GUILTY NC - Jameson 'Jamie' Hahn, 29, stabbed to death, Raleigh, 22 April 201

New Posts

Prancy said:
I know Caroline a little. I don't know the gentlemen. I hesitate to be critical, but honestly.......this questioning is very bizarre and makes me wonder if he is not alienating the jury and not gaining rapport. It's very difficult to listen to his line of questioning. I have yet to learn anything additional from it. I'm not sure how much more I can bear.
Click to expand...

Its as though he's trying to filibuster his way to a 2nd degree (vs 1st) verdict.
 
Realtor/insurance agent here so certainly no formal knowledge of the law, but can this judge have any type of discussion with this attorney because in my mind, his cross examinations are going to affect the witnesses and the jury greatly?
 
Did he cross all the other witnesses like this?

I did see him cross the neighbor Julie and was puzzled by it. Unless there is some point to all this, I would be afraid the jury would get really annoyed. At this rate, something that should take 30 minutes takes over 3 hours with him. It's bizarre, IMO.
 
gorealtors said:
Realtor/insurance agent here so certainly no formal knowledge of the law, but can this judge have any type of discussion with this attorney because in my mind, his cross examinations are going to affect the witnesses and the jury greatly?
Click to expand...

I have the same Q. I want the judge to counsel this dude to stop wasting the Courts time. But earlier, when the judge told Arbour to sit down, I'm 95% sure I heard Arbour say "I object" and he argued with the judge!
 
gorealtors said:
Realtor/insurance agent here so certainly no formal knowledge of the law, but can this judge have any type of discussion with this attorney because in my mind, his cross examinations are going to affect the witnesses and the jury greatly?
Click to expand...

The judge can't discuss anything privately with any attorney, so they all would have to be present. I think it would be very odd for the judge to comment or question his line of questioning, unless the other side objects to a certain question. The only option, IMO, is that the State would object on the grounds of relevance. HOWEVER, in a murder case, the defense is given a lot of room to present their case. Limiting their line of questions would not be likely since you wouldn't want a reversal on that ground. This is my opinion only.
 
Prancy said:
Did he cross all the other witnesses like this?

I did see him cross the neighbor Julie and was puzzled by it. Unless there is some point to all this, I would be afraid the jury would get really annoyed. At this rate, something that should take 30 minutes takes over 3 hours with him. It's bizarre, IMO.
Click to expand...

Yes he did. Poor Julie, she looked so puzzled by this defense attorney.
 
Guess I remember Judge Gessner during the Nancy Cooper trial and he and the defense attorneys had a lot of disagreements in open court about relevance, etc.
 
I'm trying to recall the Cooper trial. I saw much of it. I recall some of the issues, but don't remember them very well. At least not in the same vein of seemingly irrelevant questions as seen here. I'm trying to recall what, if anything was gained from his 3 hour cross of the officer. I can't recall anything really. The defendant's wounds were self inflicted. We knew that already. It was undisputed.

There appeared to be a dog crate in the master bedroom and a dog bowl in the kitchen. Where was the dog during this?
 
Prancy said:
I know Caroline a little. I don't know the gentlemen. I hesitate to be critical, but honestly.......this questioning is very bizarre and makes me wonder if he is not alienating the jury and not gaining rapport. It's very difficult to listen to his line of questioning. I have yet to learn anything additional from it. I'm not sure how much more I can bear.
Click to expand...

Same here. It does give me a chance to run around the house & do a few things because I realized early on in his cross that we were not gonna see some b-i-g "Aha!" moment from him after an answer from whatever poor witness was on the stand. Judge Ridgeway did try to sit him down when he was going through that drama with the poor RPD witness, but Arbour, IMO, was ready to quote chapter & verse from the Constitution, Bill of Rights, or a Supreme Court case to show that he was within his rights as a lawyer properly and thoroughly defending his client. I figured a while back that there was no way His Honor could reign him in, so I just check emails or load the dishwasher while he's up there. Never have I seen this before. That poor jury -- they have to listen, bless 'em all. At least we can pee or smoke or both when we want to!!!
 
gorealtors said:
Realtor/insurance agent here so certainly no formal knowledge of the law, but can this judge have any type of discussion with this attorney because in my mind, his cross examinations are going to affect the witnesses and the jury greatly?
Click to expand...


IANAL either, but I don't see how he can do anything about his going on & on & on -- he is not doing anything "improper," I guess -- I've never seen him before --I did see where he was licensed to practice law in NY and in NC. Maybe they ran him out of there... But no, I don't see how His Honor can reel him in -- he borders on obstructionism, but you can't stop that, either.

We're stuck. But again, at least we can get up & walk out. The principals, witnesses and jury cannot.
 
gorealtors said:
Guess I remember Judge Gessner during the Nancy Cooper trial and he and the defense attorneys had a lot of disagreements in open court about relevance, etc.
Click to expand...

Whew, go, did we ever -- but at least this guy is polite & respectful. Kurtz was a total azz, IMO, but I did think of him, too.

ETA: Do the words, "Your Honor, I need to be heard," ring a bell?? That automatically calls for the jury to be absent... If we heard it once from Kurtz, we must have heard it 50 times.
 
I have quite a few questions about the testimony from today.

Why, when the officer asked who did this to Jamie, did Nation say he was upstairs? He may have been, but wouldn't your first response be to say the name of who did it and where the attacker was? Am I missing something?

And when Nation asked Jamie if she confronted Johnathan, why didn't she answer him? I must be missing something.

The photos of the master bedroom showed some clothing on the bed. Were they clothes of Nation that he had laid out to put on and he was in the shower when the attack occurred downstairs? It appears a long struggle occurred inside the downstairs. Did the blood on the floor and walls indicate that Jamie had tried to escape the house from several exits.
 
Well, the defense stalled and kept the husband and medical examiner from testifying this week. So the jurors won't be affected over the weekend by the horrors they have (yet) to reveal. Hopefully, next week the defense will be less "obstructionist." Because, really, does it matter who was standing where in the Harrell's yard or whether Jamie nodded twice before or after she was placed into the EMS vehicle? The defense already acknowledged that Broyhill killed Jamie.

I can't imagine an outcome, after all is presented, other than a 1st degree murder conviction. The defendant brought an 8" chef's knife with him. Look at all the lives he damaged. The last cop who testified, who rode in the ambulance with Jamie, almost seemed like he was going to cry. (I did listening to him.) Broyhill not only killed Jamie, but also attacked Nation. How does that "snapped/ no-premeditation" thing tie in here? Anyway, it just shows me that this guy doesn't accept responsibility for what he has done. I wonder if he's even sorry. All JMO of course.
 
Prancy said:
I have quite a few questions about the testimony from today.

Why, when the officer asked who did this to Jamie, did Nation say he was upstairs? He may have been, but wouldn't your first response be to say the name of who did it and where the attacker was? Am I missing something?

And when Nation asked Jamie if she confronted Johnathan, why didn't she answer him? I must be missing something.

The photos of the master bedroom showed some clothing on the bed. Were they clothes of Nation that he had laid out to put on and he was in the shower when the attack occurred downstairs? It appears a long struggle occurred inside the downstairs. Did the blood on the floor and walls indicate that Jamie had tried to escape the house from several exits.
Click to expand...

I have similar questions. During the beginning of the prosecution's opening argument, my mind was spinning in regard to the direction I thought things were headed (I knew nothing about the case other than Jamie had been stabbed to death by a "friend."). There are some oddities, for sure.
 
IIRC, the officer asked Nation, "Where were you when this happened?" and he answered that he was upstairs. Nation readily and often answered "My best friend," when asked who did it.

I guess Nation asked Jamie about being confrontational because he was so surprised that Broyhill attacked her. Maybe he didn't realize how badly she was hurt. It's a bit worrisome, but then I think about the reeling distress he must have had at the time. His whole life was bleeding to death in front of him. Unable to imagine what he was going through. And now it's all coming back, and I'm sure he's seeing & hearing some of this stuff for the first time.

That kitchen and the other areas were about the bloodiest crime scenes I have ever seen. How did she survive long enuff to even get to the Harrell's house? I guess some of the blood was Broyhill's, too, and maybe Nation's as well. The floors, the walls, in multiple rooms, on the driveway, the street, the yard. I've never seen anything like this. Just horrible. The only thing that comes close is the Tate/LaBianca murders, but those scenes had multiple murderers.

Will the defense try to say that Broyhill started stabbing himself in front of Jamie and she tried to stop it and he stabbed her by "mistake"?? What else have they got? Dayam, today was a tuff one. Poor little Nation and her folks. SMH.
 
I truly believe the Defendant did it, but I just can't figure out the details. The sequence of events is really puzzling to me. I hope that testimony from Nation and the defendant will clear that up.

IMO, the sequence of events really matters, because what is more likely, the defendant was trying to stab himself, but he had to chase Jamie around the downstairs for over 5 minutes stabbing her 27 times in order to be able to stab himself OR he stabbed himself, cut his own wrists, THEN chased her around the house and stabbed Jamie. It makes no sense to me.

Thanks Borndem, I didn't catch the part that Nation told the officer, my best friend. I thought his first response was, I was upstairs.
I intend to watch more videos this weekend and catch up.
 
Hi Gang!

I can't believe that this murder happened in our little piece of heaven without my knowledge. I write it off as having lived in the country without TV during the time this all was happening, but I still can't believe I hadn't heard of this crime until last week, ya'll.

Work is demanding these days and I probably won't be able to watch much (if any) of the trial live, but I am hoping to catch up on weekends. All I could find on youtube today was opening statements and the campaign treasurer (hours and hours of testimony). Does anyone know of a link to the collection agency calls or to the neighbors' testimony? I would be eternally in your debt and might even buy you some A Southern Season pimento cheese straws.

I guess defendants in trials think, "gee, if I have no other explanation and I've been clearly placed at a scene with the murder weapon in my hand, say 'I was going to kill myself, yet happened to miss and stab someone over and over thinking it was my own flesh'". That's the only way to account for Broyhill's explanation, at least in my mind.

JMO :) ;)

-Skigirl
 
Prancy said:
I truly believe the Defendant did it, but I just can't figure out the details. The sequence of events is really puzzling to me. I hope that testimony from Nation and the defendant will clear that up.

IMO, the sequence of events really matters, because what is more likely, the defendant was trying to stab himself, but he had to chase Jamie around the downstairs for over 5 minutes stabbing her 27 times in order to be able to stab himself OR he stabbed himself, cut his own wrists, THEN chased her around the house and stabbed Jamie. It makes no sense to me.

Thanks Borndem, I didn't catch the part that Nation told the officer, my best friend. I thought his first response was, I was upstairs.
I intend to watch more videos this weekend and catch up.
Click to expand...

bbm

I didn't explain it very well, Prancy -- please forgive -- As I remember, the officer today only spoke about him asking Nation where he was when it happened, and that's when he said upstairs. You didn't mis-hear as much as you thought! Nation did tell officers & others that his best friend had done it when he was asked who did it.
 
Skigirl said:
Hi Gang!

I can't believe that this murder happened in our little piece of heaven without my knowledge. I write it off as having lived in the country without TV during the time this all was happening, but I still can't believe I hadn't heard of this crime until last week, ya'll.

Work is demanding these days and I probably won't be able to watch much (if any) of the trial live, but I am hoping to catch up on weekends. All I could find on youtube today was opening statements and the campaign treasurer (hours and hours of testimony). Does anyone know of a link to the collection agency calls or to the neighbors' testimony? I would be eternally in your debt and might even buy you some A Southern Season pimento cheese straws.

I guess defendants in trials think, "gee, if I have no other explanation and I've been clearly placed at a scene with the murder weapon in my hand, say 'I was going to kill myself, yet happened to miss and stab someone over and over thinking it was my own flesh'". That's the only way to account for Broyhill's explanation, at least in my mind.

JMO :) ;)

-Skigirl
Click to expand...

Hi, Skigirl! Glad to have you with us!!

Here is a link to the motherlode according to WRAL -- they are the ones who are live-streaming the trial and they usually have the day's stream available on the same night. There is other good info on the case as well.

http://www.wral.com/search/?jump=1&qs=Broyhill+trial
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 183 more.
Total: 4,534 (members: 184, guests: 4,350)

Online statistics

Members online
184
Guests online
4,350
Total visitors
4,534
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,594
Messages
17,971,549
Members
228,837
Latest member
Phnix
Back
Top