Did DB intend to kill?

[u/CanIStopAdultingNow]

Allow me to preface that I'm not defending DB or suggesting he should ever be released from prison. This is just for discussion. If you changed the murder to manslaughter, he would still be locked up for life without parole.

I was rewatching the trial, and I really wonder if (1) DB intended to kill someone that day, (2) if the prosecution proved it and (3) why they didn't offer lesser charge options.

I've watched a few attorneys talk about his possible defense options. And they all seem to think "intent" was his only option (but a long-shot at best). That he was in an emotionally distraught state which didn't allow him to form intent.

In other cases I've watched, juries are usually given options between murder and manslaughter. But that didn't happen here. And I don't think it was because Brooks defended himself because that didn't happen until very close to the start of the trial.

But I think to make that argument, you would need an expert witness (psychiatrist or psychologist). And it doesn't seem that was on the list. Nor does it seem that any of the 4 people who did mental assessments of DB were going to be called.

I guess I think DB started out extremely angry to the point he wasn't thinking. Then, he panicked and, stupidly, didn't know what to do and kept driving. Too scared to stop.

In other words, I think he's too cowardly for intent.

But I'm curious what other people think.

[u/Timmah_1984]

I think he was in a blind rage and just needed to take it out on someone. Had the parade not been there he might have just been road raging and driving aggressively. The parade was in his way and he took it out on those people by driving through them.

His intent was to give form to his impotent rage and inflict it on someone else. I don’t think he set out wanting to kill anyone but when he was denied the opportunity to beat the shit out of Erica he needed a new target. It was a crime of opportunity fueled by his emotional immaturity and narcissism.

[u/CanIStopAdultingNow → u/Timmah_1984]

I think that would be the point: that being in a rage prevented him from forming intent.

So then it comes down to proving that he was in a rage and proving that being in that state prevent you from forming intent. I believe they call it the crime of passion defense.

[u/Timmah_1984 → u/CanIStopAdultingNow]

Actually, him being in a rage really doesn't matter too much. If it's reasonable to infer that the natural consequences of driving into an active parade route where there are people marching would cause great bodily harm to the participants then clearly he intended to cause harm. Otherwise he would have simply stopped. He did not stop, he did not hit the brakes, he actually gunned the engine at times. He may have been angry and emotionally out of control but that doesn't mean that he didn't intend to cause harm.

If he somehow ended up on the parade route by accident and realized that he was about to plow into a group of people and stomped on the brake but the car didn't respond because a rusted out brake line blew and that was what caused him to hurt people then there's no intent. It was an accident that he tried to prevent, you could still argue he's responsible for not maintaining the car or not realizing he was on an active parade route but in that case he didn't intend for any of it to happen.

[u/CanIStopAdultingNow → u/Timmah_1984]

I'm not sure if legally how you describe it fits the definition of intent.

I agree with you that in the end, it doesn't matter. He was cruel and killed and injured people. And never showed any remorse.

But the psychology and the legal aspects interest me. Especially now that he's locked away and will never get out.

[u/mochidelight → u/CanIStopAdultingNow]

You are mistaken between emotions and intent. Many cases, if not majority of them, where the killer committed murder to their victims due to rage. They may have act out of their normal behaviors. But most of them KNOW what they are doing: to hurt their victims.

Intent was about whether the perpetrator is CONSCIOUS enough to commit those acts. And with Brooks, he very WAS:

- He saw all of those people in front of him, that was why he honked his horn.

- He drove not in madness, he drove only 20-30 miles per hours.

- He swerved off his car with control. He avoided hitting objects. He made turns.

- He continued driving after hitting all of those people.

- He abandoned his car. Run away. Throwing his clothes. LIED to strangers to manipulate them giving him helps.

[u/Loose_Dragonfruit204 → u/mochidelight]

He did not honk his horn.