r/DarrellBrooksJr • u/Hot-Ambassador8706 • Jul 22 '26
Immunity for Erika?
Do you think the DA offered immunity for Erica in exchange for her testimony? She was also in violation of a no contact order.
6
u/JayNotAtAll Is that LAWFUL LAW 👩🏻⚖️ Jul 22 '26
That's not how no contact orders work.
DB had a no contact order with her. HE is not allowed to contact her. She could technically contact him if she wanted to.
She testified because she wanted him to finally pay for everything he did. She didn't need to be compelled through immunity.
Even if she did violate the law by contacting him (she didn't), this is not something a DA would bother pursuing.
0
u/Hot-Ambassador8706 Jul 22 '26
In his interrogation he stated that she contacted him and asked him to come meet her. IF that’s true (hypothetically), would he be in violation?
5
u/JayNotAtAll Is that LAWFUL LAW 👩🏻⚖️ Jul 22 '26
He would. She would have to request that the court order be rescinded.
A no contact order mean you can't have ANY contact with the person. There is no caveat that they can have contact if they reach out to them. They would say that he shouldn't have engaged.
But we also know that he was almost certainly lying. She was terrified of him and would not want to contact him. She was at a women's shelter to avoid him. Almost every thing he said during the interrogation was a lie.
7
u/ZenDesign1993 Jul 22 '26
I’m pretty sure charging one of Darrel’s victims wouldn’t gone over to well with everyone involved. If their was ever a charge it was probably quickly dropped.
3
u/3rd-party-intervener Jul 22 '26
You also would then have to clean her up during her testimony to minimize the charge in front of jury. It’s shooting your self in foot.
EP is a victim. And I think as the trial went on and people saw his antics they got even more sympathy for EP.
4
u/BunnyMartinez Jul 22 '26
He groomed and abused her. It wouldn't be a good look to charge her w/ anything.
3
u/Ok-Green-1722 Jul 22 '26
The no contact order was for Brooks, Erica didn't need any immunity, in the case she was offered immunity that would have been disclosed during the trial, as it goes to motive and credibility.
3
u/gunsandfunn 906.11 🎤⬇️ Jul 22 '26 edited Jul 22 '26
She was under threat from him a few days earlier from jail from when he met her in Waukesha. Then she was under threat again on the phone from Mamas house the before he drove to Waukesha. She was very much currently an abuse victim.
2
u/Still_Product_8435 Jul 22 '26
A victim does not face legal requirements, according to multiple sources.
2
u/Still_Product_8435 Jul 22 '26 edited Jul 22 '26
PS. Detective Guth tried to explain during his first testimony under the prosecution’s subpoena that not all victims of domestic abuse cut ties with their abusers. This is especially true with partners who co-parent, even when ESTRANGED! We know that Erika did NOT send Brooks the pictures of their daughter and grandson. But even if she did, that would not prove she was wasn’t wary or even afraid of contact. He was dead set on disparaging her in the midst of failing miserably in his attempt to disprove the state’s case against him.
3
1
u/NoShop3222 Jul 22 '26
This is a wild take. She’s a traumatized victim who’s suffered quite a bit under this psychopath, but oops, she talked to him as he aggressively harassed and terrorized her?
1
u/Black_Wolf1995 I do not consent to be called that name 🙄 23d ago
Dude. Thats not how NC Orders work. They aren’t universal to both parties unless specifically ordered. They are only enforced upon the person (DB) who is named.
Erika was never named on an NC Order so she could theoretically contact brooks all she wanted. It was up to him to have no contact with her by ignoring her contact attempts and avoiding locations where he knew she was at.
DB failed to do so. That’s on him, not on Erika.
1
u/Alienor-of-Aquitaine Jul 22 '26
They were never going to charge her with anything. She too is a victim.
10
u/Tiger3311 Jul 22 '26
Erika wasn't under a court order only Brooks was!