By | September 24, 2013 7 Comments

Nicholas Brooks sentenced to 25 years to life for strangling his girlfriend, Silvie Cachay

Silvie Cachay, 33, a swimsuit designer, was found dead on Dec. 9, 2010, in an an exclusive New York City hotel. Her boyfriend, Nicholas Brooks, now 27, was convicted of murder. Brooks lived off of Cachay and apparently spent most of his time smoking marijuana. When Cachay wanted him to clean up his act, Brooks became enraged. Not long after that, she was dead.

Designer’s boyfriend is sentenced in killing at Soho House, on

At murder trial, jurors hear of turbulent relationship, on

Not only does Nicholas Brooks exhibit sociopathic traits, but so did his father. Joseph Brooks was arrested in 2009 on charges of raping young actresses lured to his apartment. He committed suicide in 2011.

Oscar winner is accused of raping young actresses, on


Comment on this article

Please Login to comment
Notify of

I read a couple articles about these guys a day or 2 ago including one that was about 5 or 6 pages. This family had major issues. The father was severely disordered, disowned his daughter when she went to live with her mother and completely severed the young boy’s relationship with his mother and sister. The mother was vilified to the boy and he was told she was unfit, a drug addict ect. He then grew up with only his father who was described by others as unbelievably egocentric. Guess that was a recipe for disaster.


That does help to explain the problems on HIS side. But what about HER side? What was Sylvie’s problem that she got herself stuck with an obvious loser like Nicholas Brooks? More to the point, why do I seem to be seeing two different accounts of Sylvie’s relationship history?

From sources such as this New York Times article I learn that Sylvie came to New York with her college boyfriend in 1999, when she was about 22. He was pursuing a career in banking. Four years later she married him. Unfortunately her career interests did not coincide with her husband’s, and she wanted to stay in New York while he wanted to move elsewhere. So after a year they divorced. It’s a pity that a relationship of relatively long standing (for their age) broke up, but the point I’m emphasizing is that it does seem to have been a functional relationship, and allegedly the couple “remained close” even in the years afterwards.

Subsequently Sylvie got engaged to an Australian photographer whose career was also taking off. Again the couple eventually broke up for some unstated reason, but still remained close, suggesting again that their relationship had been healthy enough.

An article in New York Magazine talks about all that dysfunction in the Brooks family:

The Curious Case of Joseph and Nicholas Brooks

This article claims that Sylvie and her college boyfriend divorced after three years of marriage rather than one, but apart from that small discrepancy it tells essentially the same story, mentioning the photographer fiancé as well.

Then in 2008, somewhere around the time she split from her fiancé, Sylvie suffered a career reverse, largely due to the economic downturn. The following few months were difficult for her. It was in mid-2010 that she started dating Nicholas Brooks.

In short, several accounts paint a picture of Sylvie enjoying relatively stable relationships in the medium term with apparently healthy and successful men. These relationships just didn’t happen to last, for one reason or another, possibly because too much of her energy went into her hectic career and social life instead. Then she suffers a career setback, though not a fatal one. But a couple of years later we find her dating a totally different kind of man, a deadbeat who eventually strangles her. Why did her taste in men seem to have taken an abrupt turn for the worse? Was it just happenstance? Or was there any connection with the downturn in her career, or with other events in her life?

That’s the picture I get from several accounts. However, the New York Post, admittedly a tabloid, had a different angle on events:

Broken heart of fashion talent

This article claims that in 2008, Sylvie “slid into depression” and began drinking after a breakup with “a boyfriend”—presumably her Australian fiancé. More to the point, she’s said to have told a friend she “had terrible luck with men,” she’d had “several emotionally abusive relationships,” she’d “been seeing several men, and they all turned out to be real jerks.”

This seems completely at odds with the picture painted in other accounts. Unless of course it was just the men she’d been seeing in the last year or two of her life who were “real jerks.”

So is this tabloid writer just spinning us a line, or if not, how do we reconcile these conflicting accounts?


Why she ended up with this guy is beside the point. Blaming the victim or trying to figure out why SHE was with him sidesteps the fact that she was met with her own horrific death. Regardless of ‘why’ she ended up with the spath, the fact remains that he strangled her to death with his bare hands. A very up close and callous way to kill someone. It takes a monster to watch the life drain from someone’s eyes as they are inches away with their hands around their neck.

The focus should be on the spath, not her. Blaming victims only perpetuates the problem and allows spaths their ‘excuses.’

As I read about Sylvie leaving the note for Nicholas Brooks,letting him know she had certain expections of him if their relationship were to work…I was reminded of how my husband HATED notes!!!

I totally agree that the focus here is not on Sylvie’s love life;it is about a brutal murderer.A man who is as low as the pests that live off the crumbs that we drop on the floor,and in turn track germs & bacteria everywhere!

I’m sure Nicholas did learn much from his father besides probably being genetically predisposed.But he is accountable for his own sins just as his father was.


While I agree that blaming the victim is something that we all want to be careful not to do, it’s also important not to make assumptions regarding other posters intent. In my previous post because I focused my comments more on Nicolas Brooks’ childhood doesn’t mean that I was trying to excuse or minimize what he did. The whys and hows are important to some of us as we attempt to build healthier patterns of reasoning so that we don’t fall into similar, familiar situations. Yes we are here to support one another, to vent if need be, to be validated for the bizarre interactions we are being subjected to by these masters of deception. Yes they are despicable, vile, pick an adjective. Because there are millions of these people and we and those who we care about will continue to come in contact with them it is vitally important that we acknowledge that we have to start doing something to affect change. For instance if we only focus others on the monster(which we know is real) they will continue to look for the boogie man. We need to focus people on the awesome, hilarious, brilliant, beautiful …. whatever lure they are using. Yes, we know it’s a fascade. We also know how effective it can be.

I agree with you,that there are many angles that we can take when looking at any situation.

I do feel badly that Nicholas missed out on having the influence of a mother in most his life.For that reason,he probably held a deep-set anger and resentment against women in his subconcious mind.His father definitely wasn’t a good influence!Besides evidently passing on the sociopathic personality,he made it too easy for his son to leech off of others instead of honorably making a living.


The tell was the comment he made about the woman’s death. Classic sociopath. I hope her murder can be a wake-up call for others trapped in a similar relationship.

Lovefraud is being upgraded. Comments and forum posts are temporarily disabled. Dismiss

Send this to a friend