In a courtroom last week, Cook County prosecutors handed over a stack of cellphone records to a defendant accused of fatally stabbing 11-year-old Jayden Perkins in March, as the defendant lobbed back accusations that they hid evidence from him.
The case against Crosetti Brand is striking on its own: A man with a documented history of abusing multiple women is accused of barging into an Edgewater apartment just a day after being released from prison, attacking his ex-girlfriend and killing Jayden when the boy tried to help his mother.
But procedurally, the matter stands out even more as it unfolds at the busy Leighton Criminal Court Building. Brand is serving as his own attorney, arguing the case without the expertise of a licensed lawyer, and he has demanded a speedy trial — meaning the case is proceeding toward trial at a pace nearly unheard of in a building where murder cases can linger for years or even a decade.
“I have seen the mounds of discovery tendered to you, tendered in a very rapid fashion, way more quickly than I’ve seen in any other case,” Judge Angela Petrone told Brand at the latest hearing, where he took possession of reams of records. The judge said she found no merit to his assertions that prosecutors weren’t complying with their obligation to turn over evidence.
The hearings pit Brand, who often appears to misunderstand terminology, rules of procedure and evidence, against experienced prosecutors racing against a clock to expedite evidence production.
Defendants have a constitutional right to represent themselves, a right that experts say nonetheless puts the accused at a disadvantage. It also poses challenges for judges and prosecutors. In this case, the parties have struggled with logistics, such as how Brand, from the jail, may serve subpoenas upon witnesses he plans to call.
“Any pro se litigant has a fool for a lawyer, as the expression goes,” said Richard Kling, a clinical professor of law at Chicago-Kent College of Law and veteran defense attorney.
‘You open your (expletive) door’
During an hourslong hearing July 1, prosecutors laid out new details about the case, alleging that Brand went on a harassment campaign before he finally showed up at the Edgewater apartment.
The case has drawn ire and grief in the community, and raised questions about protections for victims of domestic violence and the Illinois Prisoner Review Board’s handling of the decision to release Brand.
Brand was released from prison in October for a period of mandatory supervision after he was convicted in a 2015 attack on another woman. He harassed and threatened Jayden’s mother, prosecutors said, and showed up at her apartment on Feb. 1 after texting her threats the day before.
The transgression landed him back in prison, but only for a short time. He was released about six weeks later, one day before the alleged attack.
The state’s top parole official and another board member resigned in the wake of the attack, and Gov. J.B. Pritzker created a new executive review board position with a mandate to expand domestic violence training for board members.
Seeking to introduce evidence of Brand’s history of domestic violence, prosecutors described continuous threats from Brand to Jayden’s mother prior to the stabbing.
“You open your (expletive) door, I will be there,” Brand texted, prophetically, to Jayden’s mother, according to Assistant State’s Attorney Stephanie Gersch.
On March 13, she opened the door in order to take her two children to school, and Brand was there, prosecutors said.
Gersch also outlined past allegations and convictions against Brand in connection with two other women.
“This defendant has a pretty specific pattern of just showing up where these women are,” Gersch said. “When he shows up he either physically causes harm to these women or threatens to.”
Brand did not have a detailed response to prosecutors’ motion, but said they were “dropping a bomb” on him last minute.
“You can allege anything in this court,” he said.
Nightmare for judges
Brand has filed a flurry of motions since the case began, some which appear to misunderstand fundamental elements of a criminal prosecution.
Last week, he sought to present police body-camera footage, seemingly to exclude a witness on the basis that she wasn’t present at the crime scene.
Assistant State’s Attorney Danny Hanichak noted that witnesses don’t necessarily have to be eyewitnesses to the alleged crime.
Though Brand has successfully made some arguments — after he argued that pretrial publicity may prejudice him, Petrone, acting on a request from prosecutors, sealed factual records in the case — the motion hearings thus far have followed similar patterns.
“Nothing is being hidden. That’s ridiculous,” Hanichak said, pointing out that Brand appears to be clueless on courtroom procedure. “Oftentimes in cases like this where you are dealing with different agencies, (evidence production) can take a year, 18 months. We’ve fast-tracked everything.”
Defendants who seek to represent themselves have a constitutional right to proceed on their own, Kling said, but they are held to the same standard as any attorney.
“The possibility or probability of error being injected into the record goes up astronomically,” he said. “It becomes a nightmare for judges and prosecutors because realistically both judges and prosecutors want to avoid anything that’s going to cause the trial to be reversed.”
A quick pace
During the hearings, Petrone has been solicitous of Brand, often repeating issues for his understanding and allowing long blocks of time for the hearings.
The speed at which the case is moving is rare. If defendants do not ask for a continuance, their cases must proceed to trial within 120 days, a timeline that is almost never used by those charged with the most serious felonies, Kling said.
“Mostly when defendants come into the system, they need more than 120 days because the lawyers have to go through discovery, get the police reports, etc.,” Kling said. “Yes, this is unusual.”
The hearings in Brand’s case at times have been tense, with family members filling the gallery and sometimes growing emotional listening to Brand defend himself of particularly tragic allegations.
Scuffles broke out during earlier proceedings as distraught relatives of Jayden’s tried to run toward Brand.
For Brand’s part, he continues to deny guilt.
“This is America,” he said. “I’m entitled to the presumption of innocence.”
