Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #10

[Star12]

[QUOTE=SleuthyGal;2415866]I didn't even know there are such things as $200 pedis outside of Beverly Hills. The most I've ever paid for a pedi was $30 + tip. QUOTE]

Why would a runner want a $200 pedicure? The action of the socks and the running shoes would ruin it immediately. And I haven't heard of a $200 price around here, either. Although if part of a complete spa package, it might make sense. But it just doesn't sound right to me.

[raisincharlie]

Sorry if this has already been covered - I'm behind on my reading - did anyone else fine this line odd?

"The latest filings come a day after Brad Cooper's attorneys filed several motions, including one asking for his wife's autopsy results so that he could "challenge the plaintiffs' unfounded insinuation" that he killed his wife."
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3265147/

Even though they were planning to divorce, would he not be interested in the autopsy results out of concern for what "really" happened and to redirect LE to the "real" murderer? Instead of looking for truth to exonerate him, he and his counsel are looking to "challenge the plaintiffs".

The "unfounded insinuation" part is the part that gets me. Its more about the defendent than the children. He should challenge for his children if he wants them but I seriously doubt an autopsy report is going to alleviate an unfounded insinuation unless the result is natural causes, which of course is not the case since LE is investigating a homicide.

ETA - to me this was a fishing expedition. The autopsy report would contain a listing of samples and procedures. For example it would indicate if the fingernails were collected and submitted to LE for testing. It would also identify what clothing was on or near the body. IMO this indicates to me that the lawyer wanted to get out there that Nancy was found in running attire per Brad's description. I have little doubt it is most likely what she was found in actually.

[fran]

Wonder how old Brad's dad saw a $200 pedicure payment when Brad was only doling out $50 - $80 at a time to Nancy? If she wanted to buy a bathing suit, she had to describe it to Brad, type of material and all, then he would take her down and buy it.

If he was that controlling with just a darn bathing suit, I don't THINK he'd pay $200 for a pedicure. BS I say!

Heck, he didn't even buy her a Xmas present last year. Yet he wants us to believe that he made her take back an expensive gift she bought for him?:confused:

When he returned from overseas, rather than getting Nancy money from the ATM, he gave her his foreign currency and she had to go to the airport with the kids to exchange it.

He claims he left her $350 and he has the cancelled check to prove it. Yeah, IF there is such a check, I'd like to know what she paid with it. Telephone bill? Electricity?

I think Mr. Brad is feeding us a line of balogna. I'm not buyin' it. :rolleyes:

I'll wait until the evidence comes out. That is IF there is a trial. Doesn't mean I don't think he didn't do it, cuz I do. imo I just don't know if they'll be able to come up with enough evidence.

He may be as transparant as glass and as stoopid of a criminal there ever was. But that's why they have such a thing as 'dumb luck.':mad:

Just ramblin'
IMO
fran

[Fairy1]

[quote=SleuthyGal;2415866]I didn't even know there are such things as $200 pedis outside of Beverly Hills. The most I've ever paid for a pedi was $30 + tip. QUOTE]

Why would a runner want a $200 pedicure? The action of the socks and the running shoes would ruin it immediately. And I haven't heard of a $200 price around here, either. Although if part of a complete spa package, it might make sense. But it just doesn't sound right to me.

Me neither!!!! His father's affidavit said he had personally seen receipts for a $200 pedicure and a $200 pair of jeans for Nancy - IIRC. I just don't see her as that kind of girl!?!?!? IMO - all of his "supporters" affidavits were specifically designed to counter those of Nancy's friends. If I were asked to do a sworn affidavit, I would definitely not be dishonest! ALL of the people who have done them - less than 3 weeks ago - were just regular folks living their lives. Now they're in the middle of a murder investigation! Wow - I feel for all of them - whatever side they're on!

[Fairy1]

The "unfounded insinuation" part is the part that gets me. Its more about the defendent than the children. He should challenge for his children if he wants them but I seriously doubt an autopsy report is going to alleviate an unfounded insinuation unless the result is natural causes, which of course is not the case since LE is investigating a homicide.

ETA - to me this was a fishing expedition. The autopsy report would contain a listing of samples and procedures. For example it would indicate if the fingernails were collected and submitted to LE for testing. It would also identify what clothing was on or near the body. IMO this indicates to me that the lawyer wanted to get out there that Nancy was found in running attire per Brad's description. I have little doubt it is most likely what she was found in actually.

I'm thinking the complete autopsy report will not be available by tomorrow. I don't think the custody issue will be resolved tomorrow - unless LE has enough to make an arrest. I DO believe the damning evidence will have been found under her fingernails...

[Magister]

The "unfounded insinuation" part is the part that gets me. Its more about the defendent than the children. He should challenge for his children if he wants them but I seriously doubt an autopsy report is going to alleviate an unfounded insinuation unless the result is natural causes, which of course is not the case since LE is investigating a homicide.

If he didn't kill his wife, then he gets the kids. All this other stuff is just nonsense about nothing. He's the father, the grandparents have no rights under North Carolina law and even though most of the charges in her friend's affidavits can be explained or understood with an open mind and logical thought; The bottom line is that if he didn't kill his wife, then he gets the kids.

[Magister]

When he returned from overseas, rather than getting Nancy money from the ATM, he gave her his foreign currency and she had to go to the airport with the kids to exchange it.

They could've went to the BofA on the corner to exchange the currency AND according the affidavit, it was to pay for a movie that Nancy and the kids were going to see, while Brad stayed home.

One of the first rules in any travel guide is to exchange minimal money in the airport because you'll generally not get the best rate and pay a higher fee. I don't know the situation at RDU, but pretty much all large banks would make an exchange and if you're (or your companion) is a customer, it's generally free.


He claims he left her $350 and he has the cancelled check to prove it. Yeah, IF there is such a check, I'd like to know what she paid with it. Telephone bill? Electricity?

I'm still catching up and haven't read today's affidavits, but Brad's says that he paid the bills and her friends say that she wouldn't/couldn't even pay for the water.
---

And, if I might revisit the gas thing: As I posted (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2414873#post2414873) earlier, the "follow to the store", "buy the minimal amount of gas" was most likely a single instance and perhaps they had gone before the store opened, so they'd have to use a card at the pump; Perhaps Brad was squeezing dimes and he put in only enough to get through to the next paycheck. No one really knows.

His affidavit says that he gave Nancy 80% of the leftover money as a household budget and kept 20% for himself. If this is true and if Nancy had already spent the household budget, then Brad probably didn't have much left. I mean, she was supposedly given cash and one of her friend's affidavits says that she found it burdensome to go into gas stations to pay with cash, so she obviously was buying some (or most) of her own gas and was clearly capable to do it.

What kind of "control" would only half-filling a tank give, anyway? If she was going to run away with the kids, she'd only get half as far, but even a full tank wouldn't get you to Canada and if she left the day after getting the household money, why couldn't she just keep filling the tank until they got to their destination? Even at today's prices, $300 will still go quite a ways.

IOW: Like some of the other claims in the friend's affidavits, I see one story about one incident being repeated and magnified, while in this instance and forgetting about the logical question of why wouldn't she just buy more gas, one of the affidavits actually contadicts the others by complaining about paying cash.


Of course, none of this says that she deserved to be murdered, but there's just a lot of repetition and huhs in some of those early affidavits. None of the secondhand claims have anything to do with the actual murder and I see nothing that would take away his kids, so why did they even submit the things? Personally, I don't really see their purpose.

[RoughlyCollie]

This "eraser killer" explanation is interesting:

http://marileestrong.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-makes-eraser-killers-different.html

[Busylady]

I know I am really behind but while the affidavits are fresh in my mind I wanted to comment.

It appears Nancys friends have labeled Brad controlling. It doesnt fit to me, references to her going on beach trips, her training for a marathon, going and having coffee before jogs, she was at various friends houses alot. Seems like she was out and about quite a bit. If he was controlling he would of tried isolating her in my opinion.

The story about the house being infested with bugs and one room full of worms in 5 days from food left over? Not sure thats really possible but I could be wrong.

He had given up training for the triathalon in Jan, can be verified as he isnt registered for the upcoming event that he would of needed to train for. Yet Nancy was training for one?

IMO she could of very well had a spending problem, she had a 1200 dollar purse, if Brad was that evil and not letting her buy food can't imagine him buying her a 1200 dollar purse. So maybe before credit cards were taken away she spent spent spent and he had to take control? If he was paying all the bills and she had 300 a week for groceries and miscellaneous I would think that would be enough, yet it wasnt so where was the 300 a week going?

Most of the items listed in Brad's response can be verified. Marriage counselor records, cell phone records, credit card receipts, affidavits from the girls doctors prior to Nancys murder showing that he had met the drs etc, copy of the separation agreement and what Nancy's wishes were, evidence from the attorney that both Nancy and Brad had indiscretions, the video from Harris Teeter showing what he did purchase and times he purchased. The information in Nancys friends statements can not really be verified so I do not know how much weight they will carry in all this.

I do not know if BC committed this crime, but I am going to keep an open mind until more information is provided that isnt from a friend of Nancys.

[LillyRush]

Magister, The reason why she could not pay the water bill is because he had taken her name off all the utility accounts and also off of all their previously shared bank accounts. Therefore, not only did she not have access to money to pay the bill, but she had no authorization on the water bill account.

[RoseRed]

NC was not entitled to work in the U.S. She didn't have a green card.

Further, BC alleges in his affidavit that NC had an extra-marital relationship that was not sexual. How is that an affair? It sounds like a friendship to me.

Relationship that is not sexual ? uh hm remember Bill Clinton ? Wasn't sex !!! :bang:

[LillyRush]

Well, I read the affidavits and all the friends seem to be consistently bringing up the same issues. I don't think all of the different couples, some of them who know Nancy in different ways and are not mutual friends, would be able to cover the same ground if it weren't true.

The only thing that's off is that in Jessica Ward's statement she mentions that Nancy felt uncomfortable waiting for Brad at Clea and Mike's house because they had spent a lot more time recently with Brad and seemed to be his only friends. But then right after the statements made by Jessica and her husband, Clea and Mike made their statements where they mention being best friends with Nancy.

Anyway, that's the only inconsistent thing I read. But that could be just Jessica's perception of the situation, about Nancy being uncomfortable. Maybe Clea and Mike had no idea.

[LillyRush]

I see what you're saying. The friends could be exaggerating. I've seen it happen in these sort of things. I guess we'll have to wait and see. Some of the statements, at least the ones beteen the same pairs of married couples did seem kind of like copied statements (copied from each other).

I know I am really behind but while the affidavits are fresh in my mind I wanted to comment.

It appears Nancys friends have labeled Brad controlling. It doesnt fit to me, references to her going on beach trips, her training for a marathon, going and having coffee before jogs, she was at various friends houses alot. Seems like she was out and about quite a bit. If he was controlling he would of tried isolating her in my opinion.

The story about the house being infested with bugs and one room full of worms in 5 days from food left over? Not sure thats really possible but I could be wrong.

He had given up training for the triathalon in Jan, can be verified as he isnt registered for the upcoming event that he would of needed to train for. Yet Nancy was training for one?

IMO she could of very well had a spending problem, she had a 1200 dollar purse, if Brad was that evil and not letting her buy food can't imagine him buying her a 1200 dollar purse. So maybe before credit cards were taken away she spent spent spent and he had to take control? If he was paying all the bills and she had 300 a week for groceries and miscellaneous I would think that would be enough, yet it wasnt so where was the 300 a week going?

Most of the items listed in Brad's response can be verified. Marriage counselor records, cell phone records, credit card receipts, affidavits from the girls doctors prior to Nancys murder showing that he had met the drs etc, copy of the separation agreement and what Nancy's wishes were, evidence from the attorney that both Nancy and Brad had indiscretions, the video from Harris Teeter showing what he did purchase and times he purchased. The information in Nancys friends statements can not really be verified so I do not know how much weight they will carry in all this.

I do not know if BC committed this crime, but I am going to keep an open mind until more information is provided that isnt from a friend of Nancys.

[RoseRed]

The comment section of this article is quite interesting...mostly slanted towards BC....


http://www.newsobserver.com/print/thursday/front/story/1152214.html



RIP Nancy-- justice is in the works- I hope!

The 45,000 in credit charges is not a surprise. I thought there was something fishy when they said she had to borrow money for food.

Also when her family was stating about all the times they talked to Nancy on the phone 3 x a week for father , daily for Mother and then Krista said they called 2 x a day. Are they crazy do you know how much those phone bills were? As soon as I heard about all those calls to Canada, knew there was financial problems.

If he hasn't been charged then he needs his kids with him, my opinion.

[Magister]

Magister, The reason why she could not pay the water bill is because he had taken her name off all the utility accounts and also off of all their previously shared bank accounts. Therefore, not only did she not have access to money to pay the bill, but she had no authorization on the water bill account.

In all the flurry of posting, I certainly understand why you may not have seen it, but I commented (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2412401#post2412401) last night that a person's name doesn't have to be on an account to pay a utility bill and get service restored.

Perhaps she didn't have the $20, plus there'd most likely be a reconnect and possibly a deposit required (if there's not one already on the account), but the reconnect might possibly have gone onto the next bill and maybe she didn't have the twenty bucks, but nobody says that she called Brad and he refused to come. She obviously wasn't shy about sharing the story, so I don't understand why one of her friends wouldn't have just loaned her the money until Brad got home.

Not to mention that having an utility cut-off for lack of payment hardly seems like abuse.

[LillyRush]

In all the flurry of posting, I certainly understand why you may not have seen it, but I commented (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2412401#post2412401) last night that a person's name doesn't have to be on an account to pay a utility bill and get service restored.

Perhaps she didn't have the $20, plus there'd most likely be a reconnect and possibly a deposit required (if there's not one already on the account), but the reconnect might possibly have gone onto the next bill and maybe she didn't have the twenty bucks, but nobody says that she called Brad and he refused to come. She obviously wasn't shy about sharing the story, so I don't understand why one of her friends wouldn't have just loaned her the money until Brad got home.

Not to mention that having an utility cut-off for lack of payment hardly seems like abuse.

I know that for most general payments, the person paying doesn't have to be on the bill. However, sometimes when a utility is already cut-off it can get tricky. Even when trying to get emergency assistance, the person applying has to be the person on the bill. Also, why did Brad let it even get to that point? He was the one paying the bigger bills and leaving her with weekly allotments.

Did he also not check his own mail and notice the water disconnect notice with his name on it? I'm not saying that she may not have had some financial management issues, but again even Brad states that he was the one who took care of the major expenses.

[Celt]

The 45,000 in credit charges is not a surprise. I thought there was something fishy when they said she had to borrow money for food.

Also when her family was stating about all the times they talked to Nancy on the phone 3 x a week for father , daily for Mother and then Krista said they called 2 x a day. Are they crazy do you know how much those phone bills were? As soon as I heard about all those calls to Canada, knew there was financial problems.
If he hasn't been charged then he needs his kids with him, my opinion.
:couch:
Hey RoseRed!:)
I bet you they all had the International payment plan~you pay a flat fee once a month and get unlimited phone calls..really not that much.
as low as $20.00 a Month

[LillyRush]

I don't know about this shopaholic thing. I'm looking at various pictures and she mostly wears casual/sporty-type clothing rather than being over the top with fashion. I also don't see her wearing a lot of jewelry.

[Magister]

I know that for most general payments, the person paying doesn't have to be on the bill. However, sometimes when a utility is already cut-off it can get tricky. Even when trying to get emergency assistance, the person applying has to be the person on the bill. Also, why did Brad let it even get to that point? He was the one paying the bigger bills and leaving her with weekly allotments.

Did he also not check his own mail and notice the water disconnect notice with his name on it? I'm not saying that she may not have had some financial management issues, but again even Brad states that he was the one who took care of the major expenses.

I don't know the current specifics of Cary Water, but I gave an example concerning a gas/water/sewer/garbage bill from the place that I currently live and I can recall from my childhood in Cary, my father occasionally having to go pay a CP&L (ProgressEnergy) bill to get the power turned back on for one of his employees. They were needed on the jobsite and he'd be giving them an advance anyway, so my dad was always the one to go.

Earlier, I theorized that he may have been trying to stretch the budget and/or maybe he had turned-off BillPay to better finagle the payment schedule, or maybe, he guessed that they'd let him get behind.

(Some utilities will generally give you a month, but in my current town, the city bill has to be paid by the first or they'll cut you off.)

Again, I don't know what happened concerning this (single) unpaid bill, but because it or something similar has happened to a lot of people, I hope for all our sakes, it's not a reason to take the kids.

[Busylady]

Wow by the time I think I get somewhat caught up there are tons more legal documents to read. Trying to keep up here and with Caylee Anthony is proving impossible.

One thing that is bugging me is why would BC or NC for that matter be emailing her father about financial matters, house repairs matters, asking permission to help pack and paint, etc? Was the father-in-law a decision maker of some kind in this marriage. Im sure there is an explanation but the last thing in the world I would be doing is explaining my finances, or asking permission from my FIL for anything. This also leads me further away from Brad was controlling Nancy.

Will be interested to see what the domestic violence thing is about, and if it is NC who talked with them, when it is she first made contact with them. Was it after the separation agreement was in the works?

If Nancy was so frightened of him and sleeping with kids in her room, why would she let him go home with the kids and stay at a party? Why would she leave the kids every morning with him to go jogging?

[Magister]

I don't know about this shopaholic thing. I'm looking at various pictures and she mostly wears casual/sporty-type clothing rather than being over the top with fashion. I also don't see her wearing a lot of jewelry.

I don't know either, but $1200 a month is more than a lot, if not the majority of people make and like most of the examples raised in her friend's affidavits, it's more about their relationship and doesn't really speak to his ability to care for his kids.

(Not to be mean, but I'm sure Brad's making a lot more than his father-in-law's pension)

[LillyRush]

The affidavits focus mainly on incidents of emotional and verbal abuse, as well as the affair. The water bill wasn't the focus, just something mentioned by maybe 2 of the people who submitted affidavits. I'm just saying preventative measures could have been taken before the water got turned off, which Brad has pretty much taken responsibility for by saying he paid the major bills and requesting only his name be left on the account(s).

[Magister]

I'm going to take a break, so I'll just throw onto the record something that I've said, before; If Brad killed Nancy, then the children should go to one or the other sets of grandparents, rather than foster care. But, until he's charged, arrested or convicted, then the fact that there was trouble in the marriage and he didn't hangout with her friends shouldn't be grounds to take his kids.

IMHO

[Celt]

I'm going to take a break, so I'll just throw onto the record something that I've said, before; If Brad killed Nancy, then the children should go to one or the other sets of grandparents, rather than foster care. But, until he's charged, arrested or convicted, then the fact that there was trouble in the marriage and he didn't hangout with her friends shouldn't be grounds to take his kids.

IMHO

OR if tomorrow they can prove he was suicidal .. did he talk to any Doctors etc ~~ Because Suicidal could lead to murder~ suicide. and I would NOT want to take that chance if I was her parents..JMO

[SeriouslySearching]

Why would he even fight custody? The best interest of the children is what is important here. If he were any kind of a father right now...he would step aside.

[Magister]

OR if tomorrow they can prove he was suicidal .. did he talk to any Doctors etc ~~ Because Suicidal could lead to murder~ suicide. and I would NOT want to take that chance if I was her parents..JMO

I've also said a couple of times that there very easily and quite likely could be a continuance in the custody case. Sure, the grandparents have played some of the media games and that "dressing the aunt like the mom" is kind of weird, but they're now safely tucked into some wayout place in Canada, away from the glare and the investigation.

It could be argued that the kids are better-off where they are right now, so the judge could continue with the grandparents having temporary custody until the case is resolved or Brad is cleared.

[Celt]

It could be argued that the kids are better-off where they are right now, so the judge could contnue with the grandparents having temporary custody until the case is resolved or Brad is cleared.

:woohoo: Thank You!:clap::clap::clap:

[Magister]

Why would he even fight custody? The best interest of the children is what is important here. If he were any kind of a father right now...he would step aside.

If he were any kind of father, he might temporarily step aside, but they're his kids and I have no reason to believe that he doesn't love or want them and we've seen no allegations of child abuse, so why would he give up permanently?

BTW: It's the grandparents who have filed for permanent custody, so they're the ones responsible for the case.

[carolinalady]

The affidavits focus mainly on incidents of emotional and verbal abuse, as well as the affair. The water bill wasn't the focus, just something mentioned by maybe 2 of the people who submitted affidavits. I'm just saying preventative measures could have been taken before the water got turned off, which Brad has pretty much taken responsibility for by saying he paid the major bills and requesting only his name be left on the account(s).

Trying to catch up on everything.

His rebuttal affidavit addresses the water bill.

Also, as far as the baseball cap issue vs. the $200 jeans. Around this area, baseball caps are worn by many of the same people who own designer jeans.

IF the $1200/month is correct, I don't see that as an unreasonable amount if BC was paying mortgage, utilities, credit cards, cars, etc. Plenty of people in this area get by on less with larger families.

The Boat Show info. BC's rebuttal says he emailed Nancy the info. Seems like there should be a record of that.

The phone calls to Canada... the rebuttal states that they did have FREE long distance to Canada from the home phone. However, the calls were from her cell phone. He indicates he upped her minutes. Again, it seems like there should be some record of all of this.

Last thing for now, the rebuttal states they no longer have the VoIP system at home.

Again, I'm not sure if BC did this or not. I hope for the sake of his children that hid did not. It seems like he has some information in his affidavits that could be easily verified to determine how truthful his statements are.

[raisincharlie]

I don't know either, but $1200 a month is more than a lot, if not the majority of people make and like most of the examples raised in her friend's affidavits, it's more about their relationship and doesn't really speak to his ability to care for his kids.

(Not to be mean, but I'm sure Brad's making a lot more than his father-in-law's pension)

Not to be mean - then why bring it up ? Maybe Brad does make more on the face of it - what does that have to do with it ? Has it crossed your mind that perhaps the pensioner isn't in debt, owns his home and vehicles outright which in reality would put him well ahead of Brad.

I don't put alot of stock in everything said in those affidavits on either side but I disagree that they don't speak to his ability to care for his kids. I don't condone someone loosing their kids either but I do believe for the safety of the kids it is imperative to make the determination and that the determination be made by an independent third party. There are way too many kids that end up in a very bad way because no one did anything when perhaps they should have. The affidavit of the psych makes it clear that even they have a concern - and to be fair it is in both directions. At this point no one knows if he would be alright or not - no harm in finding out to protect the children.

[carolinalady]

Not to be mean - then why bring it up ? Maybe Brad does make more on the face of it - what does that have to do with it ? Has it crossed your mind that perhaps the pensioner isn't in debt, owns his home and vehicles outright which in reality would put him well ahead of Brad.

I don't put alot of stock in everything said in those affidavits on either side but I disagree that they don't speak to his ability to care for his kids. I don't condone someone loosing their kids either but I do believe for the safety of the kids it is imperative to make the determination and that the determination be made by an independent third party. There are way too many kids that end up in a very bad way because no one did anything when perhaps they should have. The affidavit of the psych makes it clear that even they have a concern - and to be fair it is in both directions. At this point no one knows if he would be alright or not - no harm in finding out to protect the children.

Has the psych even spoken to Brad? Or is she going off of the info from the Ex Parte hearing and the statements of her family/friends?

[d99gr81]

What if someone were to set call-forwarding on their phone(#1) to the phone number of phone(#2)? Then someone calls phone(#1) from phone(#3)?
To phone(#2), it looks like a call from phone(#1).
Then, someone erases any logs that may have been made...

OK guys trying to catch up again today. Will take me a while...still on page 5.

It only looks like that to someone who doesn't understand. All calls have origins and hand offs. It's very easy to trace where a call came from. Even on analog line verse VOIP. OK, Say you call California from VA. That call will be handed off a few times going across due to multiple carriers involved. Since Verizon is the local phone company in VA they would take the first hand off and route it appropriately. Keep in mind this all happens in milliseconds. Verizon could A) have a direct hand off to AT&T in CA or may hand off to say Quest in Colorado and then they hand off to AT&T in CA. Everything is logged and detailed in all three LEC's equipment. And if the person used a cell phone to call a number that was forwarding from a home to another cell phone that is so much easier to see due to many different carriers and cell towers. Believe me theres no way to hide that kind of thing.

[raisincharlie]

I'm thinking the complete autopsy report will not be available by tomorrow. I don't think the custody issue will be resolved tomorrow - unless LE has enough to make an arrest. I DO believe the damning evidence will have been found under her fingernails...

Reviewing other cases in the area, the average return time for an autopsy is at 2 months, although there is no doubt that the ME has discussed with LE the findings to this point. The complete report won't be ready for a while.

I do think the only reason it is wanted at this point in time is for the description of the clothing found on her body. The only reason that is wanted is because the ex parte made a statement that Nancy did not go running on Saturday morning. The lawyer wants to be able to say she was found in running clothes and therefore she did go running. Not that it really proves it but typical lawyer approach.

[raisincharlie]

Has the psych even spoken to Brad? Or is she going off of the info from the Ex Parte hearing and the statements of her family/friends?

I doubt she spoke with Brad. Reading her vitae she has expertise relating to children who wind up under trauma due to violence. I would say she read the same things the judge did but don't know for sure. Her report does state she has read the information supplied.

She does also present pros and cons on behalf of both parties but bottom line is she has concerns for the kids. It is posted in the legal docs thread.

[MCDRAW]

I respect that - but do you have any $200 jeans or get $200 pedicures?


Right now, I don't even have $200.:rolleyes:

[macd]

OK guys trying to catch up again today. Will take me a while...still on page 5.

It only looks like that to someone who doesn't understand. All calls have origins and hand offs. It's very easy to trace where a call came from. Even on analog line verse VOIP. OK, Say you call California from VA. That call will be handed off a few times going across due to multiple carriers involved. Since Verizon is the local phone company in VA they would take the first hand off and route it appropriately. Keep in mind this all happens in milliseconds. Verizon could A) have a direct hand off to AT&T in CA or may hand off to say Quest in Colorado and then they hand off to AT&T in CA. Everything is logged and detailed in all three LEC's equipment. And if the person used a cell phone to call a number that was forwarding from a home to another cell phone that is so much easier to see due to many different carriers and cell towers. Believe me theres no way to hide that kind of thing.
Kind of moot now, since new information says they did not have a voip system in their home, but...
If he did have his own system in his home, he would be the sysadmin for the CM and could erase those records. Do local phone companies keep records of local calls?

[d99gr81]

I wasn't even thinking about that!! I bet you're right - I guess they just put everything on that card. Just boggles my mind.

I can tell you Cisco probably paid for it. He has stated that NC racked up the CC debt and thats easy to trace.

[christine2448]

At 8 am pdt the forum will go down, moving to new server...

If you all want to chat real time, chat is available :D



Originally Posted by animal04216
The chat room is open if anyone is interested in chatting about this case! Come in anytime you all want to talk real time! Open even if a mod is not present--just behave ok?

http://www.stormdancing.net/network/java/chat1.html

put your nick in the top space, then type websleuths in the place for channel.

[carolinalady]

I doubt she spoke with Brad. Reading her vitae she has expertise relating to children who wind up under trauma due to violence. I would say she read the same things the judge did but don't know for sure. Her report does state she has read the information supplied.

She does also present pros and cons on behalf of both parties but bottom line is she has concerns for the kids. It is posted in the legal docs thread.

I looked at the document and I see that she reviewed the original request by the plantiffs and the judges decision. I guess my problem w/ this is that BC had no chance to defend himself.

Much more info has come out (granted it's her friends/family vs. his friends/family perception) since these documents were presented to the court. Like I said, I sincerely hope, for the sake of those girls, that he had NOTHING to do w/ Nancy's murder.

[pamlet]

Write a check for the entire balance, 0 the account out and open a new account.

Not really that hard.

JMHO
fran

And what about amounts left outstanding?... Checks, etc? I just thought it was interesting when everyone said "she was taken off the account" ... not "he opened a new account without her name on it" ... Just that semantic thing again I suppose ... I sounds so much more dramatic to say "he took her off the account without her knowledge" ... tho' I suspect it was discussed ... that old "the truth is in the middle somewhere" I think.

[carolinalady]

I know there was speculation as to whether or not the children would be back in town for the custody hearing today. Here's video of their arrival at the airport on Thursday.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/3267428/

[raisincharlie]

I looked at the document and I see that she reviewed the original request by the plantiffs and the judges decision. I guess my problem w/ this is that BC had no chance to defend himself.

Much more info has come out (granted it's her friends/family vs. his friends/family perception) since these documents were presented to the court. Like I said, I sincerely hope, for the sake of those girls, that he had NOTHING to do w/ Nancy's murder.

I agree. I don't have a problem with BC not being able to defend himself on this temporary basis. He needs to be able to do so today however. The most objectionable thing about it to me is the real truth will never be presented. Lots of opinions from friends etc and no way to prove some of Brad's allegations since Nancy is deceased - seems like the hamster on the wheel thing. That is why I am in favor of a real psych evaluation of him by a totally independent party before those kids are returned.

[pamlet]

I kinda hate to say it, but i'm an NC State grad too.

1- Jason Young, BA killed his wife and baby
2- Ann Miller, MA killed her husband
3- Brad Cooper, MBA killed his wife

Notice all 3 are professional , in their early 30's with young kids.
Also, all 3 lived within a 10 mile radius

Must be something in the water ... good thing we got outta there... ha

[carolinalady]

I agree. I don't have a problem with BC not being able to defend himself on this temporary basis. He needs to be able to do so today however. The most objectionable thing about it to me is the real truth will never be presented. Lots of opinions from friends etc and no way to prove some of Brad's allegations since Nancy is deceased - seems like the hamster on the wheel thing. That is why I am in favor of a real psych evaluation of him by a totally independent party before those kids are returned.

I agree. I do see in the plantiff's request for the psych eval they specifically list the docs they want to perform the services. I am in no way doubting their credentials or what not, but I really don't like it when one side or the other requests a certain party to do the eval. I, too, would prefer that the court decide on an independent party.

[raisincharlie]

I agree. I do see in the plantiff's request for the psych eval they specifically list the docs they want to perform the services. I am in no way doubting their credentials or what not, but I really don't like it when one side or the other requests a certain party to do the eval. I, too, would prefer that the court decide on an independent party.


For fairness - court appointed - agree.

[fran]

Kind of moot now, since new information says they did not have a voip system in their home, but...
If he did have his own system in his home, he would be the sysadmin for the CM and could erase those records. Do local phone companies keep records of local calls?

Now you have your thinkin' cap on! ;)

JUST HOW MUCH CONTROL DOES THE HUSBAND HAVE OVER THE 'HISTORY' OR 'RECORDS' of their home phone system?:confused:

Would he know how to change computer harddrive data?

We're not dealing with a dummy here. He's got an MBA, after all.:rolleyes:

Hope LE brings in the top computer people. THIS could be interesting and very drawn out.:eek:

Hmmmm........it was pretty late last night when WRAL brought up the shelter information. Wonder if Brad saw it?:confused:

Think he got any sleep last night or had he anticipated the possibility Nancy had seeked counsel outside? :waitasec:

Is there some unknown party who's aware of what went on behind those closed doors? :bang:

This could be interesting.

JMO
fran

[fran]

For fairness - court appointed - agree.

I thought that was why they chose this particular doctor. Because she already works with the courts?

fran

[raisincharlie]

Now you have your thinkin' cap on! ;)

JUST HOW MUCH CONTROL DOES THE HUSBAND HAVE OVER THE 'HISTORY' OR 'RECORDS' of their home phone system?:confused:

Would he know how to change computer harddrive data?

We're not dealing with a dummy here. He's got an MBA, after all.:rolleyes:

Hope LE brings in the top computer people. THIS could be interesting and very drawn out.:eek:

Hmmmm........it was pretty late last night when WRAL brought up the shelter information. Wonder if Brad saw it?:confused:

Think he got any sleep last night or had he anticipated the possibility Nancy had seeked counsel outside? :waitasec:

Is there some unknown party who's aware of what went on behind those closed doors? :bang:

This could be interesting.

JMO
fran

Fran

I've thought about that subpeona served on Interact. I have ruled out it was served to gain expert testimony - a subpeona would not be necessary for that.

Something tells me perhaps there was some consuling involved and the subpeona relates to those records. There is something to it, just dunno what. One or both contacted this organization...it will be interesting indeed.

[raisincharlie]

I thought that was why they chose this particular doctor. Because she already works with the courts?

fran

In the Rentz's petition for a psych eval - it recommended two doctors but left it open to the court to appoint if those were unavailable. The psych who signed an affidavit for the ex parte temp custody appears to be court appointed. Two different items.

[piedmontmom]

If he were any kind of father, he might temporarily step aside, but they're his kids and I have no reason to believe that he doesn't love or want them and we've seen no allegations of child abuse, so why would he give up permanently?

BTW: It's the grandparents who have filed for permanent custody, so they're the ones responsible for the case.

I just posted on another thread. ITA, in that I have not seen evidence of child abuse. Afterall...NC did leave her kids with him whenever she went jogging...and on the eve of her death...she remained at this party and left him home with the girls...that just spells trust to me. In particular on the eve of her death...when things could have been at their worst. If she were worried she wouldn't have left them with him.

I am also saddened at how the police had to take the girls from him.

[d99gr81]

I thought he did a pretty good job with that Rebuttal.
A lot of his statements could be checked with phone calls, looking at records, or looking at emails. For example he mentioned taking one of his daughters to the doctor after it was alleged that he never did. It would be fairly easy to confirm that he was in the doctors office.

My impression was that a lot of the statements from NC's friends were just lies/exaggerations in an effort to pile on someone they see as guilty. Some of the things they stated just seemed absurd to me and hard to believe.

That said, just because he may not be as bad a person as NC's friends tried to paint him out to be that doesn't mean he didn't kill his wife.

I agree with all of this. I have been through this kind of divorce as well so when I read his rebuttal's I absolutely believe him. It's easy for me because I lived through it as well. I have mentioned earlier in some of my posts to this even before his latest updates. Stating that spouse that are not happy will in fact over exaggerate and even lie for sympathy. I live it so I have felt it. Besides everything he refutes can be verified with records. That in itself is huge. Again doesn't mean he didn't kill her.

[d99gr81]

Well, I don't know about the rest of the country, but around Cary and especially in Nancy's age group and social bracket, ball caps are definitely IN!

(I wouldn't wear one, either)

OMG my girl friend is a foo foo girl and she has ball caps that are pink and she loves to wear.

[outside_chance]

Hi....first post but I've been lurking/reading all of the links for a while and wanted to post my thoughts. First off, I am of the belief that Brad did commit the crime (although there is no confirmed evidence yet to support that so I am keeping an open mind). The reason for my belief is as follows:

(1) Statistics show that a majority of murders are not random events.
(2) There was obviously a lot of stress in this relationship (IMO not all Brad's fault). It adds to "motive". I have seen friends do things that boggled my mind when they went through a separation / divorce.
(3) Looking at the "draft" separation agreements, Brad was going to have to pay a lot. I realized the agreement was not signed yet..but even if he negotiated some of that back, he still was going to suffer financially. Again, it adds to Motive.
(4) Based on rumors/statements that came out both on here and in the community, Brad's personality was portrayed controlling and narcissistic. I heard about his limiting her money and affairs within the local community long before they came out in the affidavits.
(5) For each piece of information that came out, there can be a very credible explanation, but when you take everything in totality, it doesn't add up (IMHO).

All that said, it may be very difficult for the police to get the evidence needed in this case. For example, "if" he strangled her and then dumped her body, there "could" be very little credible evidence that he committed the crime.

Lastly, I don't put a lot of stock in the affidavits for the child custody case. I have been involved in these in the past when 2 sets of good friends went through a divorce. I was shocked how events were portrayed. Each side is trying to make the other side look as bad as possible (or make themselves look as good as possible).

[raisincharlie]

Hi....first post but I've been lurking/reading all of the links for a while and wanted to post my thoughts. First off, I am of the belief that Brad did commit the crime (although there is no confirmed evidence yet to support that so I am keeping an open mind). The reason for my belief is as follows:

(1) Statistics show that a majority of murders are not random events.
(2) There was obviously a lot of stress in this relationship (IMO not all Brad's fault). It adds to "motive". I have seen friends do things that boggled my mind when they went through a separation / divorce.
(3) Looking at the "draft" separation agreements, Brad was going to have to pay a lot. I realized the agreement was not signed yet..but even if he negotiated some of that back, he still was going to suffer financially. Again, it adds to Motive.
(4) Based on rumors/statements that came out both on here and in the community, Brad's personality was portrayed controlling and narcissistic. I heard about his limiting her money and affairs within the local community long before they came out in the affidavits.
(5) For each piece of information that came out, there can be a very credible explanation, but when you take everything in totality, it doesn't add up (IMHO).

All that said, it may be very difficult for the police to get the evidence needed in this case. For example, "if" he strangled her and then dumped her body, there "could" be very little credible evidence that he committed the crime.

Lastly, I don't put a lot of stock in the affidavits for the child custody case. I have been involved in these in the past when 2 sets of good friends went through a divorce. I was shocked how events were portrayed. Each side is trying to make the other side look as bad as possible (or make themselves look as good as possible).

Yep - excellent post !

Welcome!

[d99gr81]

[QUOTE=SleuthyGal;2415866]I didn't even know there are such things as $200 pedis outside of Beverly Hills. The most I've ever paid for a pedi was $30 + tip. QUOTE]

Why would a runner want a $200 pedicure? The action of the socks and the running shoes would ruin it immediately. And I haven't heard of a $200 price around here, either. Although if part of a complete spa package, it might make sense. But it just doesn't sound right to me.

As I have stated before there is so much of this that hits home in my own experiences. My ex ran races... The one posted on here was a 5k which is three miles. My ex ran these as well and finished with the same times NC did. NC finished in like 33 minutes. Thats over 10 minute miles...thats not a serious runner...thats recreation which is why my ex ran them.

[pamlet]

Why would he even fight custody? The best interest of the children is what is important here. If he were any kind of a father right now...he would step aside.

If he's innocent why wouldn't he fight for custody? IF he is innocent .. their mother has been murdered ... and he is their father .. period.

[d99gr81]

I know that for most general payments, the person paying doesn't have to be on the bill. However, sometimes when a utility is already cut-off it can get tricky. Even when trying to get emergency assistance, the person applying has to be the person on the bill. Also, why did Brad let it even get to that point? He was the one paying the bigger bills and leaving her with weekly allotments.

Did he also not check his own mail and notice the water disconnect notice with his name on it? I'm not saying that she may not have had some financial management issues, but again even Brad states that he was the one who took care of the major expenses.

Mail??? I live 3 miles from them...I have the same water company and I pay mine online...I get no mail.

[fran]

I just posted on another thread. ITA, in that I have not seen evidence of child abuse. Afterall...NC did leave her kids with him whenever she went jogging...and on the eve of her death...she remained at this party and left him home with the girls...that just spells trust to me. In particular on the eve of her death...when things could have been at their worst. If she were worried she wouldn't have left them with him.

I am also saddened at how the police had to take the girls from him.

IMO, just from the outside looking in, as I have no personal experience with abuse, but know several people that have escaped such unions.

I think it's one of those situations where you have to actually be there to understand, as in Nancy.

She may have expressed, to her friends, that she was physically afraid of Brad, but that was most likely when she was in an emotional state to be afraid......But then, he's nice,.........so it's ok...............then he gets mad and she's not ok................then he gets mad and she's afraid again,..........but then he's ok and kisses away the fear,...........then he gets angry, but at her, not the kids, he loves them..............

I don't know if I've made myself clear, but seeing someone in such a situaion, that's how I saw it. PLUS, you NEVER want to believe they would REALLY do anything, you've been watching too much tv, they couldn't........they wouldn't.....or would they?

Emotional abuse is one step away from physical abuse and physical abuse is one step away from..............murder.

JMHO
fran

PS...I'm not saying that happened with THIS case. I frankly don't know either way, I'm like everyone else, just watching from the outside looking in. But, THIS is how abusive relationships work. Oh, and often times, NO ONE knew a thing........ala, Laci Peterson, classic example.......fran

[fran]

Hi....first post but I've been lurking/reading all of the links for a while and wanted to post my thoughts. First off, I am of the belief that Brad did commit the crime (although there is no confirmed evidence yet to support that so I am keeping an open mind). The reason for my belief is as follows:

(1) Statistics show that a majority of murders are not random events.
(2) There was obviously a lot of stress in this relationship (IMO not all Brad's fault). It adds to "motive". I have seen friends do things that boggled my mind when they went through a separation / divorce.
(3) Looking at the "draft" separation agreements, Brad was going to have to pay a lot. I realized the agreement was not signed yet..but even if he negotiated some of that back, he still was going to suffer financially. Again, it adds to Motive.
(4) Based on rumors/statements that came out both on here and in the community, Brad's personality was portrayed controlling and narcissistic. I heard about his limiting her money and affairs within the local community long before they came out in the affidavits.
(5) For each piece of information that came out, there can be a very credible explanation, but when you take everything in totality, it doesn't add up (IMHO).

All that said, it may be very difficult for the police to get the evidence needed in this case. For example, "if" he strangled her and then dumped her body, there "could" be very little credible evidence that he committed the crime.

Lastly, I don't put a lot of stock in the affidavits for the child custody case. I have been involved in these in the past when 2 sets of good friends went through a divorce. I was shocked how events were portrayed. Each side is trying to make the other side look as bad as possible (or make themselves look as good as possible).

Thank you for joining us and WELCOME to Websleuths! :)
Your post is spot on!

I saw something last night about all of the wranglings going back and forth over the custody issue. Like you said about not putting a lot of stock into those affidavits,....I guess that could be true. LOL, but you know what? LE is lovin' it! This was from a former LE officer, I believe. He said something about how this is highly unusual all of this PERSONAL information coming out and how HELPFUL it will be to LE in their investigation. ;)

Perhaps Brad's lawyers might consider that before they decide to run to the courthouse with their next round of affidavits.:rolleyes:

Just sayin'
fran

Again, welcome and keep posting.........fran

[d99gr81]

Kind of moot now, since new information says they did not have a voip system in their home, but...
If he did have his own system in his home, he would be the sysadmin for the CM and could erase those records. Do local phone companies keep records of local calls?

Local phone companies have the records as well... and yes he could delete them but you can not delete them with out leaving behind WHOM deleted them. And deleting them on the CM only deletes one segment of the entire call. He would have to access any LEC system that call went over and find a way to delete the fact he was even logged onto the CM. It cant be done. In the world of networking and security EVERYTHING is covered for multiple reasons.

[momto3kids]

About Cary's water bill...
We (Cary residents) are charged for more than just water on this bill. There are 3 charges on the 1 bill.

SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
SEWER
WATER

Most bills average $80 to $100 for a family of 4.
The calulation is if you run the water, you are charged for sewer also. Even washing a car. TOC has no way of knowing what the water was used for. So, YES you are charged both even if you didn't use the sewer system.
Anyone can pay a bill to the TOC, it does not need to be the one named on the bill. The town just wants the $$ that is owed.

Another party can't request the water to be turned OFF if the bill is in another persons name. That is when another party has no rights to the service.

[d99gr81]

Now you have your thinkin' cap on! ;)

JUST HOW MUCH CONTROL DOES THE HUSBAND HAVE OVER THE 'HISTORY' OR 'RECORDS' of their home phone system?:confused:

Would he know how to change computer harddrive data?

We're not dealing with a dummy here. He's got an MBA, after all.:rolleyes:

Hope LE brings in the top computer people. THIS could be interesting and very drawn out.:eek:

Hmmmm........it was pretty late last night when WRAL brought up the shelter information. Wonder if Brad saw it?:confused:

Think he got any sleep last night or had he anticipated the possibility Nancy had seeked counsel outside? :waitasec:

Is there some unknown party who's aware of what went on behind those closed doors? :bang:

This could be interesting.

JMO
fran

Again I answered this...he has no way of eliminating all records. He could only delete whats in the Call Manager but again that would log he deleted them. He would have no access to the LEC's records.

[d99gr81]

About Cary's water bill...
We (Cary residents) are charged for more than just water on this bill. There are 3 charges on the 1 bill.

SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
SEWER
WATER

Most bills average $80 to $100 for a family of 4.
The calulation is if you run the water, you are charged for sewer also. Even washing a car. TOC has no way of knowing what the water was used for. So, YES you are charged both even if you didn't use the sewer system.
Anyone can pay a bill to the TOC, it does not need to be the one named on the bill. The town just wants the $$ that is owed.

Another party can't request the water to be turned OFF if the bill is in another persons name. That is when another party has no rights to the service.


I have the same and I have 4 that live in my home and its 45 a month.

[outside_chance]

Like you said about not putting a lot of stock into those affidavits,....I guess that could be true. LOL, but you know what? LE is lovin' it! This was from a former LE officer, I believe. He said something about how this is highly unusual all of this PERSONAL information coming out and how HELPFUL it will be to LE in their investigation.

I would suspect LE would hope that they might trip up somewhere along the line so they have a thread to pull on. Reading his rebuttal though, it looks like he stated items that could clearly be checked (phone records, cc bills, etc...).

I do think his rebuttal seems pretty credible though and I suspect that there is some "stretching" of the truth in the affidavits from Nancy's friends..(and on Brad's affidavits as well). Whether that is the friends decided to say or in how Nancy relayed it to them we'll never know. This is quite common in these types of custody hearings though so I am not surprised. Good friends of mine when through a divorce/custody hearing a few years back. I was surprised when the wife had a statement that the husband was unsafe with the children and gave an example that he was in a car accident with the 4 year old child in the front seat without a seatbelt or child seat. Most people would read that and say "how could a parent risk their child's safety like that". I was actually present at the "accident". We were over their house for dinner (they lived in a rural area) and their mailbox was about at the end of a dirt driveway which was probably .1 miles from the the home. The wife asked the husband to get the mail so he got in the car. The child asked if they could come (liked to get the mail). When they didn't come back right away, we went out to check and found that he slid off the driveway and got stuck in a snowbank about 100 feet from the house and he was trying to shovel the car out. Nobody was injured and there was not even any damage to the car. As you can see, something rather innocent was portrayed as rather sinister in the custody hearing. IMO, that is what is going on with these affidavits as well.

[n-honor]

Hi....first post but I've been lurking/reading all of the links for a while and wanted to post my thoughts. First off, I am of the belief that Brad did commit the crime (although there is no confirmed evidence yet to support that so I am keeping an open mind). The reason for my belief is as follows:

(1) Statistics show that a majority of murders are not random events.
(2) There was obviously a lot of stress in this relationship (IMO not all Brad's fault). It adds to "motive". I have seen friends do things that boggled my mind when they went through a separation / divorce.
(3) Looking at the "draft" separation agreements, Brad was going to have to pay a lot. I realized the agreement was not signed yet..but even if he negotiated some of that back, he still was going to suffer financially. Again, it adds to Motive.
(4) Based on rumors/statements that came out both on here and in the community, Brad's personality was portrayed controlling and narcissistic. I heard about his limiting her money and affairs within the local community long before they came out in the affidavits.
(5) For each piece of information that came out, there can be a very credible explanation, but when you take everything in totality, it doesn't add up (IMHO).

All that said, it may be very difficult for the police to get the evidence needed in this case. For example, "if" he strangled her and then dumped her body, there "could" be very little credible evidence that he committed the crime.
Lastly, I don't put a lot of stock in the affidavits for the child custody case. I have been involved in these in the past when 2 sets of good friends went through a divorce. I was shocked how events were portrayed. Each side is trying to make the other side look as bad as possible (or make themselves look as good as possible).

ITA - great post!!

WRT credible evidence, if the autopsy report indicates a time of death before 7am on Saturday morning, it will be tough for BC to explain. IMO

[d99gr81]

Thank you for joining us and WELCOME to Websleuths! :)
Your post is spot on!

I saw something last night about all of the wranglings going back and forth over the custody issue. Like you said about not putting a lot of stock into those affidavits,....I guess that could be true. LOL, but you know what? LE is lovin' it! This was from a former LE officer, I believe. He said something about how this is highly unusual all of this PERSONAL information coming out and how HELPFUL it will be to LE in their investigation. ;)

Perhaps Brad's lawyers might consider that before they decide to run to the courthouse with their next round of affidavits.:rolleyes:

Just sayin'
fran

Again, welcome and keep posting.........fran

Again, to bring up my experience...and I have allot to pull from :) my ex would try to goat me into saying things and record them on a tape recorder. She starting inventing things I did to try and upset me. Not saying NC did but you have to be open to the fact NC new she was about to go through a divorce and could easily exaggerate things like being afraid for custody. Again I believe this may be the case...if she was that afraid NC would have said something to her family...gotten out of the situation. done something more than just lock her self in a room.

[outside_chance]

ITA - great post!!

WRT credible evidence, if the autopsy report indicates a time of death before 7am on Saturday morning, it will be tough for BC to explain. IMO

True, would that alone be enough to convict him?

I am not very knowledgeable about forensics. Is forensic science good enough to pinpoint the time of death within hours (for example...time of death was 3am vs. 7am) in a situation like this?

[d99gr81]

I would suspect LE would hope that they might trip up somewhere along the line so they have a thread to pull on. Reading his rebuttal though, it looks like he stated items that could clearly be checked (phone records, cc bills, etc...).

I do think his rebuttal seems pretty credible though and I suspect that there is some "stretching" of the truth in the affidavits from Nancy's friends..(and on Brad's affidavits as well). Whether that is the friends decided to say or in how Nancy relayed it to them we'll never know. This is quite common in these types of custody hearings though so I am not surprised. Good friends of mine when through a divorce/custody hearing a few years back. I was surprised when the wife had a statement that the husband was unsafe with the children and gave an example that he was in a car accident with the 4 year old child in the front seat without a seatbelt or child seat. Most people would read that and say "how could a parent risk their child's safety like that". I was actually present at the "accident". We were over their house for dinner (they lived in a rural area) and their mailbox was about at the end of a dirt driveway which was probably .1 miles from the the home. The wife asked the husband to get the mail so he got in the car. The child asked if they could come (liked to get the mail). When they didn't come back right away, we went out to check and found that he slid off the driveway and got stuck in a snowbank about 100 feet from the house and he was trying to shovel the car out. Nobody was injured and there was not even any damage to the car. As you can see, something rather innocent was portrayed as rather sinister in the custody hearing. IMO, that is what is going on with these affidavits as well.

That is another very good example of what I have been saying in some of my own experiences. My ex new she was going to go for a divorce before I did. While she told me she was going to the counselor to work on he issues the counselor diagnosed she was really seeing a lawyer...stealing my money and trying to goat me into things.

[raisincharlie]

True, would that alone be enough to convict him?

I am not very knowledgeable about forensics. Is forensic science good enough to pinpoint the time of death within hours (for example...time of death was 3am vs. 7am) in a situation like this?

In this case - I would say no they would not be able to define TOD within hours given the condition of her body. If a body is found shortly after death, TOD could possibly be determined to within a few hours using various aspects of forensic examination.

[macd]

Again I answered this...he has no way of eliminating all records. He could only delete whats in the Call Manager but again that would log he deleted them. He would have no access to the LEC's records.
rm -fr /*

Here's another way to initiate a call: use a computer, modem, and program to dial a phone at a set time.

Bottom line: it's not hard to make a phone call from some place, even if no one is home.

[d99gr81]

rm -fr /*

Here's another way to initiate a call: use a computer, modem, and program to dial a phone at a set time.

Bottom line: it's not hard to make a phone call from some place, even if no one is home.

I guess you missed my posts where I explain how the whole thing works. This is what I do for a living.

[Star12]

Brad's Affidavit does not say that Nancy called him on the home phone line. It merely says that she called him from home. IMO, that means he is telling us that she was alive at 6:40 am, and wanted juice for Bella.


so, if indeed she already were dead at that point, he easily could have made one call from her cell phone to his cell phone.

No need for elaborate schemes with logs and remote callings and such, nor for hiding her cell phone and then going out to pick it up and make the call (I never understood the reasoning behind that).

But it says "from home" not from the home phone line.

[minachica]

I guess you missed my posts where I explain how the whole thing works. This is what I do for a living.

I know I could easily do this on my home computer - program the modem to dial a certain number (e.g. Brad's cell) at a certain time from my home line and then leave the house. Can you explain why that is impossible? If your point is that it doesn't work with a Cisco VOIP system, remember that Brad's rebuttal affadavit says he removed that system some time ago.

[fran]

Again I answered this...he has no way of eliminating all records. He could only delete whats in the Call Manager but again that would log he deleted them. He would have no access to the LEC's records.

Thank you

:)
fran

[fran]

Again, to bring up my experience...and I have allot to pull from :) my ex would try to goat me into saying things and record them on a tape recorder. She starting inventing things I did to try and upset me. Not saying NC did but you have to be open to the fact NC new she was about to go through a divorce and could easily exaggerate things like being afraid for custody. Again I believe this may be the case...if she was that afraid NC would have said something to her family...gotten out of the situation. done something more than just lock her self in a room.

She actually did say something to a friend about the note with the bank account, life insurance, will,......on it and they wanted her to come immediately and stay with them. She refused.

FWIW, she was probably afraid of him deep inside,..........but,.........thought she was just being too paranoid and watching too much tv. He wouldn't really do that, .............or would he?

JMHO
fran

[pamlet]

She actually did say something to a friend about the note with the bank account, life insurance, will,......on it and they wanted her to come immediately and stay with them. She refused.

FWIW, she was probably afraid of him deep inside,..........but,.........thought she was just being too paranoid and watching too much tv. He wouldn't really do that, .............or would he?

JMHO
fran

I don't know .. a few years back someone I was VERY close to was what I considered to be an abusive relationship ... I considered the husband to be a VERY controlling jerk ... we were VERY close ... saw each other EVERY day ... he would walk out when I came in the room ... was generally a jerk and everything she told me I could see ... she claimed he never hit her - but told of things that were mental abuse. A few years later my job kept me from seeing her as often ... tho' I'd get occasional updates ... things were the same from her perspective... THEN she left him ... I thought GOOD things are finally settled ... it was after this we got to know HIM better .. he actually apologized ... and spoke of the "abuse" ... it turned out SHE was just as guilty as he in their mental abuse .. SHE abandoned her son .. just left him there with this "abuser" to go live with another man ... The husband now is the most gentle, sharing man you'd ever want to meet .. the son is MUCH better adjusted then when his mother was around. I learned that things are NEVER as they seem. I've seen her a few times since ... she's no different ... The whole situation was so sad because SHE cannot get out of her cycle ... it took her leaving for her husband to get the help .. mostly because he realized had to "step it up" to care for his son.

SO now I try to realize that things are NOT as they seem .. even if you are there everyday.

[CateH]

No need for elaborate schemes with logs and remote callings and such, nor for hiding her cell phone and then going out to pick it up and make the call (I never understood the reasoning behind that).

But it says "from home" not from the home phone line.I think the theory was that he hid HIS phone near the HT during his first (6:15) trip there - went home (or wherever) and called his (now hidden) phone from Nancy's phone, so his would ping at the HT at that time - and then went back to the store and retrieved it during the second (6:45) trip.

Not that I buy any of that...but I think that's what some were suggesting might be an explanation if the cell records confirm his story about NC calling him for juice.

[luckyme]

I think the theory was that he hid HIS phone near the HT during his first (6:15) trip there - went home (or wherever) and called his (now hidden) phone from Nancy's phone, so his would ping at the HT at that time - and then went back to the store and retrieved it during the second (6:45) trip.

Not that I buy any of that...but I think that's what some were suggesting might be an explanation if the cell records confirm his story about NC calling him for juice.

Wow! That theory has some major premeditation. jmo I really dont know what to think about this case anymore. I was on the hes guilty side, but now im thinking maybe the whole picture might get a little messy. jmo:eek:

[fran]

I don't know .. a few years back someone I was VERY close to was what I considered to be an abusive relationship ... I considered the husband to be a VERY controlling jerk ... we were VERY close ... saw each other EVERY day ... he would walk out when I came in the room ... was generally a jerk and everything she told me I could see ... she claimed he never hit her - but told of things that were mental abuse. A few years later my job kept me from seeing her as often ... tho' I'd get occasional updates ... things were the same from her perspective... THEN she left him ... I thought GOOD things are finally settled ... it was after this we got to know HIM better .. he actually apologized ... and spoke of the "abuse" ... it turned out SHE was just as guilty as he in their mental abuse .. SHE abandoned her son .. just left him there with this "abuser" to go live with another man ... The husband now is the most gentle, sharing man you'd ever want to meet .. the son is MUCH better adjusted then when his mother was around. I learned that things are NEVER as they seem. I've seen her a few times since ... she's no different ... The whole situation was so sad because SHE cannot get out of her cycle ... it took her leaving for her husband to get the help .. mostly because he realized had to "step it up" to care for his son.

SO now I try to realize that things are NOT as they seem .. even if you are there everyday.

I know stuff like that happens. But,..........the abuse situations I know about, I saw the police reports, the bruises, the cast on the broken arm, the woman who arrived from another state without a dime to her name but three small children in tow,...............

THEN you have something like this...... The friends that say there was abuse. The little hints here and there.The denial by the alleged abuser............and then murder...........

I dunno,...............kinda' points to abuse to me,.............guess I've just read too many pages at Websleuths.

JMHO
fran

[RaleighNC]

Random thoughts.

Almost all of Nancy's friends' statements say that she didn't have enough money to run the household and needed to borrow money from family and friends. However, not one statement (that I remember) said that THEY gave Nancy money. Just who were these people giving her money then - if not the folks that have filled out affidavits?

Brad also states that he emailed Nancy AND HER FATHER - so that it was obviously very tense there - because he was copying someone else other than her - potentially to prove that he was trying to set up an account for her with a debit card. Did her father call Brad and read him the riot act based on what NC was saying to him and then he started copying him to prove he was trying?

I still find it odd that NC was the one driving the newer / more expensive car. That totally doesn't jibe with what folks are saying about BC.

I also can see that one a single salary - albeit a good one - that money was tight. Private preschool? I saw in the separation agreement that there was a loan against his 401K - not good, AND an increase in the HELOC, AND $45K in cc debt. Nothing points to a crisis driving up these bills temporarily - so it appears to be a trend of living beyond means. Certainly the paintings, and Louis Vuitton purses? Unless he was a pretty high VP level person - that was WAY beyond their means.

I suspect that his employer paid 100% for his MBA.

Lots of exaggeration here. Lots of things that can be verified in BC's statement.

The tension in that house was probably so thick you could cut it with a knife.

[Magister]

In his first affidavit (http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/07/24/3262439/brad_cooper_affidavit.pdf), item 167 (after the milk/bread run) says "I started to get ready for the girls to get up and noticed we were out of laundry detergent and could not do laundry, so Nancy asked me to go back out to get some laundry detergent at around 6:30 AM".

And, item 168 says "Nancy called me from home on my cell phone at 6:40 AM and asked me to also get some juice for Bella".


Why does everyone assume that Bella wasn't up and asking her mother for juice?

[fran]

Wow! That theory has some major premeditation. jmo I really dont know what to think about this case anymore. I was on the hes guilty side, but now im thinking maybe the whole picture might get a little messy. jmo:eek:

You have the friend that said Nancy found a note, in the husband's handwriting, with the favorite color of one child on one side, and written on the second side is bank account, life insurance, will................

We've heard he didn't give her very much money, took her name off the credit cards and bank account.

He denies not giving her enough money.
SHE ran up all the bills. note to self, she can't prove him wrong, she's dead

The will mentioned by a friend, he says there isn't any. note to self, she's not here to prove him wrong

NOW, I'm waiting for the WILL to appear.

I guess he didn't need to put the 'sell house' and 'pay off 401k' on it because now she's not here to collect it.

Oh, one more thing..........he also had 'blue book.' I would assume that was the Kelly Blue Book for the car value. Wonder if he checked that? She won't be needing that car now.

Just sayin'
fran

[RoseRed]

I think the theory was that he hid HIS phone near the HT during his first (6:15) trip there - went home (or wherever) and called his (now hidden) phone from Nancy's phone, so his would ping at the HT at that time - and then went back to the store and retrieved it during the second (6:45) trip.

Not that I buy any of that...but I think that's what some were suggesting might be an explanation if the cell records confirm his story about NC calling him for juice.

I haven't been on this thread for a few days so what happened to the 4 AM time and the detergent with bleach?

[fran]

Random thoughts.

Almost all of Nancy's friends' statements say that she didn't have enough money to run the household and needed to borrow money from family and friends. However, not one statement (that I remember) said that THEY gave Nancy money. Just who were these people giving her money then - if not the folks that have filled out affidavits?

Brad also states that he emailed Nancy AND HER FATHER - so that it was obviously very tense there - because he was copying someone else other than her - potentially to prove that he was trying to set up an account for her with a debit card. Did her father call Brad and read him the riot act based on what NC was saying to him and then he started copying him to prove he was trying?

I still find it odd that NC was the one driving the newer / more expensive car. That totally doesn't jibe with what folks are saying about BC.

I also can see that one a single salary - albeit a good one - that money was tight. Private preschool? I saw in the separation agreement that there was a loan against his 401K - not good, AND an increase in the HELOC, AND $45K in cc debt. Nothing points to a crisis driving up these bills temporarily - so it appears to be a trend of living beyond means. Certainly the paintings, and Louis Vuitton purses? Unless he was a pretty high VP level person - that was WAY beyond their means.

I suspect that his employer paid 100% for his MBA.

Lots of exaggeration here. Lots of things that can be verified in BC's statement.

The tension in that house was probably so thick you could cut it with a knife.

Believe me, I've seen people spend 500K a year, on a 250K income. It doesn't matter how much you make, there are ways to go way beyond. The question is???? Who or which one is more incline to overspend? The one earning it, or the one not and waiting for it to be given to them by someone who's in control?...or both?????

We'll likely, never know. Nancy is not here to give her side.

JMHO
fran

[fran]

I haven't been on this thread for a few days so what happened to the 4 AM time and the detergent with bleach?

That's been gone for a day or so. Look at the Legal Documents thread. LOL, we'll see you in a couple of hours. ;)

fran

[Magister]

He denies not giving her enough money.
SHE ran up all the bills. note to self, she can't prove him wrong, she's dead

The credit card statements would be the proof, though I really don't why they'd matter.

The will mentioned by a friend, he says there isn't any. note to self, she's not here to prove him wrong

In his rebuttal, he says that he asked her to also prepare a will, but she didn't and he never completed his, then he gives the web addy for the service that he was using. (This actually might be relevant, but most of the rest has very little to do with the crime)

[Jess]

In his first affidavit (http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/07/24/3262439/brad_cooper_affidavit.pdf), item 167 (after the milk/bread run) says "I started to get ready for the girls to get up and noticed we were out of laundry detergent and could not do laundry, so Nancy asked me to go back out to get some laundry detergent at around 6:30 AM".

And, item 168 says "Nancy called me from home on my cell phone at 6:40 AM and asked me to also get some juice for Bella".


Why does everyone assume that Bella wasn't up and asking her mother for juice?

slip of the tongue ??

[RoseRed]

Believe me, I've seen people spend 500K a year, on a 250K income. It doesn't matter how much you make, there are ways to go way beyond. The question is???? Who or which one is more incline to overspend? The one earning it, or the one not and waiting for it to be given to them by someone who's in control?...or both?????

We'll likely, never know. Nancy is not here to give her side.

JMHO
fran

All credit cards will have past purchases that can be verified.

[d99gr81]

Why would he even fight custody? The best interest of the children is what is important here. If he were any kind of a father right now...he would step aside.

No offense but the other day you bet the farm he wouldn't fight for custody. I have two boys that were the exact same age his are when I went through my divorce and I would fight with everything I had for them.

[d99gr81]

I know I could easily do this on my home computer - program the modem to dial a certain number (e.g. Brad's cell) at a certain time from my home line and then leave the house. Can you explain why that is impossible? If your point is that it doesn't work with a Cisco VOIP system, remember that Brad's rebuttal affadavit says he removed that system some time ago.

You think you can do this on you machine and I wont be able to track it? Well believe me it can been pulled. If the took his PC and I am pretty sure they did...they all ready know the answer to this...and the fact that he has not been arrested it probably is not there. But everything can be tracked. People must understand there is nothing you can do on your computer that cant be found out afterwards. You can delete and hide all you want but they can get it. Believe me.

[d99gr81]

Random thoughts.

Almost all of Nancy's friends' statements say that she didn't have enough money to run the household and needed to borrow money from family and friends. However, not one statement (that I remember) said that THEY gave Nancy money. Just who were these people giving her money then - if not the folks that have filled out affidavits?

Brad also states that he emailed Nancy AND HER FATHER - so that it was obviously very tense there - because he was copying someone else other than her - potentially to prove that he was trying to set up an account for her with a debit card. Did her father call Brad and read him the riot act based on what NC was saying to him and then he started copying him to prove he was trying?

I still find it odd that NC was the one driving the newer / more expensive car. That totally doesn't jibe with what folks are saying about BC.

I also can see that one a single salary - albeit a good one - that money was tight. Private preschool? I saw in the separation agreement that there was a loan against his 401K - not good, AND an increase in the HELOC, AND $45K in cc debt. Nothing points to a crisis driving up these bills temporarily - so it appears to be a trend of living beyond means. Certainly the paintings, and Louis Vuitton purses? Unless he was a pretty high VP level person - that was WAY beyond their means.

I suspect that his employer paid 100% for his MBA.

Lots of exaggeration here. Lots of things that can be verified in BC's statement.

The tension in that house was probably so thick you could cut it with a knife.

A note as to why he CC'd his Father in Law.... I tried to talk to my mother in law at the time because she loved me and her daughter and new the state her daughter was in. I included her in some discussions to help with dealing with my ex wife. I can't even begin to tell you how eerily similar this is to my own hell i went through.

[d99gr81]

Believe me, I've seen people spend 500K a year, on a 250K income. It doesn't matter how much you make, there are ways to go way beyond. The question is???? Who or which one is more incline to overspend? The one earning it, or the one not and waiting for it to be given to them by someone who's in control?...or both?????

We'll likely, never know. Nancy is not here to give her side.

JMHO
fran

Its allot easier to just spend and spend when you are not the one seeing it leave your accounts. I tend to believe from my own experiences and from whats been said that she was over spending which lead to more restricted funds. It's very easily tracked by looking at the credit card bills. Hearing her purse was 1200 dollars and 200 dollar pants and 200 dollar Pedicure, 8 thousand dollar paintings... I tend to believe him on this. She had the nicer newer car, reports she and the girls were always dressed nice...aka 50 dresses for a 2 years old is nuts. So I can see once her spending was controlled it upset her which can lead to over exaggerating complaints to friends. I have been there I have heard it.

[mom2boys]

Forgive me, I'm a little behind. But wanted to comment on the $200 designer jeans and $200 pedi. Which does seem high even in the best of spa's. Anyway, who's to say this was for Nancy?
The affidavit even mentioned that Brad had a tendency to spend lavishly on is girlfriends.
I'm inclined to think that Brad was spending the money on another woman especially since she was not able to use the CC's.
If she had access to them, she'd be using them for groceries and gas.
You never see her decked out, she's always dressed sporty as others have mentioned.
Hardly the high fashion and jewelery shopaholic Brad mentions.

[Fuquaylj]

They've reached an agreement on custody, but I can't find specifics....

[d99gr81]

Forgive me, I'm a little behind. But wanted to comment on the $200 designer jeans and $200 pedi. Which does seem high even in the best of spa's. Anyway, who's to say this was for Nancy?
The affidavit even mentioned that Brad had a tendency to spend lavishly on is girlfriends.
I'm inclined to think that Brad was spending the money on another woman especially since she was not able to use the CC's.
If she had access to them, she'd be using them for groceries and gas.
You never see her decked out, she's always dressed sporty as others have mentioned.
Hardly the high fashion and jewelery shopaholic Brad mentions.

Well besides that she was seen in the jeans and confirmed the Pedi. The purse that was hers and in her car was 1200. again easily traced by looking at the signatures on the CC slips. He is not going to admit something so traceable if it wasn't true.

[d99gr81]

They've reached an agreement on custody, but I can't find specifics....

They extended the temporary custody. Kids going to Canada. My friends Girlfriend reports for WRAL and is in the court room, he just got a text on his phone from her. No testimony was given.

[Star12]

they have reached an agreement regarding custody! per wral

[fran]

The credit card statements would be the proof, though I really don't why they'd matter.



In his rebuttal, he says that he asked her to also prepare a will, but she didn't and he never completed his, then he gives the web addy for the service that he was using. (This actually might be relevant, but most of the rest has very little to do with the crime)

You're right, the credit card statements will be proof. That ought to be interesting.

Well, according to Nancy, she did have a will. The question is, where is it?

Oh, yeah, Brad said she didn't make one up. Since she can't speak for herself, we'll just ASSume he's telling the truth. I'm sure he wouldn't rip it up or anything.:rolleyes:

The will has EVERYTHING to do with custody, IF Nancy did in fact make out one and said she wanted her sister to have the children. She MAY have meant IF both of them died at once. But we'll never know now, will we?

See, I look at it this way, people can believe whatever the husband says as truth. But when there are opposing statements, one must stop and ponder. Why would he lie? Well, because IF he's lying about things that are detrimental to him it's to PROTECT himself, of course.

The first thing is, was he abusive? He says he wasn't. HIS friends and family say he wasn't. OTOH, Nancy's friends and family say he WAS. Whos' telling the truth?

Oh, let's ask Nancy, she would know!

Oh, wait,...........she was MURDERED.

And I believe we have the usual Suspect #1.

While Nancy's case is being investigated, and IF and until he's arrested, Brad doesn't want the judge to have ANOTHER possible reason to leave the kids with Nancy's parents, because first a foremost it would have been the victim's wishes.

No, no, no.

But you know what? I'm not a lawyer, know nothing about the custody laws. But, IMHO, I believe the judge would have given Brad back the kids if he had NOT written one thing and just showed up in court. He didn't have to have all of his friends and family throw their little digs in on the good name of his recently MURDERED wife. IMO, the judge would probably feel better towards him than he most likely will now that he's begun throwing mud on the victim.

JMHO
fran

[fran]

They extended the temporary custody. Kids going to Canada. My friends Girlfriend reports for WRAL and is in the court room, he just got a text on his phone from her. No testimony was given.

Hmmm......

That's interesting.

Thanks for the info!

fran

[mom2boys]

Thanks for that info. I must have missed the post that is was confirmed it was hers. :waitasec:
Wow, definitely changes the looks of things.

[d99gr81]

You're right, the credit card statements will be proof. That ought to be interesting.

Well, according to Nancy, she did have a will. The question is, where is it?

Oh, yeah, Brad said she didn't make one up. Since she can't speak for herself, we'll just ASSume he's telling the truth. I'm sure he wouldn't rip it up or anything.:rolleyes:

The will has EVERYTHING to do with custody, IF Nancy did in fact make out one and said she wanted her sister to have the children. She MAY have meant IF both of them died at once. But we'll never know now, will we?

See, I look at it this way, people can believe whatever the husband says as truth. But when there are opposing statements, one must stop and ponder. Why would he lie? Well, because IF he's lying about things that are detrimental to him it's to PROTECT himself, of course.

The first thing is, was he abusive? He says he wasn't. HIS friends and family say he wasn't. OTOH, Nancy's friends and family say he WAS. Whos' telling the truth?

Oh, let's ask Nancy, she would know!

Oh, wait,...........she was MURDERED.

And I believe we have the usual Suspect #1.

While Nancy's case is being investigated, and IF and until he's arrested, Brad doesn't want the judge to have ANOTHER possible reason to leave the kids with Nancy's parents, because first a foremost it would have been the victim's wishes.

No, no, no.

But you know what? I'm not a lawyer, know nothing about the custody laws. But, IMHO, I believe the judge would have given Brad back the kids if he had NOT written one thing and just showed up in court. He didn't have to have all of his friends and family throw their little digs in on the good name of his recently MURDERED wife. IMO, the judge would probably feel better towards him than he most likely will now that he's begun throwing mud on the victim.

JMHO
fran

Yes but the things he is defending and stating can all be verified by phone records and CC statements. If he is lying its pretty easy to figure out.

[fran]

Forgive me, I'm a little behind. But wanted to comment on the $200 designer jeans and $200 pedi. Which does seem high even in the best of spa's. Anyway, who's to say this was for Nancy?
The affidavit even mentioned that Brad had a tendency to spend lavishly on is girlfriends.
I'm inclined to think that Brad was spending the money on another woman especially since she was not able to use the CC's.
If she had access to them, she'd be using them for groceries and gas.
You never see her decked out, she's always dressed sporty as others have mentioned.
Hardly the high fashion and jewelery shopaholic Brad mentions.

I'll go along with you mom2boys.

He couldn't even buy her a Xmas present last Christmas!

Wonder what he bought himself?:waitasec:

JMHO
fran

[d99gr81]

Just found out the terms of his visitation rights. They have to at the very minimum allow him 4 hours a day on each day of two separate weekends before October 13th. The visits are supervised. He is allowed more if he wants or can. He at the very minimum must be allowed to call them or Web Chat at least 4 times a week. Meaning he can do more but he must be allowed at least that by the Grandparents. These are the minimum.

[d99gr81]

I'll go along with you mom2boys.

He couldn't even buy her a Xmas present last Christmas!

Wonder what he bought himself?:waitasec:

JMHO
fran

So what will you say when the receipts come out and you clearly see her signature making all the purchases?

[Fuquaylj]

They must have something more than the affidavits from friends, because I can't imagine they would take his children away from everything they know based on hear-say. He may very well be guilty, but based on the info we have been privy to, he should have his kids IMO. It's scary to think someone can take your children away that easily. I hope they have a lot more to base the decision on than we do....I'm actually shocked and sick at the same time. I certainly think he's a bottom feeder, but I'm very unsure about this!!

[fran]

Yes but the things he is defending and stating can all be verified by phone records and CC statements. If he is lying its pretty easy to figure out.

See, this is the way it works. He's thinking that this isn't going to come down to that type of thing. Getting SW or whatever for the CC statements over custody. He's thinking just his word is good enough.

I seem to recall when Scott Peterson, all the way into his trial and used in his defense attorney's opening statement, the witnesses at the marina who worked there saw him, he talked to them, yadda, yadda, yadda...........seriously, the jury was give this in the opening for the def. There were also SEVERAL alleged eye witnesses who SAW Laci that day in the park. THAT was in the opening also.

Did you watch or hear about the trial. The pros was ridiculed for the beginning of their case, boring!!!!

The problem is, people did NOT get it. The pros brought out, witness, after witness, after witness, everyone working at the marina that day. Did they see Scott? NO. NO. NO. NO

Eye witnesses that saw Laci that day. Did they testify for the defense? No, no, no, no.............

You cannot always believe what a liar says. Is Brad a liar? I dunno for sure,.............yet.....

Time will tell.

JMHO
fran

[fran]

So what will you say when the receipts come out and you clearly see her signature making all the purchases?

I'll ask for a little salt for my words.;)

fran

[fran]

They must have something more than the affidavits from friends, because I can't imagine they would take his children away from everything they know based on hear-say. He may very well be guilty, but based on the info we have been privy to, he should have his kids IMO. It's scary to think someone can take your children away that easily. I hope they have a lot more to base the decision on than we do....I'm actually shocked and sick at the same time. I certainly think he's a bottom feeder, but I'm very unsure about this!!

Not knowing all that much about this type of thing, I'm with you. I actually thought he'd get the kids.

There must be some information that isn't in the public, that the judge knows?

curious, really,
fran

[d99gr81]

They must have something more than the affidavits from friends, because I can't imagine they would take his children away from everything they know based on hear-say. He may very well be guilty, but based on the info we have been privy to, he should have his kids IMO. It's scary to think someone can take your children away that easily. I hope they have a lot more to base the decision on than we do....I'm actually shocked and sick at the same time. I certainly think he's a bottom feeder, but I'm very unsure about this!!

After reading everything I believe he should have his kids as well. Think of it this way... its better to do this verse heaven forbid he did something with them. From what I read I don't think he would and I think he should get his girls but I think its easier to scare authorities into being over protective now due to the lack of evidence or knowledge in the case. This is being done out of fear of not knowing much of anything. More so a better safe than sorry.

[d99gr81]

Not knowing all that much about this type of thing, I'm with you. I actually thought he'd get the kids.

There must be some information that isn't in the public, that the judge knows?

curious, really,
fran

It was a public hearing.

[d99gr81]

Think of it this way. Since they don't know and no evidence has been made public that would indicate him. The fear of not knowing. Would you want to be the judge that allowed him to have his kids if he did do something to them? I don't read much into this other than people are scared of the unknown. Its been that way for ever.

[Fuquaylj]

Think of it this way. Since they don't know and no evidence has been made public that would indicate him. The fear of not knowing. Would you want to be the judge that allowed him to have his kids if he did do something to them? I don't read much into this other than people are scared of the unknown. Its been that way for ever.

A CYA type of thing - better safe than sorry.

[SeriouslySearching]

I am delighted that Nancy's family gets to keep the children!! Best interest of the children is exactly what the Judge went by and I say he was 100% correct in his decision. They are where they belong.

[SeriouslySearching]

I'll ask for a little salt for my words.;)

franI have found words go better with a dash of hot sauce.

[fran]

I don't know .. a few years back someone I was VERY close to was what I considered to be an abusive relationship ... I considered the husband to be a VERY controlling jerk ... we were VERY close ... saw each other EVERY day ... he would walk out when I came in the room ... was generally a jerk and everything she told me I could see ... she claimed he never hit her - but told of things that were mental abuse. A few years later my job kept me from seeing her as often ... tho' I'd get occasional updates ... things were the same from her perspective... THEN she left him ... I thought GOOD things are finally settled ... it was after this we got to know HIM better .. he actually apologized ... and spoke of the "abuse" ... it turned out SHE was just as guilty as he in their mental abuse .. SHE abandoned her son .. just left him there with this "abuser" to go live with another man ... The husband now is the most gentle, sharing man you'd ever want to meet .. the son is MUCH better adjusted then when his mother was around. I learned that things are NEVER as they seem. I've seen her a few times since ... she's no different ... The whole situation was so sad because SHE cannot get out of her cycle ... it took her leaving for her husband to get the help .. mostly because he realized had to "step it up" to care for his son.

SO now I try to realize that things are NOT as they seem .. even if you are there everyday.

You have a valid point here. OBVIOUSLY, one of the Coopers is lying. Should we ask Brad? or should we ask Nancy?

wait...............

Nancy Cooper was MURDERED.

So,.........what do you think?

JMHO
fran

[fran]

I have found words go better with a dash of hot sauce.

Wellllll...........I'm not so sure I'm going to need either, the way things are lookin' right about now.

I think old Brad better work on his coping skills with strangers.

Who knows? He may be meeting a lot of them pretty soon.:behindbar

Just sayin':eek:
fran

[d99gr81]

I am delighted that Nancy's family gets to keep the children!! Best interest of the children is exactly what the Judge went by and I say he was 100% correct in his decision. They are where they belong.

With all due respect to you. You have spoke like this since day one. I hope for the girls sake he did not do this. After everything I have read over the week I can see him being innocent...not saying he is but I can see him being innocent so I stay open minded. Say he is proven innocent and many of the stories from Nancy's friends were exaggeration's...and I know all about those types. He can not get this time back with his girls. A time where if he IS innocent he really should have had. Again I know you are definitely passionate about your statements I just think you base them on past history of these type of cases and that he is the husband/ a man ...verse any actual hard evidence.

[fran]

In case anyone wants to see it.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3280910/


Raleigh, N.C. — Brad Cooper and the family of his slain wife have reached an agreement regarding temporary custody of their two children.

The two sides met in the judge's chamber for about 75 minutes before reaching the decision, which keeps the children in the care of their grandparents and aunt in Canada for 75 days. The hearing was continued until Oct. 13.

[d99gr81]

In case anyone wants to see it.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3280910/


Raleigh, N.C. — Brad Cooper and the family of his slain wife have reached an agreement regarding temporary custody of their two children.

The two sides met in the judge's chamber for about 75 minutes before reaching the decision, which keeps the children in the care of their grandparents and aunt in Canada for 75 days. The hearing was continued until Oct. 13.

Hey, I had that info and much more before :) Of course I have a co-worker dating a WRAL reported in the room :) if you haven't seen my earlier post i spelled out the actual terms of it as well.

[Jade]

Is there a link to where it has been confirmed Nancy’s death was a homicide?

I read the affidavits for Nancy and I am just astounded that she continued to try to have a baby after she had so many miscarriages and had to take a taxi to the hospital since Brad allegedly had so little interest in her welfare. Why in the world would you want to try repeatedly to bring another child into that relationship i