Trial of romance novelist and accused killer Nancy Brophy resumes | Day 7 afternoon session
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 апр 2022
- The Nancy Brophy trial resumes. Nathaniel Stillwater, Dan Brophy's son, is expected to testify today.
Nancy Brophy is accused of shooting and killing her husband Dan Brophy in June 2018 at the Oregon Culinary Institute. Sometime after that, Nathaniel Stillwater sued her in civil court for the wrongful death of his father. 
Развлечения
It stinking pisses me off that defense has continuously asked questions regarding things that have no real foundation and end up getting sustained but not until after she’s planted a seed. It’s sneaky bs and she freaking knows it. Judge is being super cool as is prosecution. That’s not usually the case with this kind of backending bs!
Yes! Same here. Especially the evaluation document, that was what angered me the most. And the prosecution does not object for foundation often enough, sigh
I don’t think they object because they know they have very circumstantial evidence and she’s probably not guilty.
@@tacooflove6175 She is guilty.
hi Nancy. it's nice you have access to RUclips in prison.
LOL@@tacooflove6175
This defense attorney seriously sucks at her job.
I am so tired of the defense. They are coming across hateful.
The defense attoney is doing her job the best she can. I don’t see any hate. She is businesslike.
I don’t agree. But it is my opinion
@@GH-oi2jf I totally agree with you! This defense team is far more “likable” and in my opinion they seem far less hateful or cold in comparison to almost all of the other defense attorneys I’ve watched on any of the last big trials that have been live streamed.
She's trying to discredit the witnesses which is standard practice and the prosecution is allowing that. They should be asking for foundation on all these irrelevant photos and documents she's presenting. She's clearly trying to trap Dt Pozi into saying things that will make it as if they did not know what they were doing during the investigation. Maybe the fact they cannot hold a proper sidebar and have to take the jury out has something to do with it? Just wondering.
Oh, if you're in a situation needing a defense attorney, I think they are very experienced and good. Better than the prosecution.
Repeat Repeat Repeated questions which inmost trials are NOT allowed. So what is it with the law in Oregon !?
Defense attorney upset about detective mis-speaking, after she calls the witness the wrong name...
How does defense not follow what a witness says?!? This trial is a poor example of a well prepared trial.
Good Lord, where is this ridiculous defense attorney going with asking the detective what type of solvent the police force uses to clean their guns and what it smells like??? Quit droning on lady… I don’t know how anyone in the courtroom is still awake.
Let's face it, the defence is flogging a dead horse. They know she's guilty, but just wasting court time.
Got to be one of the worst defense atty… is she giving testimony or asking questions?
Defense attorney is RUDE and petty. I must also add unprofessional.
I think Ms. Davis wanted some TV time. Strange.
😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Sorry, but I think the “witness”🤨just wanted to be involved in this trial, perhaps heard something and immediately jumped to conclusions. What a huge waste of time!! 😤
The defense looks ridiculously ill prepared and lacking strategy. She shows Dt Pozi a photo of a truck at potluck and then .....nothing, then she shows an aerial photo of the area and asks him to locate the potluck and then .....nothing. And the "student evaluation" or "staff appraisal" she gives the detective hell about, claiming that it states "he (meaning Dan) wanted to change" is NOTHING of the sort!!! Has she even read it? The typed part are clearly STUDENTS' comments about the school and the handwritten part is self improvement notes e.g how to give better feedback.
I Just thought she was somebodys grandma pretending to be a lawyer for a day . Extremely illprepared & unorganized. Sounding like from comments her scatter brained random questions are part of a strategy to make sure the jury hears what is probably going to be objected to. (😂just heard her whisper "was there anything else"?)omg
ALL of this trial should be a commercial for Starbucks.
Maxfield has shown her inability to:
Pronounce relevant technical terms
Remember the name of the person she's questioning,
Number exhibits
Remember IF she's numbered an exhibit, and if so,
What its number is, or
Play by the rules
Defendant is probably thinking: If I had hired Steve to do my life insurance, maybe I wouldn’t have had to murder my husband.
Good one
I like it
she could end this trial today buy showing us the ghost gun barrel she bought online
The gun barrel bought online is not the “ghost gun.” She probably deep-sixed the extra barrel and slide.
Yup! I'm not holding my breath though. If she had nothing to hide, she'd already have handed it to LE.
Finally a witness that we can hear. Excellent ins guy. defense Is being horrible and sneaky
Did Dan face this killer before it s😮hot him in the chest? What would have gone through this poor mans mind if he did in fact see who was taking his innocent, kind, caring, hard working life away from him. I hope this heartless piece of work never has a moments piece of mind for the rest of it's life. And it can never write another crappy book.
The defense attorney is hectoring the detective, a very mild-mannered type with firm answers. She makes accusations from nothing. It seems she invents all kinds of stuff. The defense attorney looks manipulative and lacking in grounded and focused strategy. And then there's the lack of providing exhibits in advance, which makes her look even more manipulative. Shady.
IMO she should tone it down and go mild-mannered for a mild-mannered witness and be careful not to distort realities in service to some point, especially a point that is a big reach . Hostility IMO generates ill will, and it looks like she's having to try really hard to make any kind of well-founded case 'cos she hasn't got anything.
Agree. The defense has nothing so they're just making up word salads.
What you said ...
Also, she needs to add a few Subtle tricks to her kit ...
The sandbagging is getting old too.
Exhibits in advance? The defense case has not yet started.
???
You said what I wanted to, but better than I could! Good on you;)
How did NB get the death certificate so quickly? Is that normal in Oregon? Especially during/just after the pandemic, it seemed rather surprising.
Very off topic, but when the insurance man said that a retirees worst fear is longevity, it kinda made me sad. You're not supposed to fear getting too old!
He was talking from his business point of view
The insurance guy comes across as so full of himself.
Detective wrongly ask NB about other persons (physical) medical ID cards found in Dan's wallet.
Defense: Where you trying to imply that Dan had photos of other women in his phone?
Brittany Davis got her 15 minutes of fame she was craving.
And the insurance guy was so cringey. He fit the stereotype of a life insurance salesman perfectly 😂
22:08
Defense: What time did you get to the crime scene, detective? I forgot to bring my notes.
Uh...okay.
Right... My goodness!🥺
Tour de dogue yes she "forgot her notes",yet she expects & wants him give an exact accurate answer & account,then makes a fuss about his answers without notes!! So she wants ppl to think she's that absentminded or dumb,& doesn't care,or is actually that dumb & absentminded!!
She's a godawful defense lawyer.
58:50 how angry defence gets
Why don't they have the actual weapons there for demonstration?
30:16 I truly believe that Hell is real....may This lawyer and her "partner" never have a good night's sleep while on this Earth...
I've never seen or heard such a nasty pair of Liars 😒🤬😡
I really like the insurance man,I feel like he is solid, credible witness!! Giving truthful answers as much as possible to his best ability!!
The insurance bloke knows his stuff ! Not a great witness though. Keep it simple.
The original expert passed away.
Why are some jurors so stupid? I’ve been a juror. I’m familiar with the rules. It isn’t difficult to understand the rules and follow the rules. When I’ve been a juror, there were no incidents like this. She has to be removed from the jury. She should also be held in contempt of court.
I don't believe that lady story not one bit
@ SALT OF DEARTH ... I suspect a defence stunt
... You?
@@tarafoley6030 - The defense attorney would not be doing that as a stunt. It would get her in trouble. I think the person who reported it did hear something, but decided not to identify the juror. She probably did not think she would have to be present to identify her personally in court.
It’s simple. The witness heard someone discussing the trial but that person was not a juror
Of course she'd have to identify the juror for the juror to be removed. I don't understand why this testimony was given to the defence and not the court. What's with all the giggles?
Wait.. she's a ROMANCE novelist? Is she a romance novelist for, like, female preying mantises?
😂😂😂
She supposedly wrote “romantic suspense” novels in which she herself stated that someone is always going to die in her books. What they really were was cheap soft-porn dime store garbage (which is why nobody would publish them except her).
the typing is driving me crazy
Im not finding this trial very interesting.....
This insurance guy is the most boring thing I’ve ever listened to! It is totally unnecessary & a HUGE HUGE WASTE OF TIME!!!! In my opinion, that much information about each plan, from a guy who clearly LOVES being “on the case!” & loves being up there risks the jurors totally shutting down. I feel so badly for them that they have to go home knowing that is the first thing they have to begin with tomorrow. It’s clearly an important part of their case, sum it up!! There are a lot
Of policies, this is what it costs each month, badda bing bada boom! OMG! Such a bad decision from the prosecution to get this guy up there
He was hired at the last minute, like the week before, because another expert died. He didn't know he had to write a report until the day before (or something). He has clearly never been in a court. He is well-meaning and doing his best. I agree he's providing too much info, but give him a break.
Keep Polishing that turd KGW.......
This is so ovious how this cop says he can't remember when he doesn't want to tell the truth.
A bit like Nancy Brophy did
Funny how you mentioned that....he gave me a creepy feeling
Being a homicide detective I’d be embarrassed with this detectives testimony . I question how he got this position he seems to be more fit to be a car dealership security officer. It’s a shame that this is what we have for high ranking officials , officials that are instrumental in determining innocence or guilt … WOW
There are a lot of comments here from people who seem to be angry about the defence lawyer. I can only imagine these are made with some kind of preconceived knowledge about this case.
I can give you the impression I get as someone who has never heard of the case and has no idea who the defendant is whether even it’s a man or woman. Listening to the opener from the defence, it’s a bit nebulous, there are certainly no ‘aha’ moments and there seem to be questions which go nowhere, which I’m hoping will be examined in further testimony- I know there are rules around bringing evidence into play which as a British person I don’t have knowledge of. Other than that it seems to be poking around trying to make the detective’s veracity appear a bit shaky, which is her job
To say that ' too much is beung made of a murder ESPECIALLY .by the spouse does for me eliminate an individual's right to qualify for Jury Duty .In addition this is not a ' crime if passion " or abuse it appears to be rather cold hearted & am.sure many sitting on a jury have preconceived feelings BUT that us why ' evidence is presented because ones ' preconceived ideas have to be taken further to " be proven beyond reasonable doubt " There have been times that tho guilty if a crime THAT level.ain't achieved ....Having seen several recent trials where jurors have obviously NOT been truthful on prior examination or as here discussed the case am.pondering how best to adjust the process of ALLOWINGVsimeine to undertake this Civic Duty correctly .
While I agree with your point about juror conduct, it would seem the witness was mistaken about the identity of the person she overheard. They may have made a comment like "If I was a juror....blah blah blah.." and she misheard.
It’s obvious why this detective got transferred to home crimes he is awful with homicide .
I know this won't be a popular opinion, but as of right now, on day 7 of this trial the defense is doing a good job of creating reasonable doubt and if I'm on the jury and I'm given this case today I'm going to vote not guilty as a result. It will be interesting to see how the rest of the trial plays out and if I change my opinion.
I'm pretty sure you changed your mind after Nancy took the stand. What a trainwreck I don't know why her defense lawyer allowed her to testify in her own defense the woman is a chronological liar
She MIGHT have had a chance, IF she had chosen to not testify. But, no. She thought she was smarter than everyone in the room & took the stand. Sunk her own ship.