Top 5 Times Judges Lost Their Temper in Court

[Music] sidebar or not you don't have one of your assistant public defenders say something about my children emotions can run high in trials and sometimes the cameras there to catch it all on tape we go over some of the moments when judges just absolutely lost it and when there were intense and Unforgettable outbursts in court welcome to sidebar presented by long crime I'm Jesse Weber it's not surprising that trials can get dramatic I mean you're dealing with tough subject matter high stakes emotions different personalities and we have seen our fair share of some of these intense moments here on Long crime so what we figured we would do is do a recap of some of these Unforgettable incidents and we're going to start with five times when judges just lost it and we'll start with a recent case of ours Darrell Brooks Jr now this was the man who was on trial for driving his car into a Christmas parade out in Waukesha Wisconsin back in November of 2021 killing six people and injuring dozens of others and what made this trial very unique is that Brooks decided to fire his defense counsel and represent himself and not only that Brooks identifies as a sovereign citizen this is someone who doesn't believe that the government has authority over him so what we ended up seeing was just nonsensical legal theories and arguments from Brooks but also incredibly tense moments between between him and Judge Jennifer Darrow and I will tell you right now I have never ever seen what I saw in that courtroom Brooks was so disruptive of the proceedings he would get into fights with the judge and he would bring up things in front of the jury that he wasn't supposed to and on one particular occasion this is the one I'm going to bring up Brooks took issue with how he was provided paperwork and the judge wasn't having any of it it should be properly addressed before the Jew even comes out that's why I'm trying to properly address it before we even win Mr Brooks stop I'm not gonna this is you are not being respectful to this proceeding or to this jury no it's not with all good respect stating that doesn't make it respectable by you Mr Brooks Monica pass stop talking till the jury is out thank you why couldn't we address this before they came out I'm not going to address it bottom line to address it though we're supposed to do order order dresses before the jury comes out before we start the matter please simply address paperwork that was given to me by you your honor repeatedly you are on the verge of being removed to that courtroom I don't want to do that I want you to stay here but you keep interrupting me and bringing up irrelevant matters I told you yesterday as a courtesy that was provided to you so that you would frankly not complain that you didn't get it as quickly as possible okay I am not the custodian of the records if you have an issue with what was provided to you how it was provided to you then take it up with the clerk of court but from now on I am not going to be the messenger and give you documents that you request to the custodian of the records or from the custodian the records They will simply have to be delivered to you at the jail but that is in response to your discussion or whatever we want to call it this morning I'm not taking it up all right it is irrelevant it needed to be noted for the record it doesn't need to be noted sir I'll make the appropriate record stop interrupting me the juries coming out were continuing with this trial despite your repeated efforts to disrupt yesterday sit down yesterday alone sir 17 interruptions not including the opportunity that I gave you where you spent 50 minutes okay discussing what were primarily either irrelevant or baseless accusations and requests not based in law or fact I was abundantly patient with you yesterday none of that is required sir because it is you can't verify your belief that that's the law doesn't make it so Mr Brooks and that is just a sampling of what we saw between them you know Brooks would be kicked out of the Court multiple times and this all ended with Brook's convictions across the board the jury found him guilty of 76 criminal charges including six counts of first degree intentional homicide and he faces life in prison moving on let's go to the Kyle Rittenhouse case very high profile trial of the 18 year old also out of Wisconsin who was charged with first degree intentional homicide Reckless homicide attempted homicide and Reckless and endangerment for opening fire during a night of civil unrest out in Kenosha in this trial this case raised important questions of self-defense after he shot and killed two men and injured a third now in this interaction judge Bruce Schroeder took issue with how prosecutor Mark Binger was questioning the defendant who decided to take the stand on issues that the judge ruled were inadmissible at trial now Binger says well look Rittenhouse opened the door to this line of questioning with his responses let's just say Bruce Schroeder judge Bruce Schroeder didn't quite agree ment was the subject of emotional and I'm well aware of that and the court left the door open for me not for you my understanding is you should have come and asked why would you think that that made it okay for you without any advanced notice to bring this matter before the jury already you were I I was a astonished when you began your examination by commenting on the defendant's post arrest silence that's basic law it's been basic law in this country for 40 years 50 years I have no idea why you would do something like that and it gives um uh well I'll leave it at that so I don't know what you're up to yeah the defendant was you the exact same weapon he was using it in a manner to try and protect property he wasn't there's your honor I with all due respect I'm not going to rehash the motion yeah that's true there's no no it's a record this was a moment for sure and you know this case would actually end in Kyle rittenhouse's acquittal this turned out to be a case where a defendant taking the stand seemed to pay off now sticking with defendants taking the stand we covered the retrial of Henry Segura now Henry Segura was charged with the horrific murders of his girlfriend Brandy Peters and her three children including his own three-year-old son the prosecution said that the motives here was a dispute over back child support really really terrible situation but it was an interesting case because the defense had suggested that the murders were actually a hit carried out by a drug Syndicate and what we saw was a retrial it was a retrial because the first trial ended in a hung jury and during this retrial at one point Henry Segura decided to take the stand and when he was questioned under cross-examination by the state he and the judge got into a bit of an exchange what did you tell her the truth did you tell her I was over there just because um to see my son but I lied to you about the sex you didn't tell him that no I didn't so it didn't I didn't have a chance to why not because the way our conversation went the phone call ended up roughly and I didn't call her back and every time she called me I would refuse to call and so your answer is no that you did not pull it you did not tell police that um yes I told the lady Johnson the investigator Johnson you told me over the phone that I was cheating on my wife I didn't want y'all to find out and she excuse me and she um like I said she went back and forth and we was arguing about you know I killed my son gonna we're gonna arrest you for killing your son and I hung up on him so your testimony is that you police in this investigator Johnson she's asking the same question over and over what no she's be quiet now we ask you a question you wait till she finished I'm a grown man and then answer it okay and she won't interrupt your answer either because the court order can't take down two people at once is that clear sir yeah that's very clear tense very very tense and for Henry Segura he was ultimately convicted and sentenced to life in prison I would tell you there's just something jarring about hearing a judge yell right because we don't really see it that often but sometimes look judges are human beings and they can only take so much and we saw this play out in the Alex Jones case so as you might recall the Infowars host had been sued by multiple people primarily the family members of those who lost loved ones in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting after Jones repeatedly and publicly called the shooting staged and fake and filled with crisis actors and during Jones's Connecticut trial he was represented by well-known lawyer norm pattis and pattis and Judge Barbara Bellis well there were some rocky moments he's not an expert and so what one does is right how many times do I have to say when I'm speaking you stop you have been a member of the bar for a long long time and you know the rules and even during a sidebar when the mics were turned on listen to this back and forth I'm not going to have a comment anymore I'm not gonna have it I'm not going to have it do you expect me to lay silently when they're directed at me but inappropriately do you expect me to roll over for my client it's not going to happen as I said before strong personalities drama it happens by the way in that particular case the jury awarded the plaintiff's almost a billion dollars in Damages really just a remarkable remarkable case and I encourage everyone to go back to listen to our sidebar episodes on it but okay we we can't talk about Judges losing it without addressing something that recently happened that took a whole other level during the sentencing hearing for the confessed Parkland school shooter the shooter pled guilty to 17 counts of murder and 17 counts of attempted murder for opening fire at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School back in 2018 and at this sentencing hearing victims family members were able to provide statements to the court this is very typical we see this a lot of times this though this trial this case was very different this was just an absolute Massacre and you can imagine these parents and loved ones have very strong feelings and yes they certainly directed their comments towards the defendant but they also directed their comments towards the defense team and they attacked them for their trial strategy and their behavior in court and the shooter's defense attorneys took issue with this they believed that the court should step in and stop it because traditionally these statements really aren't focused on the defense team they're focused on the defendant and in fact the attorney suggested that these comments were dangerous because they were directed towards their children and during an argument with judge Elizabeth shurer the judge started seeing red there were 18 Witnesses 16 or 18 witnesses that testified today there was nothing that was said until Ms McNeil made her appointment and you know we're moving on maybe stopping it from happening again when these people are upset about specific things that have gone on from that table like shooting the middle finger up at this court and laughing and joking Miss McNeil be quiet when these people have sat in this courtroom and watch this behavior from that table and they want to say that they're not happy about it what is the problem George I have no problem because I have big skin but once you bring in my children I think that's highly impropriate I didn't even know you have children I don't know what you're talking about your children what about your children for them to comment on my children is highly improper before this court to allow that kind of testing okay there was I don't remember any comments about any children and if there was it it obviously didn't it it came and went without me noticing it because I can assure you that you need to sit down right now you're out of line in fact you're excused you need to go sit in the bath with your with your uh Chief public defender Mr weeks please ask the lawyer from your office to go sit down and not say anything else to try to threaten my children and bring up my children is inappropriate go to the back of the room now that just violated about every rule of professional responsibility that I have ever I have never if you're going to get up here and you're going to because I asked you to go side far on this matter you cyber or not you don't have one of your assistant public defenders say something about my children just that same Venom that the court is expressing is the same Venom that defense Counsel had to sit through this entire morning up her children multiple times during the trial nobody knows if I'm Barren or not they don't know about my children sit down and look there is a difficult question here under the law should parents be allowed that much free reign to go after the defense council did the attorney act improperly with his statements to the judge to the judge fail to show judicial temperament I think what we can say is that none of this is surprising in that this was an incredibly emotional and difficult case that lasted three months and for the families they were experiencing this for years all right everybody that's all we have for you thank you so much for joining us here on sidebar please subscribe on Apple podcast Spotify YouTube wherever you get your podcast I'm Jesse Weber I'll speak to you next time

Channel: Law&Crime Network

Views: 862,821

Keywords: law and crime, law and crime network

Id: bw6K3rv-mnY

Length: 14min 42sec (882 seconds)

Published: Fri Nov 11 2022