Tim heidecker murder trial11/18/2023 ![]() ![]() He truly believes he is the victim in this story. It seems he sincerely believed he could find a loophole to absolve himself or convince the jury to overlook the overwhelming evidence against him. I first thought Brooks was aiming for a mistrial, but now I'm pretty sure that he is just disconnected from reality. These clips aren’t isolated incidents, everything listed occurred repeatedly during the trial.Īt the time of writing, the defense has rested and the jury is deliberating. Their own musical endeavors being admitted as evidence. Not understanding the gravity of their situation. Both often make comments that the judge tells the jurors to disregard. Causing the judge to raise their voice and acknowledge their frustration. Tim always calls the judge "judge," and Brooks will sometimes call the judge "Judge", "Ms.", or "Ms. Not referring to the judge as "your honor". Acting like they are a victim, comparable to the dozens of people they killed/injured. Baselessly accusing the prosecutors of corruption/malfeasance, and insinuating they are in a kangaroo court. Unlike Tim Heidecker's character, Darrell Brooks hasn't been found in contempt of court yet although, he has been removed twice and made to sit in a separate room on a video feed, where he can be muted if he is being disruptive. Throwing tantrums when their incompetence hurts their case. They try to make any tiny argument, trying to achieve that. Both seem to think that if one part of a witness's testimony is invalidated, that the whole testimony should be thrown out. ![]() He even tried to call the state of Wisconsin as a witness. Brooks describes himself as a sovereign citizen and tries get a mistrial by interpreting laws strictly or loosely, depending on what he is trying to achieve. Trying to use troll logic to have their case dismissed. Brooks will be told to stop interrupting, he will apologize, promise to stop, and go back to interrupting a few moments later. Constantly interrupting, even though they are not objecting. ![]() Sometimes Brooks makes no justifications for why he objects. Many of the faux-pas and traits that Tim Heidecker's character has are mirrored very closely by Darrell Brooks. They are so self-absorbed with their ego/wellbeing that they don't take other people's feelings into consideration, not even the jurors who will decide their fates. Neither ever acknowledges the pain they caused, and only show remorse when talking about how they were personally affected. They constantly antagonize and insult the prosecution, jurors, witnesses, and judge. They are disruptive, argumentative, and flounder out of ignorance of courtroom procedure. Both have no legal experience/education, no decorum, no tact, are bad-tempered, and seem confidently unaware of how poorly they are performing. Everyone acknowledges that it's a terrible idea, but they are within their Sixth Amendment rights to do so. ![]() Much like Tim Heidecker's character, Darrell Brooks fired his lawyers and chose to represent himself. He is currently standing trial for six counts of first-degree intentional homicide and 77 additional charges related to injuring 62 others. The Trial of Tim Heidecker web series is a spinoff of On Cinema, At the Cinema where the fictionalized Tim Heidecker is being tried for the murder of 20 concert attendees who were given toxic vape pens at a music festival he had organized.ĭarrell Brooks is accused of driving his SUV into a Christmas parade in Waukesha, Wisconsin. That outburst wasn’t an isolated incident: his behavior during the 16 days of this trial mirror Tim Heidecker's character so closely, that it was surreal. I wanted to expand on that post, and provide some additional context. A couple days ago, someone on this sub cross-posted a clip of Darrell Brooks trial from r/PublicFreakout. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |