The author of How to Murder Your Husband has been

The author of the essay “How to Murder Your Husband” is sentenced to life imprisonment

The author of the essay How to Murder Your Husband, Nancy Crampton-Brophy, was sentenced to life in prison on Monday June 16 for the murder of her husband.

Crampton Brophy71, was convicted in May of the second-degree murder of chef Daniel Brophy, who was shot dead at the cooking school where he taught cooking classes.

YOU CAN SEE: Why was “World War III declared” for Pope Francis?

Prosecutors reported that the 63-year-old victim was shot twice. In addition, they stated that the couple was in debt and their self-published books would not be sold. They also stated that he was insured for more than a million dollars.

The woman explained that she would be better off financially with her husband alive and that the fact that her minivan was seen near the school was just a coincidence.

Investigations uncovered in court suggest the author followed her partner to work and shot him with a Glock pistol. Investigators found two 9mm cartridge cases at the scene. He had also purchased an assembly kit for a “ghost gun,” which investigators later found in a warehouse.

In the US, so-called “ghost guns” are unregistered and untraceable firearms.

“What I can say is that it was for writing,” said the woman.

“As a writer of romantic thrillers, I spend a lot of time contemplating the murder and subsequent police process,” the 700-word post began. It was published on a blog called “See Jane Publish” and has since been privatized.

The essay was divided into sections detailing the ins and outs of murdering a rogue husband.

YOU CAN SEE: Imillas skate, the Bolivians who claim their origins with skirts on wheels

“If murder is to set me free, I don’t want to spend time in prison,” wrote Crampton-Brophy.

“And let me be clear that I don’t like monkeys and orange isn’t my color,” he added.

The judge ruled that the essay would not be admitted into evidence because it was written years ago as part of a writing seminar and could unfairly disadvantage the jury. It turned out that the members of the same did not have to read it to reach their verdict.