Posted on 10/26/2022 9:29:26 AM PDT by JewishRighter
May the families of all victims be comforted to the degree they can by this just verdict.
Not news that a black guy in a SUV attempted to run over/kill some 70 or so white people celebrating Christmas last year.
As I understand from many remarks made by the Judge and Prosecutors, he was thoroughly advised of his rights and made an informed decision to represent himself. As an attorney, I can envision what that looked like: he would have been told that it is advisable to have an attorney who knows the rules of court and rules of evidence, that he will be held accountable to know the rules and procedures of court and he would have been asked to re-affirm that he was making the decision with a complete understanding and without any coercion, duress or promises of any kind. Watching the judge, I am confident she did a thorough job of covering all bases to make sure that his decision would not be a grounds for appeal.
How much play did this trial get on MSM/news?
“It was not local, so I didn’t focus much on it“
You probably do know what happened in Charlottesville, however. The disinformation media decides what to repeat over and over and over again until everyone knows about it even if what they repeat is false such as policemen were killed on January 6.
No worries there. I watched most of the trial and know this: he used a variety of tactics repeatedly to delay, obstruct and interrupt the proceedings. He did not start using the “I don’t understand” line until the last day of trial and it was painfully obviously just a new tactic to create grounds for appeal. I mean, he was using “I don’t understand” to things he was told that were simple English declarative sentences with no jargon.
As to deeming his refusal to answer as a no, that is also a non-issue. She told him over and over and over again that his failure to answer her questions (are you calling a witness, do you intend to testify, do you agree with the jury instructions) would be regarded as a negative response.
I went back and forth between thinking the judge was way too patient, soft spoken and actually kind to this piece of filth. In the end, she was just giving him enough rope to hang himself by appearing before the jury as a rude, obnoxious jerk.
And then there were parts where he read a script written down (probably by others or that he had copied from a book). Yes - the judge, and the witnesses, were very patient with him (”who is him?”). I can understand the judge as she is a professional and didn’t want a mistrial, but I’m surprised none of the witnesses attempted to run out of the witness stand and go clobber the guy.
My armchair diagnosis is sociopath: not a mental disorder calling into question his ability to understand and aid in his own defense, but a perfect storm of nasty denial of responsibility, always turning every conversation into an argument and a total inability to understand how others perceive him. I watch his opening and closing statements and they were tour de force examples of utter misunderstanding of how he would be perceived acting as if he was also a victim, shedding crocodile tears, playing to sympathy after they know exactly what he did: they saw the whole damn thing on video!
I knew for sure that the jurors were just going to spend enough time to give the appearance of serious consideration and then enter 76 guilty verdicts. He apparently had no clue.
Very good observations. My sense was that the prosecutors did NOT coach the witnesses as Brooks suggested. Coaching a witness means telling them what to say. Preparing a witness is another thing entirely: it means helping the witness understand the process, helping them deal with the pressure of being on the witness stand and how to avoid trick questions and keep their answers limited to the facts they know. I believe part of that prep in this case was getting them ready to remain perfectly calm on the witness stand, to give off no vibe of hatred, anger or any form of animosity. This was essential for several reasons but the most important one was not to give him 1 nanometer of room to say that the witnesses testified based on their personal feelings towards him and, yes, of course, due to racism.
I watched witness after witness behave with amazing self-restraint and that was my impression as a trial attorney: they were very well prepared, not coached.
Yeah. A guy getting attacked panicked in Charlottesville and ran a lady over.
I agree with your whole post. I also think he is a sociopath with narcissist tendencies. He has no regard or empathy for other people. He is a true bully, but only with people who are in his mind smaller than him. Like women. He is the classic control freak as he constantly uses the term “I let you”. He reminds me of a small child at times who needs a good spanking and a sit in the corner.
I know the judge worked hard and didn’t want to let those victims families down, but sometimes her constant allowing him to keep arguing was the wrong way to deal with this guy. If it wasn’t for the suggestion of the prosecutor to allow him to carry on in his final arguments and they would handle his disobedience with objections, we would never have gotten to where we did today. She was exactly right. He started out like he was going to be a bad boy, she objected, and then all at once he went into his self pity rant and it was over.
All in all, he is one hateful and repugnant sumbish and I am glad he will be behind bars forever. We hope. Never know if some politician will decide to open the cell doors anymore.
She was utterly amazing. Patience like I have never seen.
Definitely not the same.
Unfortunately for Darrell that would be considered “ex post facto” and not applicable to his case.
CC
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.