Nancy Brophy murder trial: Day 19, morning session | Live stream
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 май 2022
- Defense attorneys call more witnesses to the stand during the morning session of Day 19 of the Nancy Brophy murder trial.
Nancy Crampton Brophy was arrested in September 2018 in the shooting death of her husband Daniel Brophy.
Daniel Brophy, 63, was killed as he prepped for work at the Oregon Culinary Institute in southwest Portland on June 2, 2018.
Subscribe: / kgwnews8
Watch the latest KGW newscast: www.kgw.com/watch
Get the KGW app: kgw.com/appredirect 
Развлечения
The prosecution proved their case 2 weeks ago; the rest of this absurdity is the defense proving that they have no case. NB is guilty.
Most of the defense witnesses would be most appropriate for the penalty phase. Not sure how they get past her being on camera at so many locations at the time of the murder. Also, how doesn't any friend or family member have any conversation at all about the day of murder? And.....why would you be so caught up in cleaning out your home within a day or two of the murder of your spouse? That would be the last thing on my mind.
Ok, so the way I look at it with all the testimony so far
Nancy was
1) Getting her Starbucks a few times a day
2) Going out for lunches quite often with her writer friends
3) Going on getaways with her writer friends very often
While poor Mr Brophy was working his butt off to keep their heads above water
and then poor Mr Brophy was doing all the cooking for all said friends when they came over, whether it was just for one evening or sometimes they would be staying for a while.
No wonder the poor guy was getting so tired and things where getting away from him. Eventually burn out can bring you down and even break a person. He probably did complain to her about all the spending on all the Starbucks, lunches and getaways. IMO.
Exactly
She couldn't pay the mortgage but she made sure she paid almost 1200$ a month for his life insurance policies. She makes me sick. I can't wait til they send her to Prison
@@AK-47.762 not so sure…this might get a juror or two..
@@AK-47.762 IIRC it was $1600/month. It was over half his income.
@@AK-47.762
She had to make sure she would be financially set, when she decided to follow through with things...
She wanted to sell the house anyways, because she didn't want to be there, hated the yard, chickens, "stuff," etc.
She didn't care about the house payments getting behind, because she could always sell the house and make even more money.
Looks like the entire book club will be on the stand😴
Ha ha!
They all say the exact same things. 😴
I heard 6 members so I hope this is the end of the writer group. The OCI community is the big on as the guy about the gun instructions said! This is supposed to end next Friday but not if the defense team doesn’t stop the endless parade of copycat witnesses who truly don’t know the couple deeply.
@@hoppy6141 The romance witnesses might tend to live in an alternate reality as it seems that Nancy does. Fantasy, fairy tales, make believe. The psychologist should've tested for that trait.
Yes, enough with the writers’ group already! Defense was largely just trying to get around the judge’s ruling that they couldn’t testify to the substance of her work or why she theoretically bought the gun build kit … The prosecution has a rebuttal case so defense has to be wrapping up soon. If NB testifies as planned, I can’t wait for the prosecution’s cross examination.
Defense had time to present these writer witnesses yesterday. Instead, they said they were out of witnesses and had to end the day early, and now they've consumed all morning. They are NEVER prepared.
Constantly wasting time.
I respect that Overstreet doesn't give af if the witness is in a wheelchair.
You can’t get away from that guy
Geez same questions over & over about nothing. When is the judge going to put a stop this BS. How long is this trial going to be with constant irrelevant rubbish.
The judge does not control who testifies, only what they say if contrary to the laws.
I am so over hearing from the 'wanna be' writer's club lot...if I hear another person waffle on about the importance of brainstorming, authenticity and essential research etc., etc., I will scream!!
"You actually sell books" - defense about their own client NOT selling her books
🤣
More words salad from Nancy’s writer friends. Nothing is new. They had a great marriage, Dan was great cook and feeding people ( and Nancy was busy travelling and having good times with her writer friends spending Dan’s hard earned money. Yup 😊
All her friends sure have nice memories of Dan but not much about Nancy. It seems to be a parade of Dan admirers. She came off as living a self-indulgent life.
Jury in & out for the defence's crap.
Most of the trials have discussions at the bench instead of making the juries keep getting up and out.
I personally enjoy how the prosecution takes every witness for the defense and basically turns it against them ... ok so the x culinary institute guy who told Dan about guns and the gun shows ... Dan never actually followed up to say by the way we bought the glock at a gun show ... thank you for your advice. It's all going downhill ... how far down hill depends on how many more poor witnesses the defense calls ... they can't undo the neighbour who saw Nancy leave the house (looking for the dogs and waving their leashes), or the video of the van near the culinary institute, lets talk about why Nancys' phone was left at home if she was innocently dropping a waffle iron off to Dan.. The more they talk the more they lie.
And someone testified that the waffle iron at the scene was not dan’s and the witnesses- some sort of director at the institute - had never seen dan’s waffle iron.
Dan was probably just being polite to the guy who was babbling about guns in the hallway. The guy was a former student or something. It's clear from other testimony that Dan had ZERO interest in guns.
The woman who owned the shooting facility in Sherwood was maybe the best example. Defense wanted to prove that Nancy never practiced with the gun, otherwise she would have gone there. But she didn't.
Prosecution demonstrated that the Sherwood facility was an IDEAL place to research guns. They have 75 weapons of many types for rent! You can even go there and simulate a scenario for using a weapon. Perfect for novel research. But did Nancy ever go there? NO.
@@laradesautel3013 LMAO All it took was for prosecution to ask the witness about the waffle iron. I guess Defense never had, and their argument got burnt to a crisp.
So if Nancy says she was dropping off a waffle iron then she is admitting she was on the scene. Kind of a big thing to forget you were there around the time your husband was murdered!! How do her friends or family believe her!!!
The most boring defense. If they took his advice and bought a specific gun, so what? It doesn’t mean she couldn’t have used it to kill him. Remember the cameras?
This poor guy Dan... If ever there was someone who was worthy of a Partner who loved him for his good qualities..it was him.. Imagine the shock on his face.. when he faced her.. with a gun pointed at him..only to have her shoot him in the back after he fell..one for good measure.. or vice versa.. back first..then in the chest. She is not tech savvy though.. didn't think of Cameras catching her.. Forensic Computer's techs catching her.. not very Smart actually.. she even had him killed at work..to collect ' Workman's Comp." Money, Greed, Selfishness, she wanted it all for herself..
Nancy shot Dan in the back first while he was filling water containers (he had the water running). He was paralyzed, lying on the floor, and facing her when she finished him off.
That plot Nancy was developing with friends, about a man shooting his wife after his wife told him he had to leave the relationship....... Swap the genders, and you have Nancy testing out her plan to kill Dan, the plausibility, the reason, what she could get away with, what might go awry.....
I tell ya, Dan asked Nancy to leave. Even though no one else knew about it (he was a very private man), he was at the end of his rope. Maybe he sensed danger.
The only people talking in glowing terms about this relationship are all Nancy's friends. These are either: women employees, women relatives, or women who have been fed Dan's food (aka romance writers).
Yep.. she micro managed everything.. kept him working like a slave for the money also.. their life was one for optics only.. what looked good to t
Others..
I agree ! He found out about her "burning" their money, and likely contacted an attorney to start a Divorce....and she would be left with ..NOTHING !!....In my opinion
@@mphseason23 In fall 2017, Dan had to take the $35k out of HIS 401k to pay the credit card debt, so at that point he had to know about the finances. It will have taken him a long time to bust his butt to earn that $35k, and then they burned through it no time. They were headed over a cliff.
I'd like to see the timing on when they married, before or after that withdrawal.
Yeah, I'll bet he told her to leave....
Sleuth the Wild I agree! I really think Dan had just about given up,was worn out, disgusted,& had told nb or was trying to figure out how to get out,get her out,& if she didn't outright know it, she suspected it! There may've been a big argument!
@@vernareed2692 Yes, I think he asked her to leave. They weren't even married until 2016. He could have got rid of her, and she'd have no assets. No divorce, just good riddance.
I would guess she was planning to murder him way in advance of 2016, but she had to marry him first. She had to get her name on the deed, too.
I think maybe Nancy made a fake will for Dan leaving everything to her.
All the "writers" did was do research, eat and party.
1:18:27
WHAAAAAT?
If they are finding out things, from the publicity, _that_ isn't good! Those are the kinds of witnesses, that can cause SERIOUS issues! I understand that the Judge is trying to do things, so if/when Nancy is convicted, there won't be an appeal. I don't like how this witness, contacted defense, then contacted another witness, then had a call with him on Saturday and then interview on Sunday.
Very Very Strange!
About time the judge said something. I'm sick of all these Liars taking the stand defending that animal. Doesn't matter why she bought the gun kit she murdered her husband in cold blood.
Stop letting these ppl continue to lie on the stand. No one goes and buys a ghost gun just bcuz. She bought it cuz it was untraceable and she knew she'd get away with it. Little did she know it required some skill to assemble it, that she clearly did not have. So she goes and buys a Glock 17, then buys a slide and barrel so they wouldn't know the bullets came from her gun. But she thought wrong. I wonder why they didn't do GSR test on her that day. Can't wait to hear her excuse of why she was downtown leaving the area right after her husband was blown away.
The detective testified they had no reason to suspect her of the crime until the van video became available. He also said they would have needed a court order to be allowed to do so unless she offered. She was home long enough to wash up before she arrived back at OCI for the death notification so chances are it wouldn’t have shown anything if done.
@@hoppy6141 Yep. She pretty much pulled off a perfect murder. She knew OCI didn't have cameras. There were no witnesses. And more. She forgot one thing: cameras at nearby businesses.
I thought it was suggested that she had to deliver Dan’s favorite waffle iron to him that morning and was so traumatized when she heard there’d been a shooting at the school that she totally repressed that memory. But maybe at this point I’ve heard from one too many fantasy writers and I’m the one who’s traumatized with faulty memory.
@@barbaragrove6097 It amazes me she parked sometime when Dan arrived and went in and out in 6 mins. No hesitation in any of it. (I wonder if she even called out to him after she entered the garage door…) How she was not seen with the people out and about plus students is just plain luck for her. And if she is found not guilty, she gets all that insurance and WC money windfall. Let’s hope those that are on the fence in the jury can see through all the smoke & mirrors.
@@trishbrennan9452 oh no she told the police that she was home in bed that she wasnt down there that day he was killed.
I don’t trust some of these witnesses and I did like defense - now I don’t. She’s giving the court the finger and judge is taking it.
Wonder how much NB $pent on writer retreats at hotels.
Is it just me, or is the Defense Attorney asking a lot of leading questions? Especially to the guy who came in last minute.
An attorney might do that when she knows that a witness has specific information to provide. She has these questions prepared to be sure to get it on the record.
They are called leading questions
Thank you for pointing this out! I have been pulling my hair out while waiting for an objection that never comes while defense counsel spoon-feeds their witnesses the answers to their questions. I don’t understand why neither prosecutor is objecting to these ridiculous leading questions. I hope this doesn’t continue during Nancy’s direct examination or I’ll be bald by the end of the trial! 👩🦲
I think leading questions are allowed during cross examination
I would have to watch this again, but for some reason I was thinking that they were asking leading questions to their own client & their witnesses, which you aren't supposed to do but if it was cross than I know that's okay. This was over a year ago, so I can't remember which attorney and witnesses I asked this about.
Take care, guys!
❤️
Afternoon Session Day 19. Why is the defense spending so much time on a date the phones were tracked - in FEBRUARY! What's the point of this? I'm waiting and waiting while I read War and Peace..
Nancy went to a firing range twice. The cell phone data is evidence.
@@sleuththewild But which firing range? If she had to register at the Sherwood one, did she go to one that didn't require that. That must be what afternoon testimony was about - the Feb/March cell phone GPS data of a phone going to Sherwood. How does this possibly help the defense? Gosh, I got confused on that computer guys testimony.
@@tourdedogue4952 She went to the BLM (Bureau of Land Management, US Dept of Agriculture) firing range. Quite far to the west of Portland, way out in the country. The cell towers pinged her phone on the highway heading to that area and then back again. Not beyond there.
See my comments yesterday on the BLM stuff.
@@sleuththewild Ah, yes, I remember looking up the area at the time (I'm very familiar with BLM land), so I did forget that piece. Thank you.
@Clem Fandango Thank you, yes, I forgot that. And, somebody explained she used the different barrel for her gun to practice on so it wouldn't show it was fired. Is that your thought too?
Afternnoon Session 19 Computer Guy. Boy, it's pretty wild that Big Brother really is watching absolutely every step you take with technology. Just like George Orwell's 1984 wrote about.
Not really. The book is about totalitarianism. We are nowhere near that. I’m grateful that technology can be used to track criminals. I’m sure that nobody is tracking my movements, even though the raw data are in the cell tower records.
@@GH-oi2jf Just saying - don't even TRY to get away with a crime these days. Personally, I'm glad for the intel and don't care if they track me if it saves my life.
The bar owner was asked if he felt he had relevant information to the case and he said no. If he felt he didn't have important information then why exactly did he contact the defense??????
15 min of fame
This judge can’t even remember what witnesses say that the other side is objecting too. This is like a kangaroo court, hopping all over the place with no substantial evidence , cooking, eating, gardening teaching…get on with it.
It is not like a “kangaroo court.” That’s ridiculous.
You can’t get around the the video of her car being at the area of the school around that time that she said she was in bed. No way to get around that fact!
That's what I think, they have her on video. She did not plan on that.
She circled the school twice, slowly then parked. I think she wanted to make sure he was alone. Seems to me she left the house within a couple of minutes after he did. She claimed at 1 point she went to get Starbucks but dropped that pretty quickly I believe
1:17:03
This is very very strange. Anybody who knows anything about trials, knows that you're _NEVER_ supposed to speak with other witnesses...
But he wasn't a witness or a listed witness when he spoke to witnesses
Is that judge inexperienced? He is not very smart!
I think he is doing his job properly. Do you have any basis for your assertion, or do you just not like him?
You know what I find odd about the writers guild witnesses? Why doesn't the prosecution ask them about Nancie Brophie's Plotting skills. Was she very good about knowing how the murderer should act? Was she good at looking up information on things that a murderer would likely look into to commission the murder? How to get an undetectable gun, How to hide the information, how to plot out an alibi and who to tell what, how to hide what you were doing from people, establishing plot twists, how to get into a characters head and think like a murderer, and that she tested those theories out by brainstorming, research, and testing things out? so that as a writer she could write a story, but as a murderer she could plan the crime, and the alibi and test things out, practice basically, until they were ready to act it all out? quite literally masterminding a murder, whether that is to act on it or write it, planning it out is very very similar whether you are writing about it or committing it. So if she can write a plot about a wife whose husband is murdered, she could very well plan out a murder. And with forethought also know who to tell and not to tell what pieces of information to plot an alibi, and how to look innocent, and how a grieving widow would act, So that she knew what to do when committing the murder. Did they think she was good at plotting, and research, and motivation, and getting demeanor and how to act right? Was she good at plot twists and seeding doubt in her stories? And how they can correlate that into actually commiting the murder.. Those skills the defense attorneys are trying to use to say she was plotting out a book, could just as easily be proven to be skills that are used when plotting a murder. Just an idea.
basically that all that brainstorming, and testing, and conversation that they think makes her so innocent, was literally her using them to Plot the murder of her husband, and figure out a way to use them for an alibi. that all those conversations where them helping her plot the murder, Plot her alibi, and make them witnesses by acting how an innocent person would look based on their recommendations? So they literally aided her and abetted her in planning and covering up a murder? And she literally plotted to make them party to the murder, by helping her figure out how to do it, and research it, and execute it, and then using their advise and knowledge and eventually they themselves to cover it up.
Wow the prosecution really baited them into putting Nancy on the stand. Now it makes sense why she took the stand two days after this.
If she is so amazing and they had the best most loving relationship that was inspiring and admired by all - and all this testimony proves the impossibility of murder- then wtf killed the victim? Because the evidence seems overwhelming but the sheer volume of defense witnesses testifying to the perfectness makes me wonder if they’ll be able to get a conviction. I am surprised judge let this much in and the scope to be so broad. Most of this is only heard during a penalty trial phase!
She loved his money; he was her gravy train.
I bet he told her to leave....
Oh! She's too good to be true! So friendly, hard-working, amazing friend, entertainer and a good public face. This is probably one of the more dangerous people if you think about Ted Bundy, but yes; I agree, the jury may decide she's just too damn good to do this.
@@sleuththewild I don't think he had that gumption. He was just quite happy with the status quo; no fights or arguing as they didn't see each other much or sleep together. He just wanted to be all about food; from garden to table, very popular in Portland. He had no idea of their money and trusted her completely. She seems to gave been planning this a long time and, with anybody that has evil thoughts, it does start to affect a relationship and I think that's what was making him lay on the couch more often...not caring what he was watching. He was a very aware guy.
@@sleuththewild
Agreed! He was DEFINITELY her gravy train... hence why she had him get so much life insurance, be working so much, which she could've done a bit as well, instead of just writing and drinking her daily Starbucks...
WHAT A LIFE!
People seem to think they were ACTUALLY that perfect! That's very very uncommon.
@@tourdedogue4952
"Hard-working," except for when they were going through financial hardships and trying to get caught up. It was his retirement that was used, his hard work (working 3 jobs), etc., that was helping _THEM_ get caught up. It seems, as soon as things were better "financially," that's when she struck (and murdered him). She's very intelligent, and just didn't think she'd get caught.
Damn. Don’t mean to be insensitive but I’m glad this witness was already in a wheelchair when his cross examination started 😂
Why doesn’t kgw allow comments during the actual court time?
I've wondered that myself.
I like it better without simultaneous. The comments on here are pretty thoughtful.
I like checking in at the moment to see if I heard right or if someone caught something. . sometimes I'm flabbergasted!
Are they still at lunch?
Yes, until 4:30 pm EST.
Oh the judge says previous hearings have gone off the damn point. Week done judge. She did it and you've allowed the defence to simply bore the jury to death to get her acquired.
I feel sorry for the jurors. He has them up and down regularly for mundane things like yo-yo's. This is a piss poor Judge. He cannot control his court. (I have served on a criminal jury panel for 3 days and the Judge was learned, experienced, and the Attorneys were well prepared and it flowed smoothly.)
@@merlewarren3459 I agree! I think the prosecutors are really good. I think the male prosecutor wants to scream “Enough Already”!!
The lady prosecutor was trembling her whole body at one point and almost yelling at the Judge to get her point across. I thought she was going to go after him. . .lol 😂😂 I should have been there, I would have helped her.😇
36:14 Hey, who turned out the lights?
With the bar owner prosecution should have reiterated that Dan showed no interest in the guns
45:00 So she even used him to get free lunches, too. You KNOW she didn't expect to pay for it.
Re: Guns: which is it - Nancy and Dan were concerned for their safety because of recent school shootings OR Nancy needed a gun/ghost gun kit as research for a book she was writing?
She should have said she was re writing her earlier book 'how to kill your husband' and doing research. She's since learned that there's a huge plot hole involving coffee shop cameras and buying a shit load of gun parts and her new retirement plan is a 80 stretch in a concrete shitbox.
How did she get away with that Glock not being heard that early quiet Sat morning?
Fired twice.
Anybody?
It was inside a closed building. There are no windows in that back kitchen. It wasn’t even on a wall next to the street.
@@GH-oi2jf Was she that smart to know that? My gosh, seems like she timed this like James Bond, in and out in 6 minutes, with nobody seeing her or not camera catching her body moving, AND, the building was solid enough not to hear the shots. Almost hard to believe. Just almost.
I fired a hand gun once and only once at a range. It shook my entire body, the sound was enormous, unpleasant and I shook for days afterward. You sure have to be determined to fire one with ease.
@@tourdedogue4952 - depends on the calibre.
@@tourdedogue4952 - She knew her way around the building.
2:14:05
Yeah... _"fictional"_ all right!
🙄
Did Nancy have any insurance policies on herself that Dan would collect if she died???? I wish the prosecution asked this to all the insurance witnesses. I only heard about the one cash value policy.
The prosecution did ask about policies on Nancy. There wasn't a whole lot.
I think there weren't any because she said due to her age it was harder and cost more. Very strange since they sell policies and advertise all the time for older people to get insurance. Just an excuse.
There were policies, her attorneys laid out each policy going back years showing how they both had the same policies except for 1 that she was insured for less than him, because of her age. They took policies that cost the same for each of them, but because Dan was slightly younger, he got better coverage for the same cost of the lesser valued policy for Nancy.
@@Amandah00CLC There would have been very little difference in cost between them if the policies went back years. Age difference wouldn't have mattered, and women cost less to insure.
I hope prosecution brings rebuttal on insurance.
Yes she did
It’s interesting that even this far into the trial the defense hasn’t learned how to turn off their microphone. There whispering is amusing.
This guy is super sketchy. He's been caught either flat out lying or downplaying certain things, plus he reached out not to the police, but Nancy's lawyer. No one else. It's obvious he's been coached by the defense. No way he avoided news about it, how else did he know to reach out to her lawyer?
Edit; 1:20:00 He's just parroting what she just said, we can't trust him! This is so unprofessional of her to not disclose this.
Ironic! Two liberals forced to discuss firearms and have witnesses who own and love firearms on the stand.
If Mr Hall is telling Dan which gun he thinks he should buy and where to buy it that is not hearsay and this judge continues to show bias to the DA he just questioned him about something else that the da could have thrown out of the testimony giving him more reasons to use against the defense why this man can't testify I am very disappointed in this judge I hope he reads this and rethinks what he's doing because his bias is out there for everyone to see
Because they are not allowed to testify to a conversation
It absolutely *IS* hearsay: a statement made out of court and offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Just because it’s something that the witness said doesn’t make it not hearsay.
I’ve seen a lot of comments criticizing how quiet the judge and prosecutor are as a dig - like masculinity is only yelling. I think it’s refreshing these dudes are controlled and polite 🤍
Have none of these retired, pretend writers never heard of google? Houses full of lethal ordinance for books that never sell.
Touch my camera through the fence
Who’s watching afternoon session? What do you think about computer guy?
Halfway listening, not following it. Waiting to hear cross. What do you think?
@@barbaragrove6097 Oh man, I'm just watching computer guy's RUclips videos. What a terrible video to show the jury the power of a Glock pistol! I cannot figure out why the defense would put this down as 'evidence' that NB was not guilty. If anything, knowing Dan was not a gun guy, I can only watch this thinking it was NB at the computer and watched more than one 'powerful gun video's on more than on one occasion. Sheesh! I'm looking forward to cross.
@@tourdedogue4952 Agree & agree!
@@3939LA Yes!
I hope prosecutor can make this painfully long testimony turn to evidence in pros favor
He keeps mask on because he doesn’t want to show his face.
Now the da wants to tell the defense what questions they can ask and also telling the judge not to let him ask certain questions this is ridiculous this is a kangaroo court
I just want to skip all the defenses witnesses except for the cross examination. Their marriage was just absolutely perfect. Something we should all strive for. It was so perfect that she had to take a gun early in the morning and kill him. Unbelievable. I don’t understand the defense Lawyers. I understand Everybody deserves a defense but they seem as dishonest as Nancy herself
Repeating everything they have testified before...Hey Defense Attonys...Let your Defense witnesses lie on the stand...Its all on tape....This Judge needs to loose his law license after this trial......In my opinion
The judge will not lose his law license. He is doing a good job, even if you don’t like it. Don’t be ridiculous.
At least he finally called out defense attorney and her weird remarks after doing it on two of their witnesses. One she said after the judge asked if witness could be excused she laughed “I sure hope she’s excused!” Then after the second one was done she made some stupid comment about “what she wish she would’ve said”. So inappropriate.
@@GrizzlyUrsusArctos Defense was the only one who needed to excuse the witness!
@@barbaragrove6097Untrue. The Judge asks both sides whether a witness can be dismissed.
I’ve read the bio on both the defense lawyer , my opine is they are liberal and they will win no matter what it takes
They’re liberals yet they’re trying to pin the murder on a homeless [oops I mean “unhoused”] black man collecting cans near OCI that morning. Hypocrites.
This case is sort of "iffy" for me. The prosecution doesn't really have any hard evidence. She could actually be innocent.
Do you mean nobody saw her pull the trigger? That isn’t necessary to convict.
So her coincidentally not remembering anything from the day of the murder, but also saying she was home, then saying she left. Then saying she don't remember, then saying she was riding around writing, oh but remember she has no recollection of what happened that morning. But she knows for a fact she didn't murder Dan, but ohhh wait she doesn't Remember anything, but she knows she didn't have a bra on when she went to Starbucks although She doesn't remember going. Oh yea she was seen on cctv right by the culinary school at the time Dan was murdered. Whew no evidence there
It's called CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence, and the prosecution has shitloads of it.