PDA

View Full Version : Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #12



Pages : 1 2 [3]

jilly
07-30-2008, 01:09 PM
Runnermom - Thank you for sharing your story. Relieved that you're still with us!:blowkiss:

fran
07-30-2008, 01:10 PM
Fran

I would like to ask a simple question. Do you believe 100% that was said in all the affidavit's of Nancy's friends? even 75% what about 50% do you believe what Nancy went around telling her friends?

I believe 100% of what Nancy's family and friends have put in their affidavit. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT

Before everyone jumps all over me, let me explain my reasoning.

Nancy's friends have absolutely NOTHING to gain by coming forward and telling their story, Nancy's story to them. So, whatever the friends have stated, I DO believe that what they state was either actually witnessed by them, or TOLD to them by Nancy.

Do I believe everything Nancy said. Well, I don't know because this, to the most part, went on BEHIND closed doors, across the country from where I am, and I don't know anyone involved in this case.

BUT...........Nancy is dead, Brad is alive. Brad was the last to be seen with Nancy. Brad is perfect, just ask him (imo, that, to me, tells me all I need to know about Brad),

Nancy is dead and Brad will tell you EVERYTHING that she did wrong while she WAS alive.

Why?
Why does he want us to think poorly of his poor murdered wife?
Nancy is dead.
Brad survived.
Nancy told her friend she was physically afraid of Brad.
Nancy is dead.

Which one do you believe?

fran

PS.....ask yourself, why would Nancy's friends go to all of this TROUBLE, defending their dead friend, telling HER side, speaking up to what they believe happened, what they KNOW in their HEART, when it is going to cause trouble in their life? Why would they lie about such an important thing? Why? This is real life. These are real, living people. They are NOT charactors in a book, play, or film...Real people with real lives, children, home, family, friends, church, schools, j o b s.............friends, neighborhood friends..........and NOW exNeighborhood friends.

Why would they say what they did IF it were NOT the truth. IMHO, they wouldn't. period

PPS....When this case began, a poster, don't remember who, we still knew absolutely nothing about the state of the marriage of the victim and NOT suspect, we KNEW ZILCH.....this particular poster, (you know who you are) said this case will tear that neighborhood apart.......don't know if EXACT words, but that's what I got out of it.

NOW you can see WHY that particular poster said what they did.........:( fran

jilly
07-30-2008, 01:12 PM
This may have already been mentioned, but just because LE said it was a LV purse, doesn't mean it was authentic. There are TONS of fakes out there, so let's not jump to conclusions (or confusions!!!) on that subject. We do not know (yet) who ran up the CC bills. The evidence will show that.....IMO, of course.

I see your point Fairy but in this particular family, from what I've read, I don't think they would have had any knock offs. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Brad had bought it for her.

gritguy
07-30-2008, 01:13 PM
Reading the rebuttal affidavit of BC was interesting.

To me, her friends overplayed their hands in several instances and BC has been able to come back and show that their stories are overblown. Of course the only story that will really matter is the one that gets told to the jury. But at first there was the temptation, out of sympathy and trying to make sense of this I suppose, for people to fit Nancy into the sweet innocent controlled victim mold and Brad as the complete uncaring monster mold. Given that they were both real people, this would never turn out to be the full true picture. Yet Nancy didn't owe anyone being perfect as a pre-condition to our community's shared sorrow for losing her.

There will be negative things about Nancy. That's irritating to see because of the horror of what happened to her, but that's the way it is. It will also turn out that BC was probably not constantly as bad as people wanted to believe he was. Neither of those things has anything to do with his possible guilt.

What struck me beyond the mudslinging on all sides was the absolute lack of sympathy or empathy that BC displayed for his slain wife, the one he had earlier said he wanted to stay married to. I think if I were writing all that, I would include something in there about the family's common loss, and his anger at the person who stole Nancy's life, and his daughters' mother. I cannot understand being coldly argumentative about your wife's exaggerations, even if true, only days after her murder.

I am somewhat afraid that the investigation will continue to make unspecified progress but yet never end; however, I still have faith and some confidence that this case will be solved.

reddress58
07-30-2008, 01:15 PM
I know, work is really in the way :) The nerve really!

Just a couple of points and some questions I have. One for the VoIP guy. Can you have a Cisco phone service? My father works for Cisco and he has everything paid for by Cisco pretty much. His VERY high speed data line, his cell phone and his VOIP service. His VoIP service is from Vonage, but he uses Cisco phones. Oh wait, I think I know what you mean. Like he would have the whole system in the house? Like the old style Nortel systems where you have a whole system in the house? Why would one do that though? If they just had VoIP, I would assume that they still had either Time Warner service (hence the Time Warner subpoena) or Vonage. I am assuming Time Warner though since they were indeed subpoenaed.

Ok, I think I know what you meant now. Typing it out helped! LOL

One other point, I don't think he lied about the training. He did not register for the Ironman and he had not updated his blog since January, so where was the lie there that he hadn't been training? I am confused unless there are blog posts I had missed. The friends I have who are techies that train update their training blogs pretty regularly if nothing but to keep note of their times and the like. Especially if they have the data recorders from Nike and such which I think someone said Brad did purchase or have.

Just for the sake of discussion, I want to repeat that I am from Cary, have multiple family members employed at Cisco (and others formerly employed at Cisco), am a degreed computer scientist who graduated from NC State and I am married to a "phone" guy, though he isn't real deep in the Cisco IP phones.

And just to reiterate someone else's statement. Your VoIP line has nothing to do with telecommuting. That is your high speed data line. Two separate things though many people around here have both provided by Time Warner.
If you read his affidavit it says he hadn't trained since June, 2007. Yet his next goal was the Lake Placid Ironman July 2008 (which was this month). I also know firsthand that this particular event fills up the same day it is offered online! He HAD to be registered for it in January when he wrote his last entry. It was already filled up in July 2007. Also you'll read in his training log that he was back up to a six mile run and talking about meseauring his body fat or something. That is what I call training in January 2008...which he said he had not done since June 2007!

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 01:16 PM
It's there. I just read it. On the Quotes thread.

Thank you! I found it.:)

EntreNous
07-30-2008, 01:17 PM
Fran, you are so right on! I totally agree with you. You understand the nuances which is so, so important. Many people miss those.

SleuthyGal
07-30-2008, 01:19 PM
Hyperbole aside, and believing that Brad is the culprit in this horrendous crime... it now comes down to what can be proven in a court of law, assuming enough evidence is amassed to even qualify to take this case to trial.

And therein lies the mystery for us sleuthers. We don't know what LE has on the guy, aside from the obvious things such as the contentious separation, etc. The affidavits give us some good clues into the state of things in that rel'p, but it's not enough.

I am waiting anxiously to learn what REAL evidence might exist--the kind of evidence that would allow the DA to feel confident about proceeding forward with a murder charge.

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 01:24 PM
I'm not saying that he didn't do it, I'm just saying that we don't need to string him up by his toes and go on about how horrible he is until we know all the facts and have the evidence that beyond a shadow of a doubt says that he killed his wife.

jmo

cassadinechik
07-30-2008, 01:25 PM
Ok, I guess just judging from the people I know who train and use a blog, this to me looked like an attempt in January to try to say he was going to recommit and then he never did. Just because he was running wouldn't mean he was training. But I guess it just depends on how you look at it? Had he been there before? Here is a link to a story where if you have been at the event prior you can register the day before - http://www.fitness4sports.com/gonna-try-to-register-for-lake-placid-ironman.html. There were also numerous hits where they were going to reopen registration for these things for an additional two hour window here or there. So I don't think you have to be registered a year before hand.

I guess for me it is not a lie. And I guess whether he was controlling, selfish, ego centric, a big spender, training for a marathon and all the other horrid things he might have been, that still doesn't mean he did her in. Which, I have no idea if he did or not, but none of it proves a thing for me.

fran
07-30-2008, 01:26 PM
I too would like to thank the posters who have shared their stories. You have no idea how you stories effect those of us who read them. They seriously make me cry. This is why I become so involved in these types of cases, why I'm so, ok, mouthy once I'm confident I know who did it.

I have never been a victim of domestic violence, thank goodness. I was one of the lucky ones. But, I've known SEVERAL victims. I've known victims who did it, over, and over, and over, and over again. It was like she was a magnet, or she was magnetized to towards them. I guess it's a personality trait, to her detriment, I might add.

I've seen an abusive relationship develope, slowly over a period of time. NOTHING prior to marriage. I was there for the wedding and my four daughters were brides maids. We saw them off on their honeymoon and their return to buy their dream home. All you expect at the beinning of two people who are in love..................But, all good things come to an end. The constant phone calls when your somewhere else start out as cute, he can't live without you............and.....................I saw this same love story turned horror film, go on for 8 years......911 calls, leave her 100 miles from home on the side of the road in the middle of nowhere, no money, nothing..........oh....yeah, the animal cruelty goes in there too, but you gotta watch those dogs you try to kill and fail, because when you've reached the abyss, and decide it's time to do away with wifey, she's made a friend and,....he's no friend of your's as you found out in the midst of the act of attempted murder.

Ok....sorry, got carried away.............

Bless all of you survivors! :blowkiss:

YOU are an inspiratation and an example of what all of the abused victims could be.

There is life AFTER..........Just RUN and seek HELP.......and even if you can't find help, you don't need someone who will abuse you. They are just so NOT worth your life!

JMHO
fran

PS...also a note to all survivors that have shared their stories within these pages,........you do realize you've gotten your revenge against your abuser. Your 'revenge' is your happiness. A happiness with someone who appreciates YOU for YOU. Good job!

:blowkiss:

fran

raisincharlie
07-30-2008, 01:28 PM
They have apparently gotten a warrant and seach his office at Cisco. Here is the updated link from WRAL. Sorry if this has already been posted. Just trying to keep up with all the posts.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3302342/


Thanks IMHO63

I was curious why only the N & O reported applying for a hearing on the issue of the warrants. It appears from this that WRAL is also involved.

Hope they win their issue but more so hoping the warrants stay sealed so that justice may proceed.

SleuthyGal
07-30-2008, 01:32 PM
I'm not saying that he didn't do it, I'm just saying that we don't need to string him up by his toes and go on about how horrible he is until we know all the facts and have the evidence that beyond a shadow of a doubt says that he killed his wife.

I'll settle for "beyond a reasonable doubt," which is the standard used in criminal trials. :)

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 01:32 PM
Here's another possibility...Do you think someone was hired to kill her?

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 01:33 PM
I'll settle for "beyond a reasonable doubt," which is the standard used in criminal trials. :)

*LOL* sounds good to me

:crazy:

SleuthyGal
07-30-2008, 01:34 PM
Here's another possibility...Do you think someone was hired to kill her?

no I don't.

fran
07-30-2008, 01:34 PM
Hyperbole aside, and believing that Brad is the culprit in this horrendous crime... it now comes down to what can be proven in a court of law, assuming enough evidence is amassed to even qualify to take this case to trial.

And therein lies the mystery for us sleuthers. We don't know what LE has on the guy, aside from the obvious things such as the contentious separation, etc. The affidavits give us some good clues into the state of things in that rel'p, but it's not enough.

I am waiting anxiously to learn what REAL evidence might exist--the kind of evidence that would allow the DA to feel confident about proceeding forward with a murder charge.

Like they say, "The devil is in the details."

It's the details that IF he did this crime, will get him caught.

He has an MBA, in I'm assuming computer science or something related to it.

He's NOT trained or formally educated to commit murder, or ANY 'crime.'

But............LE, the forensic chemists, the ME, the DA, the judges, they ARE formally trained to CATCH criminals.

IF he did this crime, I do NOT think he's an even match for those who's j o b is to catch the bad guys.

JMHO
fran

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 01:37 PM
allright...I'm going back to just reading...my thoughts don't come out right *LOL*

raisincharlie
07-30-2008, 01:38 PM
Reading the rebuttal affidavit of BC was interesting.

To me, her friends overplayed their hands in several instances and BC has been able to come back and show that their stories are overblown. Of course the only story that will really matter is the one that gets told to the jury. But at first there was the temptation, out of sympathy and trying to make sense of this I suppose, for people to fit Nancy into the sweet innocent controlled victim mold and Brad as the complete uncaring monster mold. Given that they were both real people, this would never turn out to be the full true picture. Yet Nancy didn't owe anyone being perfect as a pre-condition to our community's shared sorrow for losing her.

There will be negative things about Nancy. That's irritating to see because of the horror of what happened to her, but that's the way it is. It will also turn out that BC was probably not constantly as bad as people wanted to believe he was. Neither of those things has anything to do with his possible guilt.

What struck me beyond the mudslinging on all sides was the absolute lack of sympathy or empathy that BC displayed for his slain wife, the one he had earlier said he wanted to stay married to. I think if I were writing all that, I would include something in there about the family's common loss, and his anger at the person who stole Nancy's life, and his daughters' mother. I cannot understand being coldly argumentative about your wife's exaggerations, even if true, only days after her murder.

I am somewhat afraid that the investigation will continue to make unspecified progress but yet never end; however, I still have faith and some confidence that this case will be solved.

Great post ! I do agree and believe that these affidavits should be viewed very gingerly - custody of those children was on the line following the murder of a woman. Emotions were pretty raw for those folks and so I can say nothing to their detriment, they all are in a truly bad spot.

The only thing about the affidavits that did indeed bother me was as you say, the coldly argumentative nature of the defendant with regards to his deceased wife. I have to say I was definitely astounded by this despite the man trying to fight for his children. Iy could have been handled differently and quite frankly I am at a loss to understand why his lawyer would allow this approach. I don't think he served his client well in this instance. JMO.

SleuthyGal
07-30-2008, 01:38 PM
It's the details that IF he did this crime, will get him caught.

Yes, absolutely!


IF he did this crime, I do NOT think he's an even match for those who's j o b is to catch the bad guys.I sure hope he's not a match for them. Although admittedly even criminals can sometimes be the recipient of dumb luck, as much as anyone else can. And as I said before, it comes down to what can be presented and proven in a court of law. The game is often frustrating because justice does not happen 100% of the time in our system.

But hopefully it will prevail in this and other cases.

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 01:40 PM
Yeah, and you're also here to tell us about it.;)

Seeeeee........that's the difference, IMO.

You have compared what happened to you and related it to this case. Which, is what we do as human beings, base much of our decisions and opinions on what we've experienced and seen.

While we all appreciate everything you've shared here, showing how it's NOT always the man who's the CHEATER AND ABUSER, either physically or mentally, the difference is you both came out to tell your side of the story. Whatever story is told, at least you both can tell it, whether it's truth or contradictory or not.

THIS case, THIS story, has one dead. One is silenced, one is here to tell all the dirty little secrets, or at least their version.

IF the other side contradicts his side, and part of the deceased story was that he was controlling and abusive. Just the mere fact the person claiming the ABUSE is dead, should be enough evidence to anyone looking from the outside in, that the survivor is most likely the perp. Especially as he was the LAST ONE with the victim.

Now,................to prove it.

JMHO
fran

PS....Like I've said, IF I am wrong, I will profoundly aplogize on this forum and to every single person who's read my words. This is JUST MY OPINION....fran

So because she is not here and can not speak it means he is a liar? First off he can provide receipts to prove whom spent what. He has made it clear in his affidavits that you don't believe...yet those things are EASILY proven by receipts and phone records. Again all friends on both sides admitted to never witnessing abuse. You never mention the fact that three close friends who you believe in their affidavits claim different money was given...50, 80 and 300. So which one of those three is NOT lying? Obvious 2 of them are lying OR have all been given a different sob story. YES? Either way that in itself makes me believe there versions are exaggerated complaints from a friend in a bad marriage looking for sympathy. You reason to believe the Plaintiff's hear say that clearly is contradictory to themselves... your reason cant just be "Well she is not here to tell her side." Or my EX is still here to tell her side.

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 01:45 PM
okay...sorry...one more thing.

The reason NC's friends testified to what Nancy said is because that is what she was telling them. I'm not saying it wasn't real or that it didnt' happen. But they were only getting her side of the story. And if they beleived it to be so true why the hell didn't they help her?

MoonFlwr
07-30-2008, 01:47 PM
So because she is not here and can not speak it means he is a liar? First off he can provide receipts to prove whom spent what. He has made it clear in his affidavits that you don't believe...yet those things are EASILY proven by receipts and phone records. Again all friends on both sides admitted to never witnessing abuse. You never mention the fact that three close friends who you believe in their affidavits claim different money was given...50, 80 and 300. So which one of those three is NOT lying? Obvious 2 of them are lying OR have all been given a different sob story. YES? Either way that in itself makes me believe there versions are exaggerated complaints from a friend in a bad marriage looking for sympathy. You reason to believe the Plaintiff's hear say that clearly is contradictory to themselves... your reason cant just be "Well she is not here to tell her side." Or my EX is still here to tell her side.

And...what the poster said, who you responded to (fran?) ..'one party is dead and can't tell their side', but her friends sure rushed forward and gave sworn statements. If they do that, then, surely the other side has a right to speak, too, or is he supposed to stay mute? By that poster's logic that isn't fair.

raisincharlie
07-30-2008, 01:47 PM
Here's another possibility...Do you think someone was hired to kill her?

There is that pesky home equity line for $55 K that hasn't been referenced. Seriously, the hired killing is not out of the question, not likely but not impossible either. I'm trying to puzzle why Brad's office is being searched, certainly Nancy was not murdered there. There are obvious reasons for this search but I seriously doubt one of those reasons is to rule Brad out as a suspect. At this point I would not rule out a hired murder.

cassadinechik
07-30-2008, 01:47 PM
Reading the rebuttal affidavit of BC was interesting.

What struck me beyond the mudslinging on all sides was the absolute lack of sympathy or empathy that BC displayed for his slain wife, the one he had earlier said he wanted to stay married to. I think if I were writing all that, I would include something in there about the family's common loss, and his anger at the person who stole Nancy's life, and his daughters' mother. I cannot understand being coldly argumentative about your wife's exaggerations, even if true, only days after her murder.


Here are some things about the typical engineering personality type - http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119777920/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

There was once a movie with Robert Urich where his wife was killed and he was an engineer. He lack of emotion led everyone to think he was guilty, when it was really just the way he was. If you know highly technical engineering types, not all of us are this way, but many of us are.

The best way I can illustrate this is with a personal story. I was driving to work on night and I hit a guy on his bike. It was ruled in now way my fault. His blood alcohol was .25 or something insane and he was right in the middle of a dark road. The very night it happened, I called my husband and he came. I was sobbing. I then went home, my husband got the car washed. The car still had a dent in it. I am now in the middle of a lawsuit over it, though my insurance company assures me it will be okay, I worry that my now total lack of emotion really will hurt me if I seem to not care. I do care, I am just very logical. Me crying or being upset in any way won't repair their situation for them.

I have probably made myself sound like a cold hearted you-know-what now, but I am just trying to point out that many of us engineering types run for the most part on pure logical and not emotional basis.

So anyhow (I am very long winded today), he was writing an affidavit to show why he was a fit father, not one to defend himself in a murder case for the public to read or to show he was grieving. I think if he didn't do it, he is obviously grieving and that had nothing to do with the matter at hand.

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 01:51 PM
Here are some things about the typical engineering personality type - http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119777920/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

There was once a movie with Robert Urich where his wife was killed and he was an engineer. He lack of emotion led everyone to think he was guilty, when it was really just the way he was. If you know highly technical engineering types, not all of us are this way, but many of us are.

The best way I can illustrate this is with a personal story. I was driving to work on night and I hit a guy on his bike. It was ruled in now way my fault. His blood alcohol was .25 or something insane and he was right in the middle of a dark road. The very night it happened, I called my husband and he came. I was sobbing. I then went home, my husband got the car washed. The car still had a dent in it. I am now in the middle of a lawsuit over it, though my insurance company assures me it will be okay, I worry that my now total lack of emotion really will hurt me if I seem to not care. I do care, I am just very logical. Me crying or being upset in any way won't repair their situation for them.

I have probably made myself sound like a cold hearted you-know-what now, but I am just trying to point out that many of us engineering types run for the most part on pure logical and not emotional basis.

So anyhow (I am very long winded today), he was writing an affidavit to show why he was a fit father, not one to defend himself in a murder case for the public to read or to show he was grieving. I think if he didn't do it, he is obviously grieving and that had nothing to do with the matter at hand.

I agree

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 01:53 PM
There is that pesky home equity line for $55 K that hasn't been referenced. Seriously, the hired killing is not out of the question, not likely but not impossible either. I'm trying to puzzle why Brad's office is being searched, certainly Nancy was not murdered there. There are obvious reasons for this search but I seriously doubt one of those reasons is to rule Brad out as a suspect. At this point I would not rule out a hired murder.

you know it could not have even been a "professional" hitman. You just never know.

Okay seriously last post...

cassadinechik
07-30-2008, 01:56 PM
Ok, me too. I have so much work to do. I am promising myself that I will not post here for the next hour :) LOL

raisincharlie
07-30-2008, 01:56 PM
So because she is not here and can not speak it means he is a liar? First off he can provide receipts to prove whom spent what. He has made it clear in his affidavits that you don't believe...yet those things are EASILY proven by receipts and phone records. Again all friends on both sides admitted to never witnessing abuse. You never mention the fact that three close friends who you believe in their affidavits claim different money was given...50, 80 and 300. So which one of those three is NOT lying? Obvious 2 of them are lying OR have all been given a different sob story. YES? Either way that in itself makes me believe there versions are exaggerated complaints from a friend in a bad marriage looking for sympathy. You reason to believe the Plaintiff's hear say that clearly is contradictory to themselves... your reason cant just be "Well she is not here to tell her side." Or my EX is still here to tell her side.

What will you say if his signature appears on those receipts ? will you continue to say Nancy is the one who spent like crazy, for some reason I think so. Even Brad acknowledges he took away access to charge cards and the checking account.

I have little doubt Brad can prove certain things by means of paper, but he makes more allegations which cannot be proven because the other party is indeed deceased. Because he can prove some items with paper is in no way proof that he can prove everything he is claiming. And please tell, what the heck searching his office is going to prove about who spent what, or that Nancy lied. Face it - your boy is aq suspect, plain and simple, despite his receipts and phone records.

raisincharlie
07-30-2008, 01:57 PM
you know it could not have even been a "professional" hitman. You just never know.

Okay seriously last post...

Plenty of gang members who would do it pretty cheap and given Raleigh's recent disclosure concerning the gang problem - not out of the question.

raisincharlie
07-30-2008, 02:03 PM
<snip>

So anyhow (I am very long winded today), he was writing an affidavit to show why he was a fit father, not one to defend himself in a murder case for the public to read or to show he was grieving. I think if he didn't do it, he is obviously grieving and that had nothing to do with the matter at hand.

So based on this logic - if Brad was trying to prove he was a fit father to continue to have custody of his children - why didn't he stick with that approach? Given the timing and circumstance of the custody issue - what Nancy was or how she was had nothing to do with the issue - it should have been about him and his abilities, not his deceased wife's failings.

IMHO63
07-30-2008, 02:03 PM
Thanks IMHO63

I was curious why only the N & O reported applying for a hearing on the issue of the warrants. It appears from this that WRAL is also involved.

Hope they win their issue but more so hoping the warrants stay sealed so that justice may proceed.

raisincharlie--

I'm with you on that. The warrants are currently only sealed for 30 days, I think the media should be able to wait. I know a lot of people want to see them, but it would best to let LE fully investigate before anythings gets out.

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 02:05 PM
Reading the rebuttal affidavit of BC was interesting.

To me, her friends overplayed their hands in several instances and BC has been able to come back and show that their stories are overblown. Of course the only story that will really matter is the one that gets told to the jury. But at first there was the temptation, out of sympathy and trying to make sense of this I suppose, for people to fit Nancy into the sweet innocent controlled victim mold and Brad as the complete uncaring monster mold. Given that they were both real people, this would never turn out to be the full true picture. Yet Nancy didn't owe anyone being perfect as a pre-condition to our community's shared sorrow for losing her.

There will be negative things about Nancy. That's irritating to see because of the horror of what happened to her, but that's the way it is. It will also turn out that BC was probably not constantly as bad as people wanted to believe he was. Neither of those things has anything to do with his possible guilt.

What struck me beyond the mudslinging on all sides was the absolute lack of sympathy or empathy that BC displayed for his slain wife, the one he had earlier said he wanted to stay married to. I think if I were writing all that, I would include something in there about the family's common loss, and his anger at the person who stole Nancy's life, and his daughters' mother. I cannot understand being coldly argumentative about your wife's exaggerations, even if true, only days after her murder.

I am somewhat afraid that the investigation will continue to make unspecified progress but yet never end; however, I still have faith and some confidence that this case will be solved.

This may sound harsh but I want to be honest. My ex wife did so many horrible things to destroy our family. The boys nor I did anything to go through what we went through. I would never wish anyone dead but there was a time there that IF anything had happened to her I would not have been grieving. I would have been sad that the boys lost their mother but I was so hurt and not happy at the time ...sad to say i would not have been grieving.

MoonFlwr
07-30-2008, 02:05 PM
So based on this logic - if Brad was trying to prove he was a fit father to continue to have custody of his children - why didn't he stick with that approach? Given the timing and circumstance of the custody issue - what Nancy was or how she was had nothing to do with the issue - it should have been about him and his abilities, not his deceased wife's failings.

But..I don't think he cast the first stone, IIRC. The gaggle came forward first, with allegations against him!

raisincharlie
07-30-2008, 02:06 PM
raisincharlie--

I'm with you on that. The warrants are currently only sealed for 30 days, I think the media should be able to wait. I know a lot of people want to see them, but it would best to let LE fully investigate before anythings gets out.

Yes indeed - let LE do what they need to do.

stillblv
07-30-2008, 02:10 PM
So based on this logic - if Brad was trying to prove he was a fit father to continue to have custody of his children - why didn't he stick with that approach? Given the timing and circumstance of the custody issue - what Nancy was or how she was had nothing to do with the issue - it should have been about him and his abilities, not his deceased wife's failings.


I think that Brad had nothing to do with what went into the affadavits; the lawyers are the ones who decide what to ask dependent on what they want to include in those affadavits. And their reasons are purely to forward their client's "case" - not to necessarily make him look good.

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 02:11 PM
What will you say if his signature appears on those receipts ? will you continue to say Nancy is the one who spent like crazy, for some reason I think so. Even Brad acknowledges he took away access to charge cards and the checking account.

I have little doubt Brad can prove certain things by means of paper, but he makes more allegations which cannot be proven because the other party is indeed deceased. Because he can prove some items with paper is in no way proof that he can prove everything he is claiming. And please tell, what the heck searching his office is going to prove about who spent what, or that Nancy lied. Face it - your boy is aq suspect, plain and simple, despite his receipts and phone records.

The fact that she has a 1200 purse, 200 dollar jeans, 8000 dollar paintings, BMW x5 and 200 dollar pedicures. The fact that he said she did and that can easily be proven . I can pretty much assure you those signatures are hers. That is what she was cut off from spending.

stillblv
07-30-2008, 02:14 PM
But..I don't think he cast the first stone, IIRC. The gaggle came forward first, with allegations against him!


I hope you never stick up for a friend.

fran
07-30-2008, 02:14 PM
Hyperbole aside, and believing that Brad is the culprit in this horrendous crime... it now comes down to what can be proven in a court of law, assuming enough evidence is amassed to even qualify to take this case to trial.

And therein lies the mystery for us sleuthers. We don't know what LE has on the guy, aside from the obvious things such as the contentious separation, etc. The affidavits give us some good clues into the state of things in that rel'p, but it's not enough.

I am waiting anxiously to learn what REAL evidence might exist--the kind of evidence that would allow the DA to feel confident about proceeding forward with a murder charge.

IF they arrest him, that SHOULD be an indication that LE was able to gather sufficient evidence that they BELIEVE they can get a conviction.

We, the public at large, may NOT see 90% of the evidence prior to trial. That may be the ONLY and FIRST time the evidence will be revealed to the public.

The affidavits not only gave US some good CLUES into the state of things, it also gave LE the direction in which to SEARCH for the EVIDENCE.

Hence, SW at Brad's Cisco office.

Interesting, there's an additional SW that they're not revealing for where?

JMHO
fran

PS....these cases are like puzzles. Bit by bit, piece by piece, LE fits the pieces together until they get the complete PICTURE of murder and eventually a trial...fran

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 02:20 PM
IF they arrest him, that SHOULD be an indication that LE was able to gather sufficient evidence that they BELIEVE they can get a conviction.

We, the public at large, may NOT see 90% of the evidence prior to trial. That may be the ONLY and FIRST time the evidence will be revealed to the public.

The affidavits not only gave US some good CLUES into the state of things, it also gave LE the direction in which to SEARCH for the EVIDENCE.

Hence, SW at Brad's Cisco office.

Interesting, there's an additional SW that they're not revealing for where?

JMHO
fran

PS....these cases are like puzzles. Bit by bit, piece by piece, LE fits the pieces together until they get the complete PICTURE of murder and eventually a trial...fran


Yeah, I wonder if that SW is for the man she had an affair with?

MoonFlwr
07-30-2008, 02:20 PM
I hope you never stick up for a friend.

Not sure what you mean by that...but :waitasec:

Was just responding about people insinuating that through all allegations, the one being painted in a certain way, is expected to stay mum.
Heh I'd love to see what would've unfolded on these boards if Brad hadn't responded.

It doesn't make sense. Nancy's friends came forward to speak on her behalf...so, she wasn't voiceless. By the reasoning of some posters on here...both sides have a right to speak up...therefore, why should Brad remain quiet. It doesn't make sense!

gritguy
07-30-2008, 02:21 PM
I think that Brad had nothing to do with what went into the affadavits; the lawyers are the ones who decide what to ask dependent on what they want to include in those affadavits. And their reasons are purely to forward their client's "case" - not to necessarily make him look good.

That's generally true, but not always. In this case, it looks to me like they may have told him to have at the other affidavits and dispute what he could. There are several grammatical and typographical errors; it was obviously done in as much a hurry as possible given the level of detail involved.

I see him at home typing this stuff up while reading through the other affidavits, e-mailing to his lawyer, paralegal cutting and pasting, a little poishing and viola: affidavit.

Blondieskatz
07-30-2008, 02:23 PM
What will you say if his signature appears on those receipts ? will you continue to say Nancy is the one who spent like crazy, for some reason I think so. Even Brad acknowledges he took away access to charge cards and the checking account.

I have little doubt Brad can prove certain things by means of paper, but he makes more allegations which cannot be proven because the other party is indeed deceased. Because he can prove some items with paper is in no way proof that he can prove everything he is claiming. And please tell, what the heck searching his office is going to prove about who spent what, or that Nancy lied. Face it - your boy is aq suspect, plain and simple, despite his receipts and phone records.

Snip~
IMO the office is being searched so they check his computer. Look for emails, any receipts, research, maybe maps. Doesn't mean he's guilty, but most people spend most time at work than home so it makes sense to check the office. As far as being put on leave that also makes sense, again doesn't mean Cisco thinks he guilty. They are probably trying to keep employees focused on work rather than BC which would be easier when he's not there.

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 02:23 PM
It doesn't make sense. Nancy's friends came forward to speak on her behalf...so, by the logic of some posters on here she wasn't voiceless. Therefore, why should he remain so.

Good point. Brad was defending himself against what had been said from the other side.

gritguy
07-30-2008, 02:24 PM
This may sound harsh but I want to be honest. My ex wife did so many horrible things to destroy our family. The boys nor I did anything to go through what we went through. I would never wish anyone dead but there was a time there that IF anything had happened to her I would not have been grieving. I would have been sad that the boys lost their mother but I was so hurt and not happy at the time ...sad to say i would not have been grieving.

Good point, and so is the one about possibly he's just not emotional. However, if the attorneys were really on top of the affidavits (and possibly they couldn't be what with the hurried pace), they could have introduced a dose of humility that would have made the piece a little easier to swallow.

stillblv
07-30-2008, 02:24 PM
Not sure what you mean by that...but :waitasec:

Was just responding about people insinuating that through all allegations, the one being painted in a certain way, is expected to stay mum.
Heh I'd love to see what would've unfolded on these boards if Brad hadn't responded.

It doesn't make sense. Nancy's friends came forward to speak on her behalf...so, she wasn't voiceless. By the reasoning of some posters on here...both sides have a right to speak up...therefore, why should Brad remain quiet. It doesn't make sense!


I just think it's kind of rude and disrespectful to call her friends a gaggle. Obviously you're above all that kind of behavior - like sticking up for a friend. Yeah, they may be overreacting but I'd sure as hell wish they'd overreacted a little bit more. Maybe she'd still be alive.

stillblv
07-30-2008, 02:26 PM
Yeah, I wonder if that SW is for the man she had an affair with?


oh yeah....THAT guy. The one with no physical contact.

Blondieskatz
07-30-2008, 02:26 PM
Good point. Brad was defending himself against what had been said from the other side.


I look at it like this~ BC is already presumed guilty so he is defending himself. The attorneys..well that's what they do. I don't know if he's guilty or innocent, but I understand defending oneself. If I thought I was going to tried for murder, I'd probably do the same.

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 02:26 PM
Snip~
IMO the office is being searched so they check his computer. Look for emails, any receipts, research, maybe maps. Doesn't mean he's guilty, but most people spend most time at work than home so it makes sense to check the office. As far as being put on leave that also makes sense, again doesn't mean Cisco thinks he guilty. They are probably trying to keep employees focused on work rather than BC which would be easier when he's not there.


I agree IMO they are looking for the e-mails and other things he was talking to in his affadavit.

fran
07-30-2008, 02:28 PM
I'm not saying that he didn't do it, I'm just saying that we don't need to string him up by his toes and go on about how horrible he is until we know all the facts and have the evidence that beyond a shadow of a doubt says that he killed his wife.

jmo

Just keep your open mind in that he may be innocent. Truly, he needs people like you, because without the you's, he wouldn't be able to get a fair trial. He needs people on that jury that go in without an opinion. really

I don't begrudge anyone who feels he's innocent or says what we now know isn't enough to convict him. That's well and good, IMO. He's entitled to a fair trial. Eventhough, everyone who's read MY words, know how I feel, I want him to get a fair trial, IF they accuse and arrest him. That's what is so great about our country. Heck, they could have someone's crime on video, they STILL are entitled to a trial. Good! I'd want the same for myself too.

But, IF he did this crime, hopefully, someone reading about it, reading pages here on Websleuths, IF they too are in such a relationship and they're looking in a mirror of their life, PERHAPS, just one life will be saved. This SAME SET of CIRCUMSTANCES happen over and over and over. Believe me, they are NOT all solved. Even if WE know who did it, IN OUR OPINION, without enough evidence, they remain UNSOLVED.

Sad, but true.
:(
fran

PS....I don't think we're really saying all that much 'bad' about him. We're just talking about the way his wife and friends say he is. After all, he's the one speaking ill of the dearly dead and departed. Guess she wasn't quite as dear to him though, obviously.....:(..fran

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 02:29 PM
I look at it like this~ BC is already presumed guilty so he is defending himself. The attorneys..well that's what they do. I don't know if he's guilty or innocent, but I understand defending oneself. If I thought I was going to tried for murder, I'd probably do the same.

right and if he wanted his daughters back he needed to answer to those allegations being made

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 02:30 PM
The people that believe her friends affidavits did not respond to what I said a few posts ago. When I said three friends claim 3 different stories... for instance when referring to the money he was giving her. Either A) that indicates that she is exaggerating stories to her friends for sympathy... or B) two of her friends are lying. Which is it?

MoonFlwr
07-30-2008, 02:31 PM
I just think it's kind of rude and disrespectful to call her friends a gaggle. Obviously you're above all that kind of behavior - like sticking up for a friend. Yeah, they may be overreacting but I'd sure as hell wish they'd overreacted a little bit more. Maybe she'd still be alive.

lol! You sure jump to conclusions.

Anyway, the word gaggle has been used on here...and, by the way their stories don't match up in some instances...and yadda yadda yadda, they sure do come across as being spurious in some of their claims.
(Their intention/s may've been right, but it appears that some facts weren't verified before stated...hence the word 'gaggle'..because it came across to some that they were whipping each other up.)

MoonFlwr
07-30-2008, 02:32 PM
I look at it like this~ BC is already presumed guilty so he is defending himself. The attorneys..well that's what they do. I don't know if he's guilty or innocent, but I understand defending oneself. If I thought I was going to tried for murder, I'd probably do the same.

Point I was trying to make. You stated it better! ;)

raisincharlie
07-30-2008, 02:33 PM
The fact that she has a 1200 purse, 200 dollar jeans, 8000 dollar paintings, BMW x5 and 200 dollar pedicures. The fact that he said she did and that can easily be proven . I can pretty much assure you those signatures are hers. That is what she was cut off from spending.


links please :

$1200 purse

Nancy's name is signed on the lease papers and is financially responsible for leased BMW.



You can assure it? Unless you are Brad or his lawyer or have direct access to those items you can assure nothing.

While you whine about the kids being removed based on lies in those affidavits - here's some paper for you - the children were removed from his custody on 7/16/08. Those affidavits full of lies you keep whining about were not even written and submitted until 22 and 23 July. That is easily assured.

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 02:33 PM
right and if he wanted his daughters back he needed to answer to those allegations being made

Exactly... and Like I said there was a time I would not be grieving if something happened to my ex.. and rest assured I would do anything for my boys...not matter what it took and not matter who's feeling were hurt... If it were me and I was innocent and I would do anything for my boys.

MoonFlwr
07-30-2008, 02:35 PM
Exactly... and Like I said there was a time I would not be grieving if something happened to my ex.. and rest assured I would do a thing for my boys...not matter what it took and not matter who's feeling were hurt... If it were me and I was innocent and I would do anything for my boys.

Another point, well-stated!

Blondieskatz
07-30-2008, 02:36 PM
The people that believe her friends affidavits did not respond to what I said a few posts ago. When I said three friends claim 3 different stories... for instance when referring to the money he was giving her. Either A) that indicates that she is exaggerating stories to her friends for sympathy... or B) two of her friends are lying. Which is it?


They could all be talking about different times as far as the money goes. One week he may have given her $300, the next $80 thus each friend remembers a different amount.

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 02:38 PM
Exactly... and Like I said there was a time I would not be grieving if something happened to my ex.. and rest assured I would do a thing for my boys...not matter what it took and not matter who's feeling were hurt... If it were me and I was innocent and I would do anything for my boys.

Yup...if he had kept quiet and just let the girls go without so much as a word, people would have made alot more out of that. He was damned if you do, damned if you don't.

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 02:38 PM
links please :

$1200 purse

Nancy's name is signed on the lease papers and is financially responsible for leased BMW.



You can assure it? Unless you are Brad or his lawyer or have direct access to those items you can assure nothing.

While you whine about the kids being removed based on lies in those affidavits - here's some paper for you - the children were removed from his custody on 7/16/08. Those affidavits full of lies you keep whining about were not even written and submitted until 22 and 23 July. That is easily assured.

pretty nice vehicle to be in ones name when that one has no job.

raisincharlie
07-30-2008, 02:39 PM
pretty nice vehicle to be in ones name when that one has no job.


I agree, but unless she pointed a gun at his head and forced him to sign for it - Brad agreed to it.

fran
07-30-2008, 02:42 PM
right and if he wanted his daughters back he needed to answer to those allegations being made

Well, all I have to say to that is, IF he's arrested and tried, "If he wants the jury to like him, to feel sorry for him, he needs to act like a victim."

His affidavit came off, IMO, as a desparate man. Someone who's done something wrong, was making excuses for his actions or deflecting the state of his marriage and his relationship with his recently murdered wife.

I didn't take that as a defense to get his children back but a defense on why he couldn't have killed her, because she was the one who did everything wrong in their relationship, NOT him, he was just a door mat left to take her indiscretions, her monetary abuse, her running around, and he was left to take care of their children and she STILL wanted to leave him.

Given enough latitude, he's probably telling those closest to him it's her own fault she got murdered, that's what she gets for jogging alone. :mad:

Ok, I know that was mean, but..............that's the attitude I'm getting from him. It's ALL NANCY'S FAULT, EVERYTHING WRONG, IT WAS HER DOING AND HE'S COMPLETELY INNOCENT.

She's dead, he survived. :(
Wrong place wrong time?
or..........the ultimate in abuse?

JMHO
fran

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 02:44 PM
I agree, but unless she pointed a gun at his head and forced him to sign for it - Brad agreed to it.

That doesn't sound like he was very good at controlling her.

What a horrible controlling husband. he MADE her get an X5, and 8000 paintings and 200 dollar jeans and 200 dollar pedicures. He must have ORDERED her to buy his girls 80 dollar outfits.

Sorry but some of you flip like a fish out of water.

reddress58
07-30-2008, 02:44 PM
pretty nice vehicle to be in ones name when that one has no job.
You're walking on eggshells now, d. If you think raising two children and doing all the household care is not a "job", I beg to differ. That's the role she was given in their marriage...and they both agreed to it. Sounds like your divorce made you a little bitter toward woman doing what woman do so well! Support men. That's exactly what she was doing, and doing it well. So you don't think she earned having a car in her name? Shame on you.

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 02:48 PM
maybe I should be scared of my own hubby. He controls the money, he pays the bills, he doesn't socialize or go to parties in the neighborhood with me.

I work and take care of our son and the house...

Good thing I'm in SOUTH Carolina.

reddress58
07-30-2008, 02:49 PM
maybe I should be scared of my own hubby. He controls the money, he pays the bills, he doesn't socialize or go to parties in the neighborhood with me.

I work and take care of our son and the house...

Good thing I'm in SOUTH Carolina.
...oh, and of course, according to d, you aren't deserving of having a car in your name.

raisincharlie
07-30-2008, 02:50 PM
That doesn't sound like he was very good at controlling her.

What a horrible controlling husband. he MADE her get an X5, and 8000 paintings and 200 dollar jeans and 200 dollar pedicures. He must have ORDERED her to buy his girls 80 dollar outfits.

Sorry but some of you flip like a fish out of water.

No flipping here - I still think he murdered his wife and after the search of his office I am getting much closer to being able to say he did, not that i think.

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 02:51 PM
Well, all I have to say to that is, IF he's arrested and tried, "If he wants the jury to like him, to feel sorry for him, he needs to act like a victim."

His affidavit came off, IMO, as a desparate man. Someone who's done something wrong, was making excuses for his actions or deflecting the state of his marriage and his relationship with his recently murdered wife.

I didn't take that as a defense to get his children back but a defense on why he couldn't have killed her, because she was the one who did everything wrong in their relationship, NOT him, he was just a door mat left to take her indiscretions, her monetary abuse, her running around, and he was left to take care of their children and she STILL wanted to leave him.

Given enough latitude, he's probably telling those closest to him it's her own fault she got murdered, that's what she gets for jogging alone. :mad:

Ok, I know that was mean, but..............that's the attitude I'm getting from him. It's ALL NANCY'S FAULT, EVERYTHING WRONG, IT WAS HER DOING AND HE'S COMPLETELY INNOCENT.

She's dead, he survived. :(
Wrong place wrong time?
or..........the ultimate in abuse?

JMHO
fran

Fran, I am sure you are a sweet person... but i have to say, you say the same thing every time... It's with blinders on. There was nothing other than statements to give his side of the affidavits. The man has two girls who if innocent deserve and need to be with him. I would have been way more vicious in defending my self, especially when an upset spouse over exaggerates to friends...those friends used those stories to try and paint him in a way he needs to defend. Those friends stories contradicted themselves. None of this proves he did or didn't kill NC, but it does prove he loves his girls and knows he must defend himself for THEIR sake.

stillblv
07-30-2008, 02:51 PM
Exactly... and Like I said there was a time I would not be grieving if something happened to my ex.. and rest assured I would do anything for my boys...not matter what it took and not matter who's feeling were hurt... If it were me and I was innocent and I would do anything for my boys.


You may not be personally grieving for your spouse but wouldn't you feel sad that your sons wouldn't have their mother? If I were innocent I would be pretty shocked that my kids' father had been murdered and would want to find out who did it just as much, no more, than the next person.

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 02:53 PM
...oh, and of course, according to d, you aren't deserving of having a car in your name.

Thats not what I was saying...I was proving a point about supposedly being controlled. So every house wife deserves an X5?????? how about a Honda? Or a Mini van?


Fine do what you guys do best ...twist words to get to a place you think it should go.

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 02:55 PM
You may not be personally grieving for your spouse but wouldn't you feel sad that your sons wouldn't have their mother? If I were innocent I would be pretty shocked that my kids' father had been murdered and would want to find out who did it just as much, no more, than the next person.

I had no feelings for her at all... It would not have phased me thats how much I went through.... later I would have been sad for my boys...as I posted in the original thread.

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 02:57 PM
...oh, and of course, according to d, you aren't deserving of having a car in your name.

I don't think that's what d meant.

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 02:58 PM
Fran, I am sure you are a sweet person... but i have to say, you say the same thing every time... It's with blinders on. There was nothing other than statements to give his side of the affidavits. The man has two girls who if innocent deserve and need to be with him. I would have been way more vicious in defending my self, especially when an upset spouse over exaggerates to friends...those friends used those stories to try and paint him in a way he needs to defend. Those friends stories contradicted themselves. None of this proves he did or didn't kill NC, but it does prove he loves his girls and knows he must defend himself for THEIR sake.

heck even one of the people who gave a statement for BOTH parties.

reddress58
07-30-2008, 02:59 PM
Thats not what I was saying...I was proving a point about supposedly being controlled. So every house wife deserves an X5?????? how about a Honda? Or a Mini van?


Fine do what you guys do best ...twist words to get to a place you think it should go.
I think it was made pretty clear in a previous post that there are degrees of control and that it typically escalates as the relationship goes on. His behavior toward her worsened when she made a visible attempt to leave the marriage. I believe most of her spending was done before that happened. When she no longer agreed to sit back and let him do as he pleased without any attention paid to her and the children, and after he had adamantly denied an affair she knew he had; then she was done with him. THAT is when he realized he lost control; that is when his behavior became more bizarre.

Carrington
07-30-2008, 03:01 PM
Search warrants for his office, looking for a girlfriend, perhaps.
Whom may just work at Cisco. They may also want to take a look at his locker at the gym.
IMO

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 03:03 PM
would he even maintain a locker at the gym? I belong to the YMCA and they loan you a lock and a locker for the time that you are there that day but they don't let you have it full time.

Carrington
07-30-2008, 03:05 PM
would he even maintain a locker at the gym? I belong to the YMCA and they loan you a lock and a locker for the time that you are there that day but they don't let you have it full time.

Oh, I thought they had a membership to a fancy club.

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 03:07 PM
Oh, I thought they had a membership to a fancy club.

They do that's why I was asking I was comparing the Y to the fancy club. They may have ben able to keep the locker I dunno?

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 03:09 PM
Considering what I went through I can easily see him being the one controlled here. My ex was controlling and manipulating... but later I found out she was telling the complete opposite to her friends... when I look at what NC drove and all the pricey things she had, its kind of hard to believe she didn't have some control.

fran
07-30-2008, 03:12 PM
maybe I should be scared of my own hubby. He controls the money, he pays the bills, he doesn't socialize or go to parties in the neighborhood with me.

I work and take care of our son and the house...

Good thing I'm in SOUTH Carolina.

:laugh::laugh:

This did make me smile.

Thanks,
:)
fran

PS.....yes, S Carolina seems a little tamer. ;)OR they don't get high profile and we just haven't heard of them. Have you looked online for your state? :confused:...J/K

Bob&Bob
07-30-2008, 03:12 PM
Considering what I went through I can easily see him being the one controlled here. My ex was controlling and manipulating... but later I found out she was telling the complete opposite to her friends... when I look at what NC drove and all the pricey things she had, its kind of hard to believe she didn't have some control.

I agree.

The whole thing makes me think who was controlling who.

Having said that, things don't look very good for him.

It sounds like it was a horrible situation for a long time
and his affadavit sounds like he's trying to explain how
bad things were. And it sounds like they were a big mess.

SleuthyGal
07-30-2008, 03:13 PM
okay...sorry...one more thing.

The reason NC's friends testified to what Nancy said is because that is what she was telling them. I'm not saying it wasn't real or that it didnt' happen. But they were only getting her side of the story. And if they beleived it to be so true why the hell didn't they help her?

We don't know what they did or didn't do to help her. Yes, money was one issue and we don't know if they ever gave her any or not (at least I don't know) but money is not the only thing. They might have offered to take her in, we don't know.

You can't make an adult leave their abuser if they don't want to and are not ready to. Even when they complain about what a horrible person s/he is.

I have a friend who is in what I consider an abusive rel'p with a live-in BF. She's always 'just about to' breakup with him, but never does and there's always some excuse about why it's not the right time to make him move out of her home, etc etc. Bottomline: you can be a shoulder for awhile, you can offer everything in your power to help, you can lecture and listen and provide advice, ideas, a safe haven, and everything else, but you can't force someone to take action. And as most abused women will tell you, their abuser is not 100% horrible 100% of the time. They cling to these bright spots whenever/whereever they can.

RaleighNC
07-30-2008, 03:14 PM
ya know - I think we all need to take a step back and think that would happen if any one of us was in Brad's shoes and DID NOT kill our spouse.

I was running through this scenario the other day and came to the conclusion that the following things would be said about me:

While my husband is out traveling and working his butt off, I am at home with the animals.

I am spending his money like a crazy woman - the UPS guy was there ALL the time.

Hubby drives a 2003 truck. Wife has been through 3 (!) cars in that time period. She had a perfectly good Volkswagen for a little while - but no.... that wans;t good enough - she had to have that expensive Mercedes.

And the year he got that for her for a combo birthday / Christmas / Anniversary present - do you know what SHE got HIM???? Chicago style relish for HOT DOGS.

You know she's always joked around about killing him and dragging his body back to work to get the triple life insurance, don't you? Well, she finally did it.

Obviously, this paints a very interesting picture of me and I would DEFINITELY be a POI. ha ha ha

I would vigorously defend myself - explaining the cars saying he wanted the car as much as I did, that oftentimes we didn't really exchange Christmas gifts because it seemed forced and we never felt like we went without, that I was ONLY JOKING about killing him and dragging his body to work, etc. I'd also explain that I actually WORK FROM HOME and make a decent living even though I am always in shorts and a t-shirt and that I'd sooner kill myself than have anything happen to my husband.

But I'd sure look bad. And I am guess that nothing I said would change the minds of some people - even when my friends stuck up for me. The naysayers would say I was just making a desperate plea to make people feel sorry for me - not that I was devastated, etc.

Think about what you've said to people while joking around, or how things can get twisted. Add that to the fact that the odds are with a spouse killing a spouse and this train picks up speed really fast to convict the remaining spouse.

No one is perfect - and pointing out that NC probably exaggerated to her friends doesn't mean anyone thinks she deserved to die, or even that brad didn't do it - just that NOTHING is black and white.

SleuthyGal
07-30-2008, 03:16 PM
But aside from the 'controlling' husband...some men are more the passive/aggressive type like a Scott Peterson. Where they appear more charming to everyone, including their spouse, but are simmering on the inside and scheming away and one day they well....take action.

We'll never know what it was really like inside the Cooper marriage--only that they weren't happy with each other and there was ongoing tension and discord. And, of course, one of them was found murdered and the probability is that the other spouse did the deed. There are a million reasons why one person kills another and no one except the killer can ever really know for sure the 'why' of it.

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 03:21 PM
We don't know what they did or didn't do to help her. Yes, money was one issue and we don't know if they ever gave her any or not (at least I don't know) but money is not the only thing. They might have offered to take her in, we don't know.

You can't make an adult leave their abuser if they don't want to and are not ready to. Even when they complain about what a horrible person s/he is.

I have a friend who is in what I consider an abusive rel'p with a live-in BF. She's always 'just about to' breakup with him, but never does and there's always some excuse about why it's not the right time to make him move out of her home, etc etc. Bottomline: you can be a shoulder for awhile, you can offer everything in your power to help, you can lecture and listen and provide advice, ideas, a safe haven, and everything else, but you can't force someone to take action. And as most abused women will tell you, their abuser is not 100% horrible 100% of the time. They cling to these bright spots whenever/whereever they can.


Sorry but the way they vilified him there is no doubt that IF they helped her financially they would have put that in the affidavit's...no doubt.

Bob&Bob
07-30-2008, 03:25 PM
What in the hell was wrong with him buying flowers?

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 03:28 PM
I am just curious but how many women here think that a wife can be the abuser?

Being a man and living through so much I can assure I was...whether you believe me or not is one thing. Two reason I don't just detail my entire story...one it would be a novel and I am just to busy and lazy to write it all but also I just don't want to live it again in writing it.

SleuthyGal
07-30-2008, 03:29 PM
Sorry but the way they vilified him there is no doubt that IF they helped her financially they would have put that in the affidavit's...no doubt.

The affidavits are not depositions with a lawyer asking questions, so I don't know if they absolutely did or absolutely did not. I would need them to be asked, point-blank, if they supplied any financial assistance at any time, and then hear or read their answer(s) in order for me to know one way or the other (for sure).

SleuthyGal
07-30-2008, 03:32 PM
I am just curious but how many women here think that a wife can be the abuser?

<raises hand>

Of course it's possible. And one partner in a gay rel'p can be an abuser of the other. Any gender can be an abuser.

However, forum posters' personal experiences and anecdotes have no bearing on what actually happened in the COOPER case. We just don't have the info yet. We have clues. We have some statements. But we don't have all the info that will (eventually) come out.

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 03:33 PM
great post Raleigh!

My husband and I don't exchange Christmas presents every year it just depends on our budget and normally we get what we want throughout the year anyway. We feel that Christmas is for our son. (even thought he's a very spoiled only child and grandchild)

stillblv
07-30-2008, 03:33 PM
What in the hell was wrong with him buying flowers?

Bob! LOL! How was your nap???

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 03:35 PM
I am just curious but how many women here think that a wife can be the abuser?

Being a man and living through so much I can assure I was...whether you believe me or not is one thing. Two reason I don't just detail my entire story...one it would be a novel and I am just to busy and lazy to write it all but also I just don't want to live it again in writing it.

I beleive a woman can be an abuser definately.

You should not have to tell your story to get your point accross, it is nobody's business what you had to go through. :blowkiss:

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 03:36 PM
bob totally cracks me up *LOL*

reddress58
07-30-2008, 03:37 PM
Sorry but the way they vilified him there is no doubt that IF they helped her financially they would have put that in the affidavit's...no doubt.
They DID put it in the affidavits. I went back and read them all this morning. Said her family and friends had to give her money. It also said that one couple offered to have her come stay with them.

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 03:39 PM
They DID put it in the affidavits. I went back and read them all this morning. Said her family and friends had to give her money. It also said that one couple offered to have her come stay with them.

I just re-read them also. I must say that what they had to say was pretty bad.

KTaylorsc
07-30-2008, 03:39 PM
Have a good night folks! I'm goin' home now...

play nice!

actually, would it be too much to ask for everyone to stop posting until I get back in here again?

JK

RaleighNC
07-30-2008, 03:40 PM
great post Raleigh!

My husband and I don't exchange Christmas presents every year it just depends on our budget and normally we get what we want throughout the year anyway. We feel that Christmas is for our son. (even thought he's a very spoiled only child and grandchild)

Honestly, the "she got a mercedes, he got 6 jars of pickle relish" is one of my Grandma's favorite stories to tell her friends. But I know it would get ugly aired in a series of depositions. :Banane09: And I know my hubby told the story to his friends at work and they all kinda looked at him funny. He thought it was hysterical - I am sure they think I am a money grubber. oh how we look to others with the tiny snippets of our lives that we share.

Good to know we're not the only ones who usually don't do the big Christmas thing (the relish year excluded, of course)

RaleighNC
07-30-2008, 03:42 PM
They DID put it in the affidavits. I went back and read them all this morning. Said her family and friends had to give her money. It also said that one couple offered to have her come stay with them.

Yes all the affidavits said that "she had to get money from family and friends in order to have enough monmehy to ...." and yet there is NOT ONE instance of anyone saying .......

23. I gave Nancy Cooper $250 in cash on 6/21/2008 so she could buy groceries.

If the affidavit givers weren't the money givers, then who was???? And where the heck are they????

fran
07-30-2008, 03:48 PM
Fran, I am sure you are a sweet person... but i have to say, you say the same thing every time... It's with blinders on. There was nothing other than statements to give his side of the affidavits. The man has two girls who if innocent deserve and need to be with him. I would have been way more vicious in defending my self, especially when an upset spouse over exaggerates to friends...those friends used those stories to try and paint him in a way he needs to defend. Those friends stories contradicted themselves. None of this proves he did or didn't kill NC, but it does prove he loves his girls and knows he must defend himself for THEIR sake.

Yes, I am a very sweet person, if I may say so myself. :)

FWIW, Nancy's friend's affidavits painted Brad like a person who did NOT really care about his children, but merely as ponds in his abusive relationship with his recently departed wife. Having said that, it was obvious, to even Brad AND his attorney, that the friend's statements were NOT with malice in their heart, but concern, for the innocent children.

Anyone watching this from afar, should know that IF he in fact did murder his wife, that the next POSSIBLE victims could be either HIMSELF, OR the CHILDREN.

The murder investigation is about MURDER of Nancy Cooper. THAT is a separate issue.

The custody of the children, is TEMPORARY. Not permanent. This is a trying time for all involved. He KNOWS he's the center focus of the investigation. UNTIL he, Brad is either ELIMINATED or arrested as a suspect, HIS freedom is in jeoprady, HIS future is up in the air.

HE should have been thinking of the children first and foremost. He was NOT. HE was thinking of himself, his image. EVERYTHING that was wrong in his life was NANCY'S FAULT. He made sure EVERYONE knew that.

Totally WRONG, completely UNNECESSARY!

Just like they tell divorcing parents, do NOT put down your ex to the children, you'll pay for it later IF you do. MOST people also do NOT speak ill of the deceased. People who do are either petty, hateful, hurtful, not the deceased one's friend, NOT a loved one of the deceased.

IF the image he was portraying was one of a loving husband, the disparging remarks, either from HIS affidavit or HIS friends most definitely missed their mark with MOST people. That's why the press played it up so big. And anyone not seeing that, well, they just don't know what they're looking at, imo.

We're all human, after all. We're not perfect, none of us. BUT, someone who's recently deceased, someone who was murdered no less, is almost brought to the height of sainthood, in the minds of all that person's loved ones. I know Nancy wasn't a saint, but for crying out loud, she wasn't even in the ground yet, when her husband started throwing stones on her memory. Stones that will come back to haunt him. Stones that pointed this investigation in it's present direction.

He used Nancy's not being here to speak up for herself, as a chance to take all eyes off of himself. And what is even more disturbing, he's using the EXCUSE it was to get custody of his children. IMHO, the ONLY innocent victims of that household still alive.

He COULD have put all those affidavits out without saying one thing AGAINST his recently deceased wife. IF he couldn't maintain custody of HIS children on his own merit, well, to me, that says alot! IF he'd not said one bad thing about Nancy, he would probably have many more people think he's innocent than he does now. His affidavits sounded like the words of someone hiding what went on behind those closed doors. Closed doors that MAY have been hiding murder.

JMHO
fran

PS..OH, and one more thing. It was ABSOLUTELY NOT NECESSARY to bring up in those affidavits, which HE AND HIS ATTORNEY knew would be public record and read by a large part of that adult local community, something hurtful to one of the CHILDREN of one of Nancy's friends who spoke up on Nancy's behalf. THAT had NOTHING to do with him being a good parent or not. IT was NOT necessary to put that in there except to CAUSE HURT to someone who would speak up for their friend. It's NOT just the parents here, he may have harmed for what he believes is a betrayal, he may have caused HARM to their child! ........outrageous!! IMHO.....fran

momto3kids
07-30-2008, 03:49 PM
Yes all the affidavits said that "she had to get money from family and friends in order to have enough monmehy to ...." and yet there is NOT ONE instance of anyone saying .......

23. I gave Nancy Cooper $250 in cash on 6/21/2008 so she could buy groceries.

If the affidavit givers weren't the money givers, then who was???? And where the heck are they????

Million Dollar question:waitasec:

reddress58
07-30-2008, 03:51 PM
They do that's why I was asking I was comparing the Y to the fancy club. They may have ben able to keep the locker I dunno?
I'm a member of the Lifetime Fitness gym...same as the Coopers. You can't keep the locker..the whole place is very similar to the Y. Just a little more modern and expansive. He may have a locker at his gym at work. I know Cisco has a gym, but I'm not sure if they provide lockers. I doubt it would be any different as to lockers, though.

I'm curious about this second SW. It's possible it could be for a person to gather DNA & such.

Or...(this is where I'm going to show my computer ignorance, so go ahead and get your chuckles out. I can take it.) ...I'm sure BC's internet server is CISCO. Would they have another room/office in a building that houses the uhhhh "Main Frame"? If he erased his hard drive, it would wipe out his e-mail trail...but wouldn't they still be on the server? (ok, you can stop laughing.) I'm thinking they may need a SW for a room other than his office.

momto3kids
07-30-2008, 03:57 PM
I'm a member of the Lifetime Fitness gym...same as the Coopers. You can't keep the locker..the whole place is very similar to the Y. Just a little more modern and expansive. He may have a locker at his gym at work. I know Cisco has a gym, but I'm not sure if they provide lockers. I doubt it would be any different as to lockers, though.

I'm curious about this second SW. It's possible it could be for a person to gather DNA & such.




I just get the feeling it is for an another individual. A friend of NC or BC...I just feel it is.

reddress58
07-30-2008, 03:59 PM
I just get the feeling it is for an another individual. A friend of NC or BC...I just feel it is.
Then that means there is probable cause...and a suspect!

SleuthyGal
07-30-2008, 04:01 PM
They would word the SW in such a way so that they could obtain access not just to the hard drive on his computer at work, but also any network drives, servers, email backups or other backups, CDs/DVDs/jump drives or any electronic media that he would have had access to in the scope of being at Cisco. It would cover everything, pretty much.

SleuthyGal
07-30-2008, 04:03 PM
I just get the feeling it is for an another individual. A friend of NC or BC...I just feel it is.

You mean another person may be a suspect?

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 04:03 PM
I'm a member of the Lifetime Fitness gym...same as the Coopers. You can't keep the locker..the whole place is very similar to the Y. Just a little more modern and expansive. He may have a locker at his gym at work. I know Cisco has a gym, but I'm not sure if they provide lockers. I doubt it would be any different as to lockers, though.

I'm curious about this second SW. It's possible it could be for a person to gather DNA & such.

Or...(this is where I'm going to show my computer ignorance, so go ahead and get your chuckles out. I can take it.) ...I'm sure BC's internet server is CISCO. Would they have another room/office in a building that houses the uhhhh "Main Frame"? If he erased his hard drive, it would wipe out his e-mail trail...but wouldn't they still be on the server? (ok, you can stop laughing.) I'm thinking they may need a SW for a room other than his office.

Cisco is not an internet provider. First off even if he erased a hard drive it can be recovered.. if he saved it on the local hard drive it wont be on a shared drive on a server. You can delete emails from your side but not the recipients side. Email PST files get large in our business so those files are saved locally as well and not on the email sever. Rest assured if he IS hiding something they can find it. Deleting files does not mean the files are gone. He can't hide the things people are saying he may have done.

reddress58
07-30-2008, 04:04 PM
They would word the SW in such a way so that they could obtain access not just to the hard drive on his computer at work, but also any network drives, servers, email backups or other backups, CDs/DVDs/jump drives or any electronic media that he would have had access to in the scope of being at Cisco. It would cover everything, pretty much.
Thank you, SG. In the affidavit they actually spell out the exact office #. That is why I was curious. I'm sure all of those items are not contained in that one room.

d99gr81
07-30-2008, 04:05 PM
You mean another person may be a suspect?

I replied to one of Fran's threads regarding the second search warrant...and possible being the man NC had an affair with but of course that got ignored. Anything is possible.

raisincharlie
07-30-2008, 04:05 PM
ya know - I think we all need to take a step back and think that would happen if any one of us was in Brad's shoes and DID NOT kill our spouse.

I was running through this scenario the other day and came to the conclusion that the following things would be said about me:

While my husband is out traveling and working his butt off, I am at home with the animals.

I am spending his money like a crazy woman - the UPS guy was there ALL the time.

Hubby drives a 2003 truck. Wife has been through 3 (!) cars in that time period. She had a perfectly good Volkswagen for a little while - but no.... that wans;t good enough - she had to have that expensive Mercedes.

And the year he got that for her for a combo birthday / Christmas / Anniversary present - do you know what SHE got HIM???? Chicago style relish for HOT DOGS.

You know she's always joked around about killing him and dragging his body back to work to get the triple life insurance, don't you? Well, she finally did it.

Obviously, this paints a very interesting picture of me and I would DEFINITELY be a POI. ha ha ha

I would vigorously defend myself - explaining the cars saying he wanted the car as much as I did, that oftentimes we didn't really exchange Christmas gifts because it seemed forced and we never felt like we went without, that I was ONLY JOKING about killing him and dragging his body to work, etc. I'd also explain that I actually WORK FROM HOME and make a decent living even though I am always in shorts and a t-shirt and that I'd sooner kill myself than have anything happen to my husband.

But I'd sure look bad. And I am guess that nothing I said would change the minds of some people - even when my friends stuck up for me. The naysayers would say I was just making a desperate plea to make people feel sorry for me - not that I was devastated, etc.

Think about what you've said to people while joking around, or how things can get twisted. Add that to the fact that the odds are with a spouse killing a spouse and this train picks up speed really fast to convict the remaining spouse.

No one is perfect - and pointing out that NC probably exaggerated to her friends doesn't mean anyone thinks she deserved to die, or even that brad didn't do it - just that NOTHING is black and white.

Actually, I find all these affidavits to be virtually worthless with respect to Nancy's death. They were prepared after the children were already removed from his custody. The judge who agreed to that had no idea about all these people and their claims. Now, children are not taken from their biological parents willy nilly, there has to be some concrete reason that is legally defensible. He granted custody of those kids to the grand parents based on things we might never know but what we do know is it had nothing to do with these affidavits.

These affidavits were prepared for the custody case, not to pin a murder on anyone, except maybe Jessica Adam. Whatever the case, the day of the hearing, no one wanted to give testimony regarding any of this so they agreed to terms in chambers. The only thing these affidavits really do is provide insight into a highly dysfunctional relationship - both ways. Was Nancy a saint - probably not, neither was Brad obviously. The affidavits neither prove or disprove who murdered Nancy Cooper.

The only thing they seem to prove is warring factions. That aside, Brad allowed LE into his home, into the car, wherever they wanted to go. It becomes obvious LE either saw something during those trips or evidence came to light which warranted LE to obtain and seal a search warrant for the residence and cars. Something else has come to light to warrant LE to obtain and seal a warrant for Brad's workspace at Cisco and at some undisclosed location. Whatever LE hoped to find at the house, in the cars, at the work place and wherever had everything to do with the murder of Nancy Cooper.

Cold hard facts ignoring the he/said/she said bull. The other cold hard facts are no one had the right to take Nancy Cooper's life for whatever reason they invent.

reddress58
07-30-2008, 04:05 PM
Cisco is not an internet provider. First off even if he erase a hard drive it can be recovered.. if he saved it on the local hard drive it wont be on a shared drive on a server. You can delete emails from your side but not the recipients side. Email PST files get large in our business so those files are saved locally as well and not on the email sever. Rest assured if he IS hiding something they can find it. Deleting files does not mean the files are gone. He can hide the things people are saying he may have done.
Thank you too, d. I'm getting a good lesson here.

momto3kids
07-30-2008, 04:05 PM
I still say there has to be a reason we do not have an affidavit from 3 people. 3 main key people...what do they know and not want to put on paper?

Carrie Clarke
Diana Duncan's husband
Theresa O'Driscoll

SleuthyGal
07-30-2008, 04:06 PM
if he saved it on the local hard drive it wont be on a shared drive on a server.

Unless they did automatic backups from people's hard drives at work...my employer does this and past employers have done it as well. If your computer is 'on' and connected to the LAN, you could be getting backups and not even be aware of it (though most people would be aware of this).

reddress58
07-30-2008, 04:07 PM
I replied to one of Fran's threads regarding the second search warrant...and possible being the man NC had an affair with but of course that got ignored. Anything is possible.
The affair (plantonic encounter) was four years ago...while she was pregnant with her first child. I don't think anyone took is seriously, but anything is possible.

SleuthyGal
07-30-2008, 04:09 PM
Actually, I find all these affidavits to be virtually worthless with respect to Nancy's death. {snip}

These affidavits were prepared for the custody case, not to pin a murder on anyone {snip} The only thing these affidavits really do is provide insight into a highly dysfunctional relationship - both ways.

YES YES YES!

We don't know what the PHYSICAL evidence in this case is, if it exists. We don't have a lot of cold/hard facts yet. We have some allegations, we have lots of rumors, and we have some legal documents that are for a custody case. But in the criminal case, we don't have much yet. And note 'we' =/ the police. They have stuff. Obviously. More info than we have at this time. All we have for certain is our speculation and gut feelings.

christine2448
07-30-2008, 04:14 PM
Continue discussions here please. (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2433694#post2433694)

raisincharlie
07-30-2008, 04:14 PM
I still say there has to be a reason we do not have an affidavit from 3 people. 3 main key people...what do they know and not want to put on paper?

Carrie Clarke
Diana Duncan's husband
Theresa O'Driscoll

Carrie Clarke will end up being a state's witness. I suspect she was contacted by LE and has been duly advised not to speak of the issue nor what transpired between her and LE. The other two - I have no idea what relationship they would have so I can't begin to guess.

Blondieskatz
07-30-2008, 04:14 PM
Thank you too, d. I'm getting a good lesson here.

No Cisco is not an internet company, but they would have a server and more than likely an IT Dept.

The IT Dept, where I work can pull up and look at anything you are doing on your pc at anytime. If you use email or pull up web sites you are using internet and it goes into the server drive for the company. They can also go back and get deleted items from anyones pc. It all depends on how long they keep the info served on there servers. It's kept for a week where I work. None the less, you can never totally delete you hard drive.