- Dec 18, 2013
- 136,769
- 28,058
- 2,180
whew, I was starting to worry about being able to own an SUV.So contrary to the corporate media's narrative, it actually was the man who committed the crime, not the car.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
whew, I was starting to worry about being able to own an SUV.So contrary to the corporate media's narrative, it actually was the man who committed the crime, not the car.
LOLGlue his feet to the street and run him down with a truck and show it on TV as a warning to others....
laugh.. the jury appears to agree with you, not them. It happens. Thank God it happensSo contrary to the corporate media's narrative, it actually was the man who committed the crime, not the car.
Brooks did his best to blame the suv in his closing statement. Ford had a recall, he couldn’t stop and yada yada.laugh.. the jury appears to agree with you, not them. It happens. Thank God it happens
Brooks did his best to blame the suv in his closing statement. Ford had a recall, he couldn’t stop and yada yada.
Yep, wife and I said that, why didn’t you introduce it into evidence? I found it interesting he admitted it was his car and he was driving in that close! We were laughing!!If he had mentioned the recall during the trail, it would have been ok. But he mentioned it in closing, and was rightly objected to and upheld. Closings are not the time for new evidence.
Yep, wife and I said that, why didn’t you introduce it into evidence? I found it interesting he admitted it was his car and he was driving in that close! We were laughing!!
I watched the DA and she said they were careful for that ploy. He can file, but he was allowed to participate. Even to the point in his closing statement he said the jury had the power to nullify which is a bozo no no in court after being told in a ruling. She said they decided to allow him to say it, object to it have it sustained and he can't say he wasn't allowed. That was the biggest one they were afraid of. They figured out how to bypass it in the long run. He gone.He'll likely now file an appeal on the grounds he was not properly defended.
Good news. Life in prison is what the creep deserves.
Too bad the death penalty wasn't on the table.
Was the vehicle legally registered and insured?So contrary to the corporate media's narrative, it actually was the man who committed the crime, not the car.
It was his mother’sWas the vehicle legally registered and insured?
Is she being held responsible because she didn't prevent it from being used in a crime?It was his mother’s
Does Wisconsin have the death penalty?
outstanding post!!!! thanks. I never thought about it.Is she being held responsible because she didn't prevent it from being used in a crime?
I watched the DA and she said they were careful for that ploy. He can file, but he was allowed to participate. Even to the point in his closing statement he said the jury had the power to nullify which is a bozo no no in court after being told in a ruling. She said they decided to allow him to say it, object to it have it sustained and he can't say he wasn't allowed. That was the biggest one they were afraid of. They figured out how to bypass it in the long run. He gone.
The stupid asshole Democrats in Wisconsin did away with the death penalty.