
‘You don't have to call me ‘bro': How Crosetti Brand is representing himself at trial for child's slaying
Representing himself while he stands trial on murder charges, Crosetti Brand was in the middle of heatedly arguing that he was receiving an unfair trial when the judge stopped him.
'One second,' Cook County Judge Angela Petrone said. 'You don't have to call me 'bro.''
Brand, 39, is charged with murder, attempted murder, home invasion and aggravated domestic battery in a March 13, 2024 attack that killed 11-year-old Jayden Perkins and seriously injured his pregnant mother.
During the first two weeks of an expected three-week trial, prosecutors called more than two dozen witnesses, all together painting a searing picture of the killing at the family's apartment in the 5900 block of North Ravenswood Avenue. After a series of harassment and threats made to Jayden's mother, Brand barged into the home and stabbed her over and over. When Jayden tried to intervene, Brand stabbed him as well, according to prosecutors and state witnesses.
All the while, Jayden's younger 5-year-old brother watched the attack unfold.
Brand, though, made the unusual decision to forgo a licensed attorney and launch his own defense – a choice that, at times, has brought an air of peculiarity to the otherwise tense and emotional proceedings.
His choice to represent himself has impacted the trial in a number of ways. Because Brand demanded a speedy trial, the proceedings got started much more quickly than is typical for murder trials, leaving prosecutors to rush to expedite evidence production and prepare witnesses just a little over a year after the attack.
It also meant that Brand has been able to question his alleged victims, grilling Jayden's mother, Laterria Smith after she told the jury what happened that day.
Pausing for the long weekend, the trial will resume Tuesday.
On Wednesday at the Leighton Criminal Court Building, Brand apologized to the judge for calling her 'bro' but continued to argue, as he has repeatedly throughout the lead-up to the trial, that he is being treated unfairly.
'That's sandbagging, judge,' Brand said, when prosecutors provided him with a certified copy of records that were previously tendered.
'Regarding the word cheating, I find there is no cheating,' Petrone responded, outside the presence of the jury. 'Regarding the word, sandbagging, I find there is no sandbagging.'
Brand, who argued during a brief opening statement that he was defending himself when Jayden was killed, comes into the courtroom each day with a short-sleeve, button-down shirt and large stacks of paperwork. He takes notes as witnesses testify.
His cross examinations are mercurial: At times, he has begun a line of questioning, then seems to change his mind, telling the judge he has nothing further. Other times, he has displayed odd quirks while examining witnesses. More than once, he has inserted random Spanish words into his cross.
'You can just say 'police,'' Petrone said, when Brand appeared to be stumbling over the Spanish word of 'policía.'
Brand has won on some issues, though. He often objects by arguing that prosecutors are leading the witness, meaning they are asking a question in a way that presumes a specific answer. Petrone has sometimes agreed, telling prosecutors to rephrase their question.
In other instances, though, she has told Brand the question was proper.
During the trial's first week, his ability to question the people who suffered due the attack has appeared to cause distress to witnesses and family members watching proceedings from the gallery.
When she took the stand on May 12, Smith did not make eye contact with Brand, answering his questions as she turned her head slightly away.
Among a litany of questions about their relationship, he asked her whether she told police they had been involved in a relationship.
'I did mention it,' she said.
Brand also peppered Smith's former fiance, Kassidy Miles, about his romantic relationship with her. Miles, who lived with Smith, Jayden and his 5-year-old son, had testified that he received a call at work from the boy to tell him Jayden had been killed. While questioning Smith and Miles, Brand was rebuked by the judge for trying to ask questions about Smith's romantic history with other men, which Petrone said violated the state's rape shield law.
After Brand finished questioning him, Miles walked off the witness stand, left the courtroom and bent over in tears.
Smith, Miles and other witnesses described the brutal attack, often struggling to make it through the difficult testimony.
Smith testified that she dated Brand in high school, but had recently rekindled their relationship in the months leading up to the stabbing. She said she tried to break it off as Brand grew more controlling.
He bombarded her with calls and texts, so she reported the harassment to authorities, Smith said. Brand was sent back to prison for violating the terms of his release after serving a sentence for an attack on another woman.
But one day before the attack, Smith was notified by an automated message, she said, that Brand had been released. The controversial decision by the Illinois Prisoner Review Board led to the resignation of two members and spurred Gov. JB Pritzker to create a new position on the board. Lawmakers this week also advanced a bill that would emphasize domestic violence awareness training for members of the state's Prisoner Review Board.
Brand has a criminal record against Smith and other women that includes attacks, threats and violations.
As the trial moved into its second week on Monday, the proceedings grew more technical, with detectives, evidence technicians and crime lab personnel attesting to evidence production and preservation.
One detective testified that he arrested Brand after the attack, finding him at an apartment and taking him into custody after Brand crawled out of the unit on his stomach.
'Did the door to unit 211 eventually open?' the prosecutor asked the detective.
He responded that it took about a minute.
'Objection, speculation,' Brand said.
'That's overruled because the detective was there and witnessed it,' Petrone responded.
Petrone has been attentive to Brand, often trying to ensure he has enough time to look through his notes and prepare himself for questioning. The court has allowed him to receive daily transcripts of proceedings and prosecutors have at times helped set up videos that he wanted to show to witnesses – things that a defense attorney would generally handle.
She pointed that out during a particularly frustrated exchange with Brand as he continued to argue after she already made a ruling.
'Is it about the same issue you put on record twice already?,' Petrone asked, adding that the court has made 'sure you have everything you need to have a fair trial.'
'The court believes you are getting a fair trial,' she said.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


USA Today
7 hours ago
- USA Today
DDG asks judge to stop Halle Bailey from traveling with their son
DDG asks judge to stop Halle Bailey from traveling with their son DDG and ex-girlfriend Halle Bailey are continuing to hash out their custody issues in court. On June 4, lawyers for the 27-year-old rapper and Twitch streamer – born Darryl Dwayne Granberry Jr. – requested a temporary emergency order in Los Angeles Superior Court, according to a filing reviewed by USA TODAY. The filing, made as part of Bailey's restraining order case against DDG that was initiated in May, asks the judge to prohibit the 25-year-old actress from traveling to Italy with their 18-month-old son, Halo. His team also asked for a continuance, or a postponement, of the domestic violence restraining order hearing that had been scheduled for June 4. According to People and E! News, in a 44-page filing, DDG's lawyers leveled allegations that cast doubt on Bailey's fitness as a parent, calling her "an imminent emotional and psychological risk." Per Billboard, the judge overseeing the case indicated she would soon issue an order on whether Bailey can travel with their son on June 4. The next hearing in the case is reportedly June 24. Bailey had been granted a temporary restraining order from DDG the same day she filed her request, according to a May 13 notice reviewed by USA TODAY. USA TODAY has reached out to Bailey's representatives for comment. Halle Bailey's allegations: Inside her restraining order request against DDG Met Gala: Halle Bailey wears suit dress Halle Bailey shines on the Met Gala red carpet in a mini-suit dress. Halle Bailey accused DDG of abuse in restraining order request In her May filing, Bailey accused DDG of physical, emotional, verbal and financial abuse and requested full legal and physical custody of Halo. As a result of DDG's alleged abuse, Bailey demanded no-contact and stay-away orders for herself and Halo that prevented DDG from getting in touch with the mother-son pair, in addition to requiring the rapper to remain 100 yards away from them and to stop posting about Bailey and Halo on social media. "I realize that there is no placating Darryl," Bailey wrote in a statement attached to the filing. "I cannot allow this abuse any longer. I cannot keep living like this. I never know when he is going to demand our son be in his mother's care and whether I will be subjected to his threats and abuse." If you or someone you know has experienced sexual violence, RAINN's National Sexual Assault Hotline offers free, confidential, 24/7 support in English and Spanish via chat and at 800-656-4673. If you or someone you know is a victim of domestic violence, call the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 800-799-7233 or text "START" to 88788. Contributing: Edward Segarra, USA TODAY
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Judge Boasberg rules migrants at Salvadoran megaprison can contest gang accusations
A federal judge on Wednesday ruled a group of Venezuelans deported to a Salvadoran megaprison under the Alien Enemies Act must be provided a legal avenue to contest the Trump administration's accusations that they are gang members. U.S. District Judge James Boasberg did not outline specific steps the administration must take, providing one week to propose how it intends to comply. Boasberg said he realized the ruling 'may implicate sensitive diplomatic or national-security concerns' but said the administration 'also has a constitutional duty to provide a remedy that will 'make good the wrong done.'' It's a complex scenario for the administration to carry out. The Trump administration has argued they have no ability to secure the return of anyone held at CECOT, a notorious Salvadoran prison known by its acronym in Spanish. And Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele has said he will not return a mistakenly deported man sent to the facility under regular immigration authorities. That raises the prospect he would decline to do so for Venezuelans being incarcerated in a country that has also been criticized for due process violations in locking up gang members. But the situation spurred an unusual ruling from Boasberg, who turned to literature in determining the men must be given the opportunity for due process. Boasberg described the process of carrying out Trump's removals under the Alien Enemies Act as being akin to a scene from the Franz Kafka novel 'The Trial,' as the Venezuelan men deported through the law were given few answers about what was about to happen to them. 'In the early morning hours, Venezuelans held by the Department of Homeland Security at El Valle Detention Facility in Texas were awakened from their cells, taken to a separate room, shackled, and informed that they were being transferred,' Boasberg wrote. 'To where? That they were not told. When asked, some guards reportedly laughed and said that they did not know; others told the detainees, incorrectly, that they were being transferred to another immigration facility or to Mexico or Venezuela.' Boasberg noted that migrants 'reportedly began to panic and beg officials for more information,' only to learn they were being sent to a Salvadoran megaprison. The migrants were flown out of the country on March 15, shortly after President Trump signed a proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act. The law has only been used three previous times, all during declared wars, but Trump has looked to the statute to justify rapidly deporting alleged gang members. Boasberg noted evidence suggesting many of the deported Venezuelans have no gang connection 'and thus languish in a foreign prison on flimsy, even frivolous, accusations.' 'Perhaps the President lawfully invoked the Alien Enemies Act. Perhaps, moreover, Defendants are correct that Plaintiffs are gang members,' Boasberg wrote. 'But — and this is the critical point — there is simply no way to know for sure, as the CECOT Plaintiffs never had any opportunity to challenge the Government's say-so.' One of the lead plaintiffs in the case, Andry Hernandez Romero, came to the U.S. to seek asylum. Romero is a gay makeup artist who said he was facing persecution by the Maduro regime both for his sexuality and political activism. The Trump administration has pointed to tattoos on each of his wrists displaying crowns with the words mom and dad written in Spanish to argue he is a gang member, saying the crowns are symbols of the Tren de Aragua gang. Experts, however, have said the gang doesn't rely on tattoos to indicate membership, and friends of Hernandez Romero say the tattoos were a nod to Three Kings Day celebrations in his hometown in Venezuela. Trump's use of the Alien Enemies Act has sparked a legal battle spanning more than a dozen lawsuits across the country, but Boasberg has been involved since the beginning. In mid-March, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) rushed to Boasberg's court when Trump first invoked the law, quickly securing an order to halt or turn around any deportation flights. Boasberg on Tuesday again condemned the administration for allowing the flights to land in El Salvador that weekend, writing his 'mandate was ignored.' Trump and his allies have publicly accosted Boasberg for his ruling, with some going so far as to call for his impeachment. The Supreme Court twice ruled the administration must give migrants sufficient notice before deporting them, but it has left it to the lower courts to take a first pass at determining exactly how much notice is required. 'In light of those Supreme Court holdings, this Court ultimately agrees with the CECOT Plaintiffs that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their due-process claim. Defendants plainly deprived these individuals of their right to seek habeas relief before their summary removal from the United States,' Boasberg wrote. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Judge orders Trump administration to bring Venezuelans back from El Salvador prison
Backed by a Supreme Court order, a federal judge ruled on Wednesday that the Trump administration must bring back to the United States hundreds of suspected Venezuelan gang members who were sent to a mega prison in El Salvador without any court review of the criminal allegations against them. U.S. District Judge James Boasberg of Washington, D.C., said the alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang who were deported in mid-March under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act are entitled to filing habeas petitions to challenge the legal basis for their deportation and imprisonment in the notorious facility in El Salvador known as CECOT, the Spanish initials for the Terrorism Confinement Center. Describing the Venezuelans' ordeal as 'Kafkaesque,' the judge noted that while the U.S. Supreme Court in April overturned his injunction stopping the removals of the suspected Venezuelan gang members, the justices ruled that the migrants have a due-process right to contest their detention on an individual basis in the United States. 'Perhaps the President lawfully invoked the Alien Enemies Act. Perhaps, moreover, [the Trump administration is] are correct that Plaintiffs [Venezuelan immigrants] are gang members,' Boasberg wrote in his 69-page order. 'But — and this is the critical point — there is simply no way to know for sure, as the CECOT Plaintiffs never had any opportunity to challenge the Government's say-so. 'Defendants instead spirited away planeloads of people before any such challenge could be made,' Boasberg added. 'And now, significant evidence has come to light indicating that many of those currently entombed in CECOT have no connection to the gang and thus languish in a foreign prison on flimsy, even frivolous, accusations.' Boasberg's rebuke of the Department of Homeland Security's decision to invoke the the archaic war powers law as grounds for summarily deporting the suspected Venezuelan gang members followed a major ruling by the Supreme Court in April. The court vacated the judge's temporary restraining order that had blocked the removal of alleged Venezuelan gang members, giving the Trump administration the green light to use the wartime law to carry out the deportations of certain migrants. The majority ruled that challenges to the detention and removal of migrants using the Alien Enemies Act must be brought as legal petitions in the area where the plaintiffs were held in the United States, not in Washington, D.C., where the American Civil Liberties Union filed its petition. But the majority also found that such migrants are entitled to due process of the law as part of their removal proceedings. The plaintiffs who brought the lawsuit in question said they had been wrongly accused of being members of the violent Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. Alien Enemies Act detainees 'must receive notice after the date of this order that they are subject to removal under the act,' Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. 'The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs.' The high court opinion came just as the judge who issued the temporary restraining order was mulling whether to hold Trump administration officials in contempt for violating his order to pause the flights of Venezuelan migrants to the mega prison in El Salvador that began in March. Boasberg originally imposed a 14-day temporary restraining order halting the deportations of alleged members of Tren de Aragua. In a concurring opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh said that all nine members of the Supreme Court agree that judicial review is available to migrants. 'The only question is where that judicial review should occur,' Kavanaugh wrote. Among the immigrants sent to the prison in El Salvador was a Maryland man. In a related legal dispute, the Trump administration admitted that Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran native, was deported there due to an 'administrative error' — despite an immigration court order that he not be removed from the United States. Another federal judge ordered the Trump administration to bring him back to the U.S. The Supreme Court affirmed the judge's order directing the Trump administration to 'facilitate' Garcia's release, but he's still imprisoned in El Salvador.