know, uh, an exact number, Your Honor. A rough estimate there would be 20 or more. Essentially, some people will be traveling to Wisconsin from different areas, different states. And I know they've expressed wanting to be there to speak for that. But like I said, me, myself, not being able to have the opportunity to speak with them personally, I haven't been able to reach out. Obviously, I can't reach out from, from where I'm at, collect call wise. So, I don't know what pleases you, Your Honor. I don't know what pleases the court. But I'm, I'm, I'm, I guess what I'm seeking is for enough time to know exactly who's going to be speaking, where they're going to be traveling from. And a little bit more information that I can provide to this court about the proceedings in Milwaukee County. [00:19:18] Speaker 1: I understand your concern about Milwaukee. But if I hold this on the 15th and the 16th, by your description of how many people, by what the state said, I think it's going to take about a day to hear the remarks from the parties. And then I would come fresh the next day to give the court's sentencing. And so, probably a day and a half. But I'd set aside both of those days just to be on the safe side in case it takes a little bit longer for either of the parties to present their sentencing remarks. [00:19:52] Daryl Brooks: Your Honor, I'm, I'm not into, what you're saying. Go ahead. [00:19:55] Speaker 1: No, go ahead. [00:19:57] Daryl Brooks: I'm trying to make sure I didn't interrupt. [00:20:00] Speaker 1: Go ahead. [00:20:04] Daryl Brooks: Your Honor, with all due respect, if it pleases the record, if it pleases your court, Your Honor, because of my situation, I could benefit from a little bit more time. I'm not asking for, I'm not asking for something outrageous here. Just enough that I can tie up some of my loose ends, get the, get you the information that you, that you need to be able, if, if someone has to be present by Zoom or whatever the case may be, or to find out if these people are actually going to travel. And also still be able to prepare for what I need to prepare for, because obviously I still, regardless to anything, I still have to be prepared to continue court proceedings. I still have to be prepared. It will really, really be a big help and a great benefit if I could have just a little bit more time to tie up the loose ends and get everything done in a timely fashion to be able to be ready to go and present, present what's needed to the court. [00:21:14] Speaker 1: I understand that, sir. The issue the court has is, obviously, if I wait much longer than that, I would, out of respect for the victims, avoid the week of November 21st. That's also Thanksgiving week. I don't think that would be an appropriate time for sentencing. I mean, my calendar is just incredibly full. That puts us into January, and I'm not willing to do that. So I think I'm giving the parties ample time. I'm giving alternate ways for family members to speak, and that is by Zoom or in person, should they wish to be here in person. And no matter what, that would still clear Mr. Brooks to be in Milwaukee on the 17th. I mean, we're one county over. It's not unusual to do an order to produce that close. [00:22:06] Daryl Brooks: When I was going to... Oh, I'm sorry. [00:22:08] Speaker 1: No. So I am going to schedule it for the 15th and the 16th. That's my decision on that. Your Honor. I want to just very briefly have, I believe it's going to be Deputy Kibler, who's going to testify about the restraints. [00:22:27] Daryl Brooks: Your Honor. [00:22:28] Speaker 1: Yes. [00:22:30] Daryl Brooks: Look, I didn't, I'm not, I'm not trying to interrupt. Go ahead. I'm, you said, when is this supposed to be? Because I'm definitely going to need a little bit more time than the 11th. [00:22:49] Speaker 1: Mr. Brooks, I've made my decision. The sentencing will be on the 15th and the 16th of November. Anyone who wants to appear by Zoom on your behalf, you must file a request in writing no later than noon on the 11th. The same is true for the state. Only those individuals who I specifically approve to appear by Zoom may be on the Zoom. [00:23:07] Daryl Brooks: What if I'm placed on the protocol? Part of jail? What if, what if? [00:23:12] Speaker 1: Mr. Brooks, that's between you and the jail at this point. If there is something you need, you need to first go through them. I'm not going to step on their toes with their protocols. I'm sure they'll understand this is a very important sentencing for you and make certain accommodations. They've done that throughout this case. I trust that they will do that as they determine is appropriate. [00:23:35] Daryl Brooks: They haven't done it for the past week when I went on the protocol without even telling them anything suicidal in nature. And I was still placed on a suicide watch protocol. [00:23:48] Speaker 1: I understand that, sir. I need to move on because I do have calendar this afternoon, but I want to have Detective Hibbler come to the stand. [00:23:55] Daryl Brooks: Hibbler. Your Honor. [00:23:56] Speaker 1: Deputy, what did I say? Detective, did I give you a promotion? Sorry. All right. He's going to come on up to the witness stand. I'm going to swear him in and we'll go from there. [00:24:07] Daryl Brooks: For the record, may I respectfully object to your ruling, Your Honor? [00:24:11] Speaker 1: It's noted for the record. All right. Madam Clerk, swear him in, please. [00:24:15] Daryl Brooks: For the record, may I respectfully request a legal reconsideration of your ruling, Your Honor? [00:24:18] Speaker 1: Mr. Brooks, I'm going to have to mute you because I need to keep going and I can't have this disruption. All right. Thank you. And you are employed in what capacity with the Sheriff's Department? [00:24:27] Speaker 4: I'm a deputy for the Waukesha County Sheriff's Department. [00:24:30] Speaker 1: Were you assigned to the trial of Darryl Brooks? [00:24:34] Speaker 4: I was. [00:24:35] Speaker 1: And can you tell us in what capacity? [00:24:38] Speaker 4: My capacity was specifically, my responsibility was Darryl Brooks along with Deputy Stanielsen. [00:24:44] Speaker 1: And were you in court at the start of the trial on October 3rd? [00:24:50] Speaker 4: I was. [00:24:51] Speaker 1: And did you come into court or work the court trial every day that we were in session? [00:24:57] Speaker 4: I did. [00:24:58] Speaker 1: Do you have knowledge of the restraints that were utilized on Mr. Brooks throughout this trial? Can you describe those, please? [00:25:04] Speaker 4: It's a soft restraint that we used. It was not any type of electronic control device. It was just a soft restraint that we applied to Mr. Brooks prior to coming into court every day. [00:25:18] Speaker 1: And would that be a restraint system that was on his legs or something else? [00:25:23] Speaker 4: It was around his ankles. [00:25:25] Speaker 1: All right. Throughout the trial, the tables in this courtroom had black table skirts. Do you remember seeing those? [00:25:32] Speaker 4: I do. [00:25:33] Speaker 1: And did that hide from view in any way the use of the restraints from the jury? [00:25:40] Speaker 4: It did. [00:25:42] Speaker 1: And were the restraints also attached to the table in some fashion? [00:25:46] Speaker 4: They were attached to the table by a tether. [00:25:50] Speaker 1: At any point in time, were there any type of electronic or stun device placed on Mr. Brooks? [00:25:57] Speaker 4: There was not. [00:25:59] Speaker 3: Sir, you indicated that the restraints were connected to the table through a tether. Is that correct? [00:26:06] Speaker 4: Correct. And then we would secure them with like a padlock. [00:26:08] Speaker 3: And how long was that tether? [00:26:10] Speaker 4: The tether that was in here was four feet. [00:26:13] Speaker 3: So Mr. Brooks could stand up? [00:26:15] Speaker 4: Correct. [00:26:15] Speaker 3: He could walk to his left briefly and walk to his right. Is that correct? That's correct. And that was the same rule that the state had that we had to stand up and use our table to question witnesses. That was the same rule that applied to Mr. Brooks? Correct. Okay. Nothing further. [00:26:31] Speaker 1: Mr. Brooks, you're unmuted. Do you have any questions regarding the restraint system as testified to by Deputy Kim? [00:26:38] Daryl Brooks: Yes, I do. And your honor, you can't practice law from the bench. [00:26:43] Speaker 1: Your question, sir? [00:26:45] Daryl Brooks: So, none of your fellow deputies told me that it was a shock device when I asked what was being placed on my ankles at the start of this trial? [00:26:56] Speaker 4: Not that I'm aware of. [00:26:59] Daryl Brooks: Not that you're aware of. Did you know for sure that I was told that they were a shock device? [00:27:07] Speaker 4: I don't believe that's the truth. I believe every time you had those devices put on, I was in there. And it was either myself or Deputy Stanielsen putting them on. And I did not tell you that. Nor did I ever hear Deputy Stanielsen tell you that they were an electronic device. [00:27:22] Daryl Brooks: So, you were here every single day for every single moment of the trial? [00:27:27] Speaker 4: Correct. [00:27:29] Daryl Brooks: And you never heard any deputy tell me that they were, as a matter of fact, let me back up. Did you recall me asking what was being placed on my ankles? [00:27:40] Speaker 4: That I don't. If you did, we would have told you it was just an ankle restraint. [00:27:46] Daryl Brooks: And you said that it was an ankle restraint. Did it have any metal parts? [00:27:51] Speaker 4: Yes. [00:27:53] Daryl Brooks: And what are those metal parts? [00:27:55] Speaker 4: Metal part is where a strap went through and the locking device. [00:28:01] Daryl Brooks: And what are those, particularly, let's say, if a defendant in a trial attempts to, let's say, attack someone, what would be the purpose of those ankle restraints? [00:28:14] Speaker 4: The restraints we had on you would limit your movement. So, if you did try to do anything, we would have had enough time to control you. [00:28:24] Daryl Brooks: The prosecutors stated that the same rules were in effect for the defendant as the prosecution. But were they not allowed to put up exhibits, to go to the front of the courtroom and put up exhibits? [00:28:41] Speaker 4: They might have a few times. [00:28:43] Speaker 1: The record will reflect it was one time in the presence of the jury. And after that, I called them on it and said that would not happen. And then after that, it was only with the permission of the court and then outside the presence of the jury. [00:28:59] Daryl Brooks: I don't believe that, Your Honor, you can practice law from the bench and answer the question that was asked to the defendant. [00:29:05] Speaker 1: Mr. Brooks, I'm in charge of the record, not you. And the record's going to be accurate. [00:29:10] Daryl Brooks: I didn't say, well, it's not accurate. You're practicing law from the bench. [00:29:14] Speaker 1: All right, Mr. Brooks, do you have any other questions for this? Yes, I do. Yes, I do. It has to be about the restraint system. Please continue. [00:29:20] Daryl Brooks: Was I allowed to approach the bench and put up exhibits at any time during this trial? [00:29:25] Speaker 4: You were not. [00:29:28] Daryl Brooks: And so, how is it that the prosecution was able to do something that I was not able to do? [00:29:35] Speaker 4: That's not for me to answer. [00:29:38] Daryl Brooks: It's because of the shock device that was put on my ankles, correct? [00:29:42] Speaker 4: There was no shock device on your ankles, sir. [00:29:45] Daryl Brooks: I was told that it was. And you said that you don't recall hearing that being told to me, correct? [00:29:51] Speaker 4: No, it was not told to you by me. [00:29:55] Daryl Brooks: Yeah, by you. But you also said, that's the point that I'm getting at. I'm asking the question. You said that it wasn't told to me by you. I've never asked you, correct? [00:30:09] Speaker 4: You never asked me, but I also did not ever hear Deputy Stanielsen tell you that they were a shock device. [00:30:13] Daryl Brooks: I never asked you. I never asked you, yes or no? [00:30:16] Speaker 4: No, you did not. [00:30:19] Daryl Brooks: So, do you know for sure if I ever asked any other deputies? [00:30:23] Speaker 4: Well, considering I was in there when the restraints were being placed on you, I did not ever hear anybody while I was inside the bullpen. While they were putting restraints on you. [00:30:32] Daryl Brooks: So, it would be fair to say that you don't know for sure if I ever asked what the device was that was being placed on my aim? [00:30:38] Speaker 4: No, I can't be for sure. [00:30:46] Daryl Brooks: So, how do you know I didn't ask? [00:30:49] Speaker 1: You don't have to answer that. That's argumentative. I mean... All right, the records were made. Mr. Brooks, I'm cutting off the questioning. I'm just muting him for a moment. If your record's been made, Deputy, you may step down. Mr. Brooks, if you have additional information that you want to provide to the court, I'd ask that you do so in writing. And you provide the identity of any and all individuals you claim provided you with information that you were in a shock restraint. But I'll make a finding based upon the testimony of Deputy Kibler and also my knowledge of being in the courtroom every day and seeing Mr. Brooks being attached, meaning they would secure him to the table, they would unsecure him when he needed to move and other things. I'll make a finding that the soft restraint system was what was utilized and at no time was he ever in a shock type of device. All right, with that then, ladies and gentlemen, it is going to conclude the hearing today. We have the sentencing dates. I would also ask that any and all written material that either side wants this court to consider also be filed by the 11th by noon. So that's November 11th at noon. That will give this court ample time to review it ahead of the hearing on Tuesday, November 15th. All right, thank you, everyone. We are in recess. The court's going to take a short break before I start with my remaining afternoon calendar.