MILWAUKEE — The man accused in the Waukesha Christmas Parade attack has requested to fire his legal team and represent himself at trial. This development comes as jury selection is set to begin in just ten days on Oct. 3.
Brooks has already been found competent to stand trial, but there’s a higher standard for determining whether a defendant is competent to represent themselves.
A local defense attorney who’s not affiliated with the case says it’s likely that Brooks will be allowed to represent himself at trial. Wisconsin law says a defendant should only be denied that constitutional right if a disability is identified that would prevent them from offering a meaningful defense.
"It's always shocking when a defendant wants to represent themselves,” said defense attorney Jonathan LaVoy. "I think he's making a huge mistake."
LaVoy says the judge presiding over the trial will determine during a motion hearing next Tuesday whether Brooks is mentally competent enough to serve as his own legal defense.
"We haven't heard too much from him in the court hearings,” LaVoy said. “He's had some erratic behavior. I believe if he answers basic questions about being able to follow the rules, that he is able to understand the severity of the charges, that he understands the pros and cons of his decision, if he's able to cohesively answer the judge's questions I think he will be found competent to be his own attorney."
WATCH: Why Darrell Brooks will likely be allowed to represent himself at trial, attorney explains
Just a couple weeks ago, Brooks withdrew his insanity plea. Instead, he’s pleading not guilty to killing six people and injuring dozens of others at the Waukesha Christmas Parade last November. LaVoy says if Brooks is allowed to represent himself, he would be assigned standby counsel, which is an attorney who would be there to advise the defendant when asked, but not actively participate in the trial.
LaVoy says there are far more cons than pros when it comes to a defendant choosing to represent themselves in a criminal trial.
“A person like Mr. Brooks does not have the knowledge of what happens in court, doesn't have access to computers, legal research and doesn't know what motions to file,” he said. “A person like Mr. Brooks who's representing themselves typically makes a mockery of their case and oftentimes hurts their defense dramatically."
LaVoy believes Brooks’ decision to represent himself would not only make the trial more difficult for him, but also for victims and witnesses who are subpoenaed to testify.
"A defendant has the right to cross-examine and confront their accusers and it has to be done in open court, so they would be required to answer questions of Mr. Brooks and that's probably going to be the most challenging part of this trial if he is allowed to represent himself,” he said.
LaVoy says if Brooks is allowed to represent himself, it would prolong the trial, but he doesn’t think it would be postponed just because of the request.
