❌

Normal view

Madison Brooks rape suspect's attorney held in contempt for using her name to try to ban pink in courtroom

20 October 2026 at 19:07

The defense attorney who asked a Louisiana judge to ban pink from the courtroom in the Madison Brooks rape case was held in contempt Monday.

Caitlin Fowlkes, who represents 21-year-old Desmond Carter, used Brooks’ full name in a court filing attached to her July motion seeking to ban trial spectators from wearing pink. Under Louisiana law, sex crime victims must be identified only by their initials in court filings, and attorneys are required to redact their full names.

Brooks, a 19-year-old Louisiana State University student at the time, was allegedly gang-raped by a group of men after a night out in 2023, then struck and killed by a car.

MADISON BROOKS’ MOM SLAMS ATTEMPT TO BAN PINK AT TRIAL FOR SLAIN LSU STUDENT: ‘WE WEAR IT TO HONOR HER’

Judge Gail Horne Ray had ruled in August that Brooks' supporters could wear pink in the courtroom, but on Monday she found Fowlkes in contempt for failing to redact Brooks' full name from the filing. Fowlkes received no punishment.

While Brooks' name has received significant public attention and has been discussed by the governor of Louisiana, Ray wrote "the law is clear that an attorney's failure to comply with the provisions of this law 'shall be punishable as contempt of court."

SEND US A TIP

According to a coroner's report, Brooks had a BAC of .319 at the time of her death and had injuries consistent with rape.

SIGN UP TO GET THE LATEST TRUE CRIME NEWS

Carter was 17 years old when he was taken into custody at the time of the incident. Brooks left Reggie's Bar in Tigerland alongside three men — Carter, Casen Carver, Kaivon Washington and Everett Lee, according to officials. Authorities say Carver drove the group to a parking lot where Carter and Washington allegedly raped Brooks.

LISTEN TO THE NEW 'CRIME & JUSTICE WITH DONNA ROTUNNO' PODCAST

The men told police that Brooks asked to be taken home after the incident, providing multiple incorrect addresses before requesting to be let out near a subdivision, where they said she wandered into the street and was struck by a car.

FOLLOW THE FOX TRUE CRIME TEAM ON X

The driver of the car that hit her remained on the scene and was ultimately cleared of charges.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

"Maddie felt safe that night, she thought these were her friends and I think a lot of selfish choices were made that night, and ultimately it led in a horrific ending," Brooks' mother, Ashley Baustert, previously told Fox News Digital.

Fox News Digital reached out to Fowlkes for comment.

Fans Don't Want a 24-Team College Football Playoff. The NCAA Thinks You'll Watch Anyway.

20 October 2026 at 15:45
A few BYU football players celebrate on the field, one of them has ripped off his helmet. | Aaron Baker/Icon Sportswire CHE/Aaron Baker/Icon Sportswire/Newscom

Hello and welcome to another edition of Free Agent! Be careful when you're behind the wheel this week.

College football is great! Surely you want even more of it, right? We'll get into the problems with a 24-team College Football Playoff (CFP), then talk about the NBA's new betting restrictions, and close with thoughts about President Donald Trump's new government golf course plans. And just in case you don't make it to the end, here's a shortcut to our survey on who you're rooting for in the World Series.

But first, many congratulations to "Gary's 1st Entry" on outlasting everyone else in our NFL Survivor group. There's no prize other than this shoutout, so be sure to print out today's newsletter, highlight this paragraph, and frame it in gold. Perhaps Gary can keep going and challenge Primetime Paulie Rothrock's 13-game winning streak from last season.

Locker Room Links

Watering Down College Football Is a Mistake

Saturday was one of the best days of college football ever—or perhaps it could have been, if we thought any of the five top-10 teams who took a loss were now certainly out of playoff contention. Instead, Georgia, Notre Dame, Indiana, Alabama, and Texas are all still very much alive in the championship hunt.

Today was one of the craziest days in college football history:

- First time ever five teams ranked in the top 7 lose in a single week
- First time the No. 1-ranked team loses to an unranked team in consecutive weeks since 1990
- First time Texas, Alabama, and Georgia all lose… pic.twitter.com/psVRoM5s5b

— Bobby Football (@Rob__Paul) October 18, 2026

With two losses, Alabama and Texas are at least on the edge of the playoff bubble with perhaps no more room for error. But that's only true under this year's CFP format. Next year, the playoff is almost officially set to balloon to 24 teams, making the chaos of a day like Saturday matter even less.

Fans will always celebrate a huge upset or major rivalry win, of course—Tennessee fans don't need playoff stakes as an excuse to get drunk when they beat Alabama. But the joy of a rivalry win in the past was always bigger because of the off-field stakes, too—the first loss for your rival meant they probably wouldn't be national champions, the second meant they'd be out of the Rose Bowl, a third meant you could be proud your team sent them packing for the Alamo Bowl. Winning is great; ruining your rival's season is even better.

With 24 teams in the playoff, the joy is a bit diminished because it will take four or possibly five losses to knock a powerhouse program out of the CFP (Iowa, at 8–4, was ranked 23rd by the committee before last year's playoffs). It'll be a bit like a rivalry win in college basketball—we win, you suck, congrats on getting a slightly worse NCAA Tournament seed.

In the business of sports, more inventory for TV is king, and the powers that be think more teams playing more playoff games will make more money. At Free Agent, we don't begrudge institutions for trying to make more money—we all do the same every day. But it's not clear abandoning conference championship games will be the answer, especially when the Big Ten and SEC championships apparently outdraw many playoff games.

ESPN and the power conferences know fans aren't happy about it—just look at all the chatter online, and how the crowd at BYU reacted when College GameDay discussed expansion on Saturday (especially when BYU would probably benefit from expansion!). They're betting enough people will watch to make the expansion profitable anyway. The last hope is that fans get loud enough to bully them into abandoning expansion—which only occasionally works, sometimes on things small (putting the trophy logo on the court for the NBA Finals) and large (soccer's European Super League). If any powerhouse considers going independent, that might shock leaders into a rethink too.

Almost every sport I know is adding more: more teams, bigger playoffs, more for TV. As fans, we still eat it up, of course—much to the excitement of the TV executives who are selling commercial time to the people trying to reach us, the viewing public. (The only counterexample is the MLB proposal to cut eight games from the regular season—I'd love to see each sport I follow cut its season by about 25 percent to make regular season games matter more, so I'm interested to see how this goes.)

Perhaps I'm biased because my favorite team, Michigan State, is a dumpster fire—they could expand the playoff to 64 teams and the Spartans still wouldn't deserve a bid. I personally don't have a whole lot at stake in the playoff format now or anytime soon. But as a neutral, the chaos of Saturday might have been viewed with my full attention in the past—instead, this year I just had it on in the background while I played video games.

Sports Are Regulating Bets Without Politicians, Part 3

After last year's major betting scandal, the NBA asked sportsbooks late last week to stop offering certain types of potentially problematic bets. The sportsbooks, which the NBA says handle roughly 99 percent of the U.S. betting market, agreed. No politician or regulation was necessary to solve the problem.

No longer can bettors bet on unders for a bit player who likely won't get more than 12 minutes of playtime. Bettors also can't wager on the opening tip or on players to miss specific shots. Parlays that string together under bets on the same player's statistics are also out (this one seems a bit harsh—if you just want to bet on a certain major player to have an off night, you can bet on stats separately, but not in a big multiplier parlay). Bets on players who have two-way contracts between the NBA and G League were already banned.

This all comes on the heels of similar developments last year in the NFL and MLB. While some people want to ban prop bets altogether, the NFL asked sportsbooks to eliminate bets in four different categories. Sportsbooks largely agreed or weren't offering those bets anyway. MLB, in light of some pitching-related scandals, asked for a $200 limit on pitch-specific bets and to keep them out of parlays—sportsbooks agreed to that too.

As I wrote last year, "Ideally, this is how the regulation of the sports betting industry should go….These approaches are catching the nuances of what works for both the leagues and for sportsbooks without the heavy-handed approaches of politicians who would use an axe to ban all prop bets instead of a scalpel to limit problematic bets."

It's important to note leagues are able to do this because they have commercial partnerships with the sportsbooks. Otherwise, the leagues would have no direct leverage over a sportsbook offering a bet the league doesn't like. Keep that in mind the next time you see people bemoaning a league partnership with a sportsbook or a prediction market.

Trump's Golf Course Plans Have People Teed Off

President Donald Trump has new plans for the National Park Service golf course at East Potomac—again. Last time new plans were announced, the site plan still had its historic miniature golf course, a par-3 course, and the existing road still ringing the property for bicycling, running, etc. Much of the public didn't like that plan anyway—now, none of that remains in the latest plans, just 18 holes of golf and a driving range.

Trump announces plans for the redeveloped East Potomac Park golf course. pic.twitter.com/ZiGYgc99Uo

— Andrew Leyden (@PenguinSix) October 18, 2026

What's really going on here seems quite clear to me: Like so many other things going on in the second Trump administration, this is a scheme to enrich the Trump family. The plan?

Step 1: Cancel a lease that was signed during the first Trump administration with a nonprofit group operating the golf course and working, in the long term, on major capital improvements and renovations.

Step 2: Use taxpayer dollars to pay for renovation of the course into, allegedly, a championship-level course capable of hosting major golf tournaments (no matter that the area has next to zero parking, is a mile from the nearest Metro station, and only accessible by narrow roads not meant to handle tens of thousands of spectators). 

Step 3: Have the federal government sign a sweetheart deal with, who else, the golf division of the Trump Organization to operate the course on extremely favorable and profitable terms.

If you're wondering why the Trump administration is doing something, corruption is usually a good guess.

The arguments for the course don't make much sense. There are plenty of adequate, competitively priced golf courses in the broader Washington, D.C., area. Several of them are already capable of hosting professional golf tournaments. Between LIV Golf and the PGA Tour, there were three tournaments at three different courses in the last couple years. The 2030 PGA Championship and 2037 Ryder Cup will happen just over the D.C. line in Bethesda, Maryland.

East Potomac is not the nicest course around, no thanks to the legal limbo it's been in for the past year. But if the National Park Service is going to, for some reason, be in the business of running a golf course, it should be a course that emphasizes and teaches its history instead of the pipe dream of a corrupt madman.

Who Ya Got? 2026 World Series Edition

For the first time in 46 years, we've got a World Series contested by two teams that have never won it before. Brewers against Rays is also a rare instance of the top seeds from each league outlasting the randomness of the MLB playoffs to make the World Series. And before you trot out the tired line that "TV executives must be seething about the small market teams" remember that they care much more about getting a playoff series that goes seven games with close results in each game (What did I say above? Inventory rules all!).

In any case, I want to know who you're rooting for. At first glance, neither team seems super objectionable to me. Come back next week for my thoughts. But make sure you sound off and take 10 seconds to respond to our World Series poll here.

Replay of the Week

Kick-six alert! (Honorable mention to the blocked extra point returned for two the other way.)

"A kick-six type opportunity."

Chris Lewis was all over this one on the CBS Sports Network call of Nevada-North Dakota State. 🏈🔥🎙 pic.twitter.com/eRt42xcYIt

— Awful Announcing (@awfulannouncing) October 18, 2026

That's all for this week. Enjoy watching the real game of the weekend: MSU men's hockey (No. 2 in the nation!) against New Hampshire.

The post Fans Don't Want a 24-Team College Football Playoff. The NCAA Thinks You'll Watch Anyway. appeared first on Reason Magazine.

❌