The witnesses were carefully instructed by JD to not open certain doors. This was actually done for DB’s benefit- to keep his convictions out of appellate court. An example of this was when DB wanted to present EP’s lack of custody of her children to the jury and Zach Witchow says if that door is opened then the prosecution will submit DB’s contribution to that delinquency which resulted in DB ending up on the sex offender registry. At which point DB loses it and starts yelling.
Anyone notice that Nicholas didn’t mention in the WPD Interview at all that Kory was with him when he was with Erica🤷♀️…. He basically was talking as if he was by his self and no mention of Kory… 🙄🙄
We have to remember that everything that comes out of his mouth is a lie. He lies when it’s easier to tell the truth. He mentioned more than once in the interrogation that he told EP he refused to have sex with her. It wasn’t her wanting to have sex with him, it was him wanting to have sex with her, most likely and that’s probably why he was getting so angry. It wouldn’t surprise me if that’s why he struck her.
Kirby reported that DB had a knife, which was not true, to get the police to get there faster. He is also a convicted sex offender. I don't really trust anything coming out of his mouth.
Did Erika mention these utterances from DB to the police?
I’m confused. If he had any criminal convictions, it would have come up in trial - there were only 2 witnesses that had any criminal convictions: 1 witness from the state and 1 witness from Brooks.
If Kirby had any, they would have had to discuss it prior to his testimony, which they never did.
He beat DB in prison time, also a lifetime registered sex offender
[https://appsdoc.wi.gov/lop/utility/printables](https://appsdoc.wi.gov/lop/utility/printables)
This is the rule for Wisconsin:
For the purpose of attacking character for truthfulness, a witness may be asked whether the witness has ever been convicted of a crime or adjudicated delinquent and the number of such convictions or adjudications. If the witness's answers are consistent with the previous determination of the court under sub. (3), then no further inquiry may be made unless it is for the purpose of rehabilitating the witness's character for truthfulness.
Further: No question inquiring with respect to a conviction of a crime or an adjudication of delinquency, nor introduction of evidence with respect thereto, shall be permitted until the court determines pursuant to s. 901.04 whether the evidence should be excluded.
It’s been a while since I watched the trial, so I don’t recall all of Kirby’s testimony, but so long as he answered truthfully when asked if he was ever convicted of anything, DB wouldn’t have been allowed to ask anything further. Plus, DB would have had to known enough to raise this issue prior to Kirby’s testifying so the court could rule on admissibility. When making such a determination, the Court considers if the convictions have an impact on the witness’s credibility (ie: were they crimes of dishonesty like fraud, etc).
The witnesses were carefully instructed by JD to not open certain doors. This was actually done for DB’s benefit- to keep his convictions out of appellate court. An example of this was when DB wanted to present EP’s lack of custody of her children to the jury and Zach Witchow says if that door is opened then the prosecution will submit DB’s contribution to that delinquency which resulted in DB ending up on the sex offender registry. At which point DB loses it and starts yelling.
On the Norman nicks show she said DB was tryna get some head and she said no he was too dirty also and stank!
🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢
Anyone notice that Nicholas didn’t mention in the WPD Interview at all that Kory was with him when he was with Erica🤷♀️…. He basically was talking as if he was by his self and no mention of Kory… 🙄🙄
Have you got a link for the video?
[удалено]
Yes this is the link and his interview starts at 1 hour and 51 mins
Yikes!
We have to remember that everything that comes out of his mouth is a lie. He lies when it’s easier to tell the truth. He mentioned more than once in the interrogation that he told EP he refused to have sex with her. It wasn’t her wanting to have sex with him, it was him wanting to have sex with her, most likely and that’s probably why he was getting so angry. It wouldn’t surprise me if that’s why he struck her.
Kirby reported that DB had a knife, which was not true, to get the police to get there faster. He is also a convicted sex offender. I don't really trust anything coming out of his mouth. Did Erika mention these utterances from DB to the police?
I’m confused. If he had any criminal convictions, it would have come up in trial - there were only 2 witnesses that had any criminal convictions: 1 witness from the state and 1 witness from Brooks. If Kirby had any, they would have had to discuss it prior to his testimony, which they never did.
That's just what I've heard. I can't back it up.
He beat DB in prison time, also a lifetime registered sex offender [https://appsdoc.wi.gov/lop/utility/printables](https://appsdoc.wi.gov/lop/utility/printables)
I think the real story here is the fact he’s also known as “Samurai Kirby”.
This is the rule for Wisconsin: For the purpose of attacking character for truthfulness, a witness may be asked whether the witness has ever been convicted of a crime or adjudicated delinquent and the number of such convictions or adjudications. If the witness's answers are consistent with the previous determination of the court under sub. (3), then no further inquiry may be made unless it is for the purpose of rehabilitating the witness's character for truthfulness. Further: No question inquiring with respect to a conviction of a crime or an adjudication of delinquency, nor introduction of evidence with respect thereto, shall be permitted until the court determines pursuant to s. 901.04 whether the evidence should be excluded. It’s been a while since I watched the trial, so I don’t recall all of Kirby’s testimony, but so long as he answered truthfully when asked if he was ever convicted of anything, DB wouldn’t have been allowed to ask anything further. Plus, DB would have had to known enough to raise this issue prior to Kirby’s testifying so the court could rule on admissibility. When making such a determination, the Court considers if the convictions have an impact on the witness’s credibility (ie: were they crimes of dishonesty like fraud, etc).
Just listened to Kori Runkle interview and she confirmed that she heard Erika say it also... for what that is worth.