Ryan Nagel

“I noticed that the brake lights -- the only reason that I noticed is because the brake lights were on, and I'd say it moved up maybe another car length in front of us from where it was.”

Nagel described the basis for his observation that the SUV changed position.

“I only saw one person at the time. I didn't -- I wasn't really looking. It just happened to be like at a glance as we drove by.”

Nagel qualified the limited scope of his observation inside the SUV.

Nagel described directing Ricky to Fairview, where their truck followed a black SUV to Brian Albert, Jr.'s house.

Nagel said the SUV moved forward while Julie came outside, and that he did not see anyone exit it or go from it to the house.

“No. I wasn't really paying attention to that at the time.”

Nagel expressly qualified the extent of his attention to the SUV while Julie approached the truck.

“I mean, I'm not there to, you know, look at a car, like oh, is there any damage on a vehicle. It's 12:30 at night. Obviously, I had a few drinks. I'm not looking for that. I just noticed that the brake lights were on.”

Nagel qualified his ability to notice damage to the SUV's taillights.

“No, but I did see the brake lights. It looked like it moved, but it wasn't. So the brake lights were on, it released them, and then stopped again. So it probably moved another car length up.”

Describes the forward movement Nagel observed after the brake lights activated. He said he had not kept his attention on the SUV, so the observation does not establish all vehicle activity during the period.

“I saw that there was a woman in the driver's seat of the black SUV in front of me, sitting there with her hands on the steering wheel at 10 and two.”

Reports that Nagel briefly observed a woman in the driver's seat with her hands on the wheel. He could not identify her and acknowledged that another person could have been present.

“Too brief, sir.”

Nagel said his view was too brief to identify the woman in the SUV, limiting the observation to an unidentified woman in the driver's seat.

“No, I did not, sir.”

Records a negative observation, but Nagel said he was focused on his sister rather than the SUV and that the woman and vehicle obstructed his view of the other side. It does not establish a continuous account of activity around the SUV or property.

“I could have popped her on the nose if I wanted to.”

Establishes how close Nagel was to his sister Julie, confirming he had a clear opportunity to assess her condition during their conversation.

“No, I did not.”

Nagel's exact denial that he heard screaming from the SUV.

“No, there was not inches of snow. No, I could still see the grass coming through the snow. I mean, just like a coating. You could still see the bare ground.”

Records Nagel's description of the snow conditions without drawing a conclusion about what would necessarily have been visible.

“No, sir. I wasn't observing the vehicle like that.”

Nagel's qualifier that he was not observing the vehicle for tail-light damage or missing sections.

“The woman and the vehicle itself.”

Acknowledges his view of the far side of the SUV was obstructed, conceding a limitation while maintaining he saw no one else.

“No, I'm not changing that. No.”

Unequivocal confirmation that redirect did not shake his testimony about the empty passenger seat.