Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #12

[christine2448]

Please continue GENERAL discussions here. Look around Nancy has her own forum (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=165), there are several threads started on specific topics to try and stay organized.


Links to previous and similar threads can be found toward the bottom of the page.


Newbies.....

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y171/christine2448/WELCOMETOWSBLUE.gif

I am sad such a tragedy is bringing us all together.

I advise everyone to read the RULES of WS, Long (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66869)and Short Version (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66872).

[WSTarheel]

OregonMommy wrote>>> ...there is no way a SAHM who was out until midnight the >>> night before would go for a training run at 7am if she had to be somewhere at 8, >>> or even 9.

I agree with everything you wrote except for the above statement. I would think it odd too except in CM's interview with FOX she stated that:
* On friday night, she knew of NC's plans to meet with JA the next day
* NC mentioned to her that night that she was going to "get a jog in" the next morning

I can't get a direct link to the fox video but if you go here http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html (http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html)
and search for Nancy Cooper, it is the second video "body found".

It doesn't look like CM thinks it was odd that NC planned to go jogging prior to meeting with JA. That said, I'm now wondering if NC planned to go out at 6am instead of 7am. The only place I've read the 7am time frame is in Brad's affidavit.

[KTaylorsc]

I thought it was interesting about the dog hair in the memorandum of judgement order as well as Donna Rentz was not allowed to drive the kids.

Are either of the girls allergic to dogs?
Why aren't the children allowed to ride in a car that DR is driving?

BTW good morning all

[Just the Fax]

I thought it was interesting about the dog hair in the memorandum of judgement order as well as Donna Rentz was not allowed to drive the kids.

Are either of the girls allergic to dogs?
Why aren't the children allowed to ride in a car that DR is driving?

BTW good morning all

Yes, one is allergic to dogs. They had one and had to find it a new home.

Brad said in his rebuttal that Donna has had many car wrecks and is an unsafe driver.

[KTaylorsc]

Thanks...I haven't been around the past few days so I'm sorry if this has allready been brought up. I'm going to catch up now.

Thank you!

[Just the Fax]

Concerning her cell phone. It was said yesterday that her cell phone was in her car based on the 911 caller's information. I re-listened to the call and think she may have meant it was actually in the house when she said 'there'.

"Her car is in the driveway and her cell cell phone is there" ...... notice she did not say 'in there'

Sure, that could go either way, but it seems more logical to think she meant 'house' when talking about the driveway and car.

[Just the Fax]

Thanks...I haven't been around the past few days so I'm sorry if this has allready been brought up. I'm going to catch up now.

Thank you!

No problem.

Here is a good news link that covers a lot

http://www.wral.com/news/local/page/3226575/

[Just the Fax]

I posted this question last night. Most agree the 2 trips to the store after 6 am smell to high heaven. This seems especially true for a Saturday morning.

I would like to know what time Brad and Nancy normally got up on a typical Saturday morning. Was it his normal habit to be up at 6 am on a Saturday ?
He said he had a tennis match at 9:30 am.

I get up at 6 or 6:30 during the week, but sleep till 8 or so on Saturday.
Also, we can likely assume the girls are not used to getting up at the crack of dawn , especially in the summer months.

[d99gr81]

Still catching up for last three days.

After reading some to catch up this morning someone wrote a post that really makes me wonder about another possible scenario. I live 3 miles from that area. I travel HS road quite often and have been on that road between 6 and 7 am on a Saturday. There is not much traffic at that time. I have seen joggers and bikers on that road and as I carefully passed them, the first thing I thought was what in the word are you doing on this road. So dangerous. Which leads me to a possible thought. What if she was jogging on HS road and got hit by a car... the person quickly got out saw that she was dead, threw her into their car and continued down HS road and took fielding knowing if was deserted back there and left her there? That fact that LE is out passing flyer's for more information. Sorry but they know the cause of death all ready. People saying that it will take 2 months...I don't buy it. Maybe thats why they say it was an Isolated incident because they suspect it was a hit and run?

Just trying to think outside the box here. I need more facts before I think one way or the other... but like I have said in many threads ...I read those affidavits and it hits home so much for me...sounds like my divorce to a "T" with out the murder and I wasn't the one cheating. His rebuttal's seem genuine and can be verified... and I went through so much of the same things so I can relate. People say "how dare he run her name through the mud!" sorry but he is fighting for his girls... I have two boys whom I did fight very hard for so I know full well why he would fight. I also know how stories get exaggerated and I have posted on some examples as well. 90 % on here come up with ways he did it but no real focus on other possibilities. Sorry but to me thats the easy way out. Sure its easy to go with the past percentages in cases like this and not stick you neck out but I guess I will continue to be that person. There has been no hard facts released so its impossible to know anything. They know the cause of death and have none for sometime now. LE has continued to say he is not a suspect or POI.

[Just the Fax]

Still catching up for last three days.

After reading some to catch up this morning someone wrote a post that really makes me wonder about another possible scenario. I live 3 miles from that area. I travel HS road quite often and have been on that road between 6 and 7 am on a Saturday. There is not much traffic at that time. I have seen joggers and bikers on that road and as I carefully passed them, the first thing I thought was what in the word are you doing on this road. So dangerous. Which leads me to a possible thought. What if she was jogging on HS road and got hit by a car... the person quickly got out saw that she was dead, threw her into their car and continued down HS road and took fielding knowing if was deserted back there and left her there? That fact that LE is out passing flyer's for more information. Sorry but they know the cause of death all ready. People saying that it will take 2 months...I don't buy it. Maybe thats why they say it was an Isolated incident because they suspect it was a hit and run?

The ME classed the death as a homicide.
That would exclude an accidental hit and run scenario

[Just the Fax]

" LE has continued to say he is not a suspect or POI."

It is interesting the DA or cops in wake county refuse to 'name' a suspect in these high profile cases (same with Ann Miller and Jason Young).

I asked a deputy at the Courthouse Friday about that in general. He said it is done so it is not inflammatory towards the potential jury pool and does not influence someones right to a fair trial.....same basic thought with sealing damning search warrants.

[d99gr81]

The ME classed the death as a homicide.
That would exclude an accidental hit and run scenario

So killing someone with you car is not a homicide?

[Just the Fax]

So killing someone with you car is not a homicide?

The key word is 'accidental'.

"Nancy Cooper, who was found murdered in North Carolina"....per WRAL, N&O and other media.

[carolinalady]

I posted this question last night. Most agree the 2 trips to the store after 6 am smell to high heaven. This seems especially true for a Saturday morning.

I would like to know what time Brad and Nancy normally got up on a typical Saturday morning. Was it his normal habit to be up at 6 am on a Saturday ?
He said he had a tennis match at 9:30 am.

I get up at 6 or 6:30 during the week, but sleep till 8 or so on Saturday.
Also, we can likely assume the girls are not used to getting up at the crack of dawn , especially in the summer months.

It would be nice to know their normal routine.

I get up early EVERY morning b/c my kids get up early EVERY morning. The don't seem to care that it's a weekend or summer break. The sun's up, they're up!

[carolinalady]

Search warrants aren't sealed only b/c they contain damning evidence. It can also be sealed b/c it's an ongoing investigation. BC and his attorneys would've been served w/ the warrants and would know what was taken from the house.

[Just the Fax]

It would be nice to know their normal routine.

I get up early EVERY morning b/c my kids get up early EVERY morning. The don't seem to care that it's a weekend or summer break. The sun's up, they're up!

Yep, but when my kids were young they would sleep in any chance they could. My 4 year old niece would never get up at 6 -7 am unless you drug her out....

That's why I am interested in what her friends say is their typical Saturday am routine.....

[carolinalady]

So killing someone with you car is not a homicide?

That's what I wonder. Wasn't the lady in Texas that hit the homeless man charged w/ murder. I realize that's different as he was still alive, lodged in her windshield, in her garage and she didn't get him medical help.

I don't know if there are other scenarios when it might be classified as "homicide".

[Just the Fax]

Search warrants aren't sealed only b/c they contain damning evidence. It can also be sealed b/c it's an ongoing investigation. BC and his attorneys would've been served w/ the warrants and would know what was taken from the house.

That is not true carolinalady

"That the release of this information will jeopardize the right of a defendant to a fair trial"

Brad and his attorney have the SW's and know what they say.
My point is the public does not because they could be inflammatory or they could compromise the ongoing investigation.

[Just the Fax]

That's what I wonder. Wasn't the lady in Texas that hit the homeless man charged w/ murder. I realize that's different as he was still alive, lodged in her windshield, in her garage and she didn't get him medical help.

I don't know if there are other scenarios when it might be classified as "homicide".

Nancy Cooper was murdered
If she was hit by a car, it was intentional

[stillblv]

The ME classed the death as a homicide.
That would exclude an accidental hit and run scenario

If it had been a hit and run, the PD would know that immediately by marks on the body and they would have put out a call for a hit and run suspect. They seem to go after hit and runs very aggressively. They also wouldn't have classified Nancy's case as just a "murder" if it had been a hit and run.

[WSTarheel]

This is the first case that I've followed every curve and turn of. I am not aware of the legal process. The GJ is expected to meet today, right? Can we expect to learn additional information today?

[Just the Fax]

This is the first case that I've followed every curve and turn of. I am not aware of the legal process. The GJ is expected to meet today, right? Can we expect to learn additional information today?

Good morning

In NC, the 'secret' GJ does not 'investigate' crimes, they only indict.
In wake county, the lead detective will cover his evidence in about 5 minutes (average is <5)


Today is GJ day. Who knows what will happen, but I would be surprised if they present their evidence for indictment today.....before October, yes

[carolinalady]

That is not true carolinalady

"That the release of this information will jeopardize the right of a defendant to a fair trial"

Brad and his attorney have the SW's and know what they say.
My point is the public does not because they could be inflammatory or they could compromise the ongoing investigation.

But that doesn't mean it contains damning evidence. More than likely, it has what LE believes happened to Nancy Cooper. I would think (and hope) that if they have damning evidence, BC would be in jail.

"By law, affidavits to obtain a search warrant must contain a detailed explanation of probable cause, and they usually have specifics about what police believe happened to the victim.

Sealing search warrants allow authorities to investigate a case without disclosing information that would allow public speculation about the case."

[Just the Fax]

But that doesn't mean it contains damning evidence. More than likely, it has what LE believes happened to Nancy Cooper. I would think (and hope) that if they have damning evidence, BC would be in jail.

"By law, affidavits to obtain a search warrant must contain a detailed explanation of probable cause, and they usually have specifics about what police believe happened to the victim.

Sealing search warrants allow authorities to investigate a case without disclosing information that would allow public speculation about the case."


This is not worth arguing about. I never said it did contain damning evidence, I was simply saying that is many times why they are sealed in high profile cases. BTW, the probable cause to search his house would point to him.
After all, he said she left the house alive.

Probable cause

"A reasonable belief that a person (Brad Cooper) has committed a crime"

[carolinalady]

This is not worth arguing about. I never said it did contain damning evidence, I was simply saying that is many times why they are sealed in high profile cases. BTW, the probable cause to search his house would point to him.
After all, he said she left the house alive.

Probable cause

"A reasonable belief that a person (Brad Cooper) has committed a crime"

Agreed. Hopefully whatever evidence they have collected from body/home does allow them to convict the murderer (whether that is BC or someone else). I definitely want justice for Nancy!

[momto3kids]

I found this posted on the City Data forum, Cary, NC. Page 41, post # 408

I have no idea who this is, but they were a member before the NC case so they didn't join just to state this. Is this why she was partially clothed?


07-26-2008, 07:00 PM
seajoy88

Member


I agree that even though they say it was not a random killing, the fact that no one has been arrested is a little unnerving.

A friend of mine that lives in the Lochmere area reported information to a detective the day Nancy went missing. While my friend was on her jog that day, she saw a woman by Nancy's description around 8am. She described an item of clothing this woman was wearing that was of interest to the detective. Whether this is a coincidence or not, an item of clothing as my friend described was found in the woods. It was not an item of clothing that was known to the public. I have no idea why the police would not release that information, but maybe it was a false lead. Either way, it's just enough information to make my friend stop running alone even if the police say they don't believe the murder was random.

[momto3kids]

I could have missed this, but has there been an affidavit from
Carrie Clarke?
Diana Duncan's husband?
Theresa O'Driscoll?

It would be interesting as to why not.

[Just the Fax]

I found this posted on the City Data forum, Cary, NC. Page 41, post # 408

I have no idea who this is, but they were a member before the NC case so they didn't join just to state this. Is this why she was partially clothed?


07-26-2008, 07:00 PM
seajoy88

Member


I agree that even though they say it was not a random killing, the fact that no one has been arrested is a little unnerving.

A friend of mine that lives in the Lochmere area reported information to a detective the day Nancy went missing. While my friend was on her jog that day, she saw a woman by Nancy's description around 8am. She described an item of clothing this woman was wearing that was of interest to the detective. Whether this is a coincidence or not, an item of clothing as my friend described was found in the woods. It was not an item of clothing that was known to the public. I have no idea why the police would not release that information, but maybe it was a false lead. Either way, it's just enough information to make my friend stop running alone even if the police say they don't believe the murder was random.

Hi mom...we established with the news reports that 'partially clothed' was incorrect and misleading. Amanda Lamb said she was was found with 'little clothing'...big difference. 'Little clothing' could easily mean jogging shorts and a T or it could also mean she was not fully clothed...we just don't know.

Seeing a 5' 8" white female jogging around 8am in and around Lochmere would not be at all unusual. Nancy could be described as looking very similar to scores of serious female runners in the Cary area.

[fran]

I could have missed this, but has there been an affidavit from
Carrie Clarke?
Diana Duncan's husband?
Theresa O'Driscoll?

It would be interesting as to why not.

Why do you ask about these particular people? Have you seen comments they made?

I know Diana Duncan made a statement.

We have a thread with all the legal documents. You may find something there.

I'm fairly certain Carrie Clarke hasn't given a written statement, that's been made public. I could be wrong.

JMHO
fran

[fran]

I found this posted on the City Data forum, Cary, NC. Page 41, post # 408

I have no idea who this is, but they were a member before the NC case so they didn't join just to state this. Is this why she was partially clothed?


07-26-2008, 07:00 PM
seajoy88

Member


I agree that even though they say it was not a random killing, the fact that no one has been arrested is a little unnerving.

A friend of mine that lives in the Lochmere area reported information to a detective the day Nancy went missing. While my friend was on her jog that day, she saw a woman by Nancy's description around 8am. She described an item of clothing this woman was wearing that was of interest to the detective. Whether this is a coincidence or not, an item of clothing as my friend described was found in the woods. It was not an item of clothing that was known to the public. I have no idea why the police would not release that information, but maybe it was a false lead. Either way, it's just enough information to make my friend stop running alone even if the police say they don't believe the murder was random.


Eventhough that person has been a member for awhile, not just for this case, doesn't mean it couldn't be someone trying to throw the case off. I know that sounds far-fetched, but we have seen it on a number of cases, imo.

During the Peterson case there were rumors flying everywhere. 90% of them were false. LOL, we even had members of the family, we believe, not sure, that tried to throw the discussion here off. ;)

JMHO
fran

[Just the Fax]

I suppose it is conceivable that she would take off for a short, 5 mile run at 7am and return home in time to shower and then head over to her 8 am painting commitment.

The fact that runner was seen at 8am, makes it that much more unlikely it was Nancy Cooper

[Blondieskatz]

"brad probably used her cellphone to call his to try to establish his alibi.

he'll probably find some excuse why his fingerprints are on her phone"

The Saint ,
IMO BC wouldn't have to find an excuse for his fingerprints to be on NC's cell phone. I know my hubby's would be on mine~ he handed it to me last night when it rang.

[Just the Fax]

"brad probably used her cellphone to call his to try to establish his alibi.

he'll probably find some excuse why his fingerprints are on her phone"

The Saint ,
IMO BC wouldn't have to find an excuse for his fingerprints to be on NC's cell phone. I know my hubby's would be on mine~ he handed it to me last night when it rang.

Actually, I would bet he used the home land line. Unlike a cell where you can play games with location origination within a tower area, the land line firmly establishes the call was made from the home.

Remember, this guy is a telecommunications expert.... those types of little details would come naturally to him

[fran]

I missed a lot of discussion yesterday while I was gone. Some posts I'd like to address. Well, some have already been discussed, but, LOL, you know me, I have to put in my :twocents: .

These are mostly from the previous thread. I don't know how to bring over a quote from another thread other than cut/paste.....computers are not my first language at home. ;)

Our new member reddress58 said they were planning on building a new, more expensive home in another area. Ok, my take, it wasn’t Nancy who was the spender, it was Brad. He’ll blame it on her now that she can’t dispute it, but IMO, he’s the one that wanted to show off. After all, he's the one that just got his MBA!

As far as those $150 dresses put aside for the girls. Well, yeah that is pretty pricey for even an adult dress, imo. But hey, I wasn't raised that way. But remember, Nancy didn't have the purse strings, Brad did. He had to pick the dresses up. Soooo......remember if the MOST RECENT purchases for the kids et al have verifiable receipts, ie credit card or money card, that was Brad picking them up. But Nancy may have shopped them. So now you have Brad saying he did all of this shopping and stuff.......yeah, what a nice guy.

Of course their plans were changed for the new house when they returned from their Dec vacation. Nancy most likely realized that it was hopeless with this guy. He was about me, me, me and that’s all there was. Plus, we’ve seen how his family is about Nancy and what is rumored of their treatment of her. Well,…………this bit of information points to Nancy not embellishing as Brad et al want everyone to believe, but trouble behind those closed doors. It's no wonder his parent's statements weren't more favorable towards Nancy.

Oh, also, remember how HIS friends said Nancy embellished. Well, the same could be for Brad. I mean, where are these people getting their information from?

Right!

JMHO
fran

[reddress58]

I missed a lot of discussion yesterday while I was gone. Some posts I'd like to address. Well, some have already been discussed, but, LOL, you know me, I have to put in my :twocents: .

These are mostly from the previous thread. I don't know how to bring over a quote from another thread other than cut/paste.....computers are not my first language at home. ;)

Our new member reddress58 said they were planning on building a new, more expensive home in another area. Ok, my take, it wasn’t Nancy who was the spender, it was Brad. He’ll blame it on her now that she can’t dispute it, but IMO, he’s the one that wanted to show off. After all, he's the one that just got his MBA!

As far as those $150 dresses put aside for the girls. Well, yeah that is pretty pricey for even an adult dress, imo. But hey, I wasn't raised that way. But remember, Nancy didn't have the purse strings, Brad did. He had to pick the dresses up. Soooo......remember if the MOST RECENT purchases for the kids et al have verifiable receipts, ie credit card or money card, that was Brad picking them up. But Nancy may have shopped them. So now you have Brad saying he did all of this shopping and stuff.......yeah, what a nice guy.

Of course their plans were changed for the new house when they returned from their Dec vacation. Nancy most likely realized that it was hopeless with this guy. He was about me, me, me and that’s all there was. Plus, we’ve seen how his family is about Nancy and what is rumored of their treatment of her. Well,…………this bit of information points to Nancy not embellishing as Brad et al want everyone to believe, but trouble behind those closed doors. It's no wonder his parent's statements weren't more favorable towards Nancy.

Oh, also, remember how HIS friends said Nancy embellished. Well, the same could be for Brad. I mean, where are these people getting their information from?

Right!

JMHO
fran
Fran, I think most of the shopping for expensive dresses and such took place BEFORE he took the credit cards out of her name. I think the tightened purse strings prohibited NC from shopping for the girls as she used to. BC stated in his affidavit that he at times used some of his remaining 20% of monthly income to buy the children clothes. If she wanted something special for the girls, she had to ask him to go pick it up. I think her father-in-law saw credit card reciepts of purchases NC signed for a while back before BC discovered the terms of the separation agreement and tightened the budget.

[fran]

Wirehair mentioned what Nancy was wearing on Friday night. IMO, that’s very good thinking and I hope LE has looked into that.

Remember Laci Peterson’s blouse? It was first photographed that first night, in a laundry basket underneath Scott’s clothes. Yet, when the 2nd SW was served, it was found crumpled up, soiled, in her underwear drawer. LE even called her sister Amy to the scene to ask her about it. Amy said Laci would NEVER do that,…. put something soiled in her drawer of clean clothes. PLUS, when she was found, she had on the pants worn that last night but NOT the blouse. Circumstantial, yes……Telling, yes………Incriminating, most definitely.

Wonder IF LE has found her clothes from that last night? IF so, where were they?

Excellent point, wirehair! I think we need to send you your official Websleuth badge, or sumpin'! :)

JMHO
fran

[fran]

Fran, I think most of the shopping for expensive dresses and such took place BEFORE he took the credit cards out of her name. I think the tightened purse strings prohibited NC from shopping for the girls as she used to. BC stated in his affidavit that he at times used some of his remaining 20% of monthly income to buy the children clothes. If she wanted something special for the girls, she had to ask him to go pick it up. I think her father-in-law saw credit card reciepts of purchases NC signed for a while back before BC discovered the terms of the separation agreement and tightened the budget.

No, I believe those dresses were on hold for Nancy. She did NOT come back so they put them back on the rack. Ehhhhhh..........I believe that was the day she went missing, that she was supposed to come back and they put them back on the rack.

I also believe the store took them and gave them to the girls. I THINK they were the ones they were wearing for the memorial service.

IF I'm wrong, I'm sure someone will let me know! ;)

JMHO
fran

PS....I don't write this stuff down so sometimes my feeble memory goes haywire! :D fran

[reddress58]

You're right. The father-in-law just stated that Nancy bought $50 dresses for the girls and saw $200 receipts for jeans and pedicure. My bad. Sorry.

[momto3kids]

Why do you ask about these particular people? Have you seen comments they made?

I know Diana Duncan made a statement.

We have a thread with all the legal documents. You may find something there.

I'm fairly certain Carrie Clarke hasn't given a written statement, that's been made public. I could be wrong.

JMHO
fran

Fran...It just seems odd to me the other husbands made a statement and Diana's husband who lives across from the Coopers did not. IMO the Duncan's would be able if anyone to identify the daily activities at the Cooper household. Such as time BC usually got home, time Nancy usually jogged if he was up at those times, what activities he used to witness BC participated in (washing cars, mowing the grass, etc). It would just give us better insight to actually how much BC did or didn't do. This would not be based on what Diana or Nancy told him, but what he actually felt was going on. IMO it would be nice to know from someone who lived 100' away.

As for Carrie, BC said she cancelled the day before for a 5:45 jog. Did she and Nancy usually jog at this time? I thought BC stated NC jogged before he went to work which would make me wonder if she jogged earlier than we are all thinking. IMO NC would have shared her situation with Carrie as well, since Nancy's other friends were well aware of it. I am just wondering why and if Carrie made a statement and why it is not shown?

Theresa was willing to talk to WTVD but didn't have a statement. I do not know how much of a friend she was to NC, but just wondered if she had done so and I missed it.

It appears Ms. Stubbs wanted affidavit's from many people for the custody case, I just wondered if these 3 had nothing to provide or they provided information she didn't want disclosed. :confused:

[Just the Fax]

You're right. The father-in-law just stated that Nancy bought $50 dresses for the girls and saw $200 receipts for jeans and pedicure. My bad. Sorry.

I don't know reddress58, seems you are our poster that would be the best expert on dresses :D

[fran]

Raisincharlie brings up the phone call from home to Brad that morning. IMO, this is his j o b………………could he change the data? Maybe? It COULD possibly take an extra step to discover any disception. Hopefully LE is smart enough to realize IF there is any hanky panky with computer info and phone records, for THIS case, first blush is not necessarily the answer! Extra research and detective work MAY be in order here.

ALSO, IF LE finds any hanky panky with the phone and computer records, bank records, etc.,............well, sorry folks, that points toward premediation, imo.

There's also been lots of discussion about Nancy's cell phone. I think it's been established she didn't normally take her cell when she went running. So her not having it with her, was her normal MO, IMO.

IF Nancy’s cell phone was in her purse, it was found in the car. FACT, the purse was found in the car. IF the cell was in her purse, assumption it was in the car.

Charilie, I agree, she would NOT leave her cell in the car.
Does anyone really think that a woman who had indicated to friends that she was ‘fearful’ of her husband, slept in a LOCKED room WITH her children, FULLY CLOTHED, WITH car keys in her pocket, would leave her cell phone in the car? Purse, maybe,(for fast get away), safety measure, such as a phone to call 911, leave in the car?
Ehhh……..no…………….KISS……….Keep it simple (silly).

IMO, Nancy's cell phone is a redherring. NOT a factor in her disappearance, ehhh. UNLESS it WAS found in the car. THEN, all bets are off as to WHY? it would be there, imo.

Oh, yeah, and anyone wanting to say, 'Well yeah, Nancy told her friend she was afraid of her husband and slept behind a locked door. But, Brad's friends say she embellished.'

Well, my anwer is, "He said she exaggerated and her friends say she was afraid. Granted here-say, but, but, but..........SHE is dead. Pointing toward the direction that she was NOT only NOT lying, she MAY very well have been RIGHT!''

Just sayin'
fran

[Just the Fax]

There's also been lots of discussion about Nancy's cell phone. I think it's been established she didn't normally take her cell when she went running. So her not having it with her, was her normal MO, IMO.

IF Nancy’s cell phone was in her purse, it was found in the car. FACT, the purse was found in the car. IF the cell was in her purse, assumption it was in the car.

Charilie, I agree, she would NOT leave her cell in the car.
Does anyone really think that a woman who had indicated to friends that she was ‘fearful’ of her husband, slept in a LOCKED room WITH her children, FULLY CLOTHED, WITH car keys in her pocket, would leave her cell phone in the car? Purse, maybe,(for fast get away), safety measure, such as a phone to call 911, leave in the car?
Ehhh……..no…………….KISS……….Keep it simple (silly).

IMO, Nancy's cell phone is a redherring. NOT a factor in her disappearance, ehhh. UNLESS it WAS found in the car. THEN, all bets are off as to WHY? it would be there, imo.

Just sayin'
fran

Fran, I posted this earlier. Since you did not comment, I suppose you missed it. You may or may not agree

Concerning her cell phone. It was said yesterday that her cell phone was in her car based on the 911 caller's information. I re-listened to the call and think she may have meant it was actually in the house when she said 'there'.

"Her car is in the driveway and her cell cell phone is there" ...... notice she did not say 'in there'

Sure, that could go either way, but it seems more logical to think she meant 'house' when talking about the driveway and car.

[Just the Fax]

I missed it, where was it stated as fact her purse was in her car ?

[fran]

I missed it, where was it stated as fact her purse was in her car ?

JTF, I don't keep notes, LOL, and I'm terrible with links. It was in one of the earlier press releases. I believe it was something about Brad locating her (can't remember the designer brand, but expensive) purse in her car and handing it over to LE, or something like that. IF you want me to check, I'll try to find it.

fran

[Blondieskatz]

I wonder when Jessica called 911 and was sitting in front of the house did she get out and look in the car. If she did maybe she saw the cell phone sitting in the car. If not there would be no way of knowing if the phone was in the car or in the house.

[reddress58]

I don't know reddress58, seems you are our poster that would be the best expert on dresses :D
Long, funny story how that user name originated. Had to do with my own personal bit of sleuthing. Maybe someday...

[reddress58]

Fran, I posted this earlier. Since you did not comment, I suppose you missed it. You may or may not agree

Concerning her cell phone. It was said yesterday that her cell phone was in her car based on the 911 caller's information. I re-listened to the call and think she may have meant it was actually in the house when she said 'there'.

"Her car is in the driveway and her cell cell phone is there" ...... notice she did not say 'in there'

Sure, that could go either way, but it seems more logical to think she meant 'house' when talking about the driveway and car.
That is interesting. JA doesn't live in the same neighborhood. Yesterday we were assuming BC told her where the cell was; but for JA to say her car is in the driveway means she must be driving by and looking while she's talking to the po-lice. Which means she may also have peaked inside and saw the cell phone. HMMMMMM.

[fran]

SleuthyGal post 207, previous thread

“Ya know...it's occurred to me in the past that CELL PHONES is where people who commit crimes often get caught. Cause they're making calls on the move, or, in Scott Peterson's case, they're making calls right near their own home...but in any case their movements are able to be tracked by triangulating the cell signal to the phone and tower.

It's like these folks can't help themselves...they have to be on their phones, making calls. They would have done themselves better evidence-wise by staying off the darn cell phones altogether...turning OFF the phone and just being out of touch for whatever length of time.

I can't tell you how many crimes I've heard about where cell phone records ultimately play a large part in helping to nail a suspect.”


Wonder if he awoke the children up in the middle of the night to go for a ride? Say 4 a.m.? IMO, at 4 a.m., there’s less likelihood of anyone seeing him leave the home. Even a neighborhood party the night before would have most likely been completely over hours before and all those attending asleep. Maybe only asleep for a few hours by that time, but 4 a.m. is a good hour to leave home without being noticed. Better than 2 a.m. or 6 a.m., IMO.


I sooooo hope that IF there is a 4 a.m. visit to the store, LE has got him on tape! I don’t care what he was buying, diapers. It doesn’t matter. He said 6 a.m. and told a whole story with it. IF it’s proven a lie, why? THIS IS IMPORTANT. Because it would mean he was out two hours earlier than he’s reported. Why? THIS IS IMPORTANT.

Just think about this, IF this was premeditated, he COULD have used his knowledge from his j o b to his advantage. STAGING the phone call.

IF he did do this crime, the phone calls after 6 a.m. that day AND the 4 a.m. visit to the store will be two highly damning pieces of evidence. ONE that he was out at 4 a.m., the phone call after 6 a.m., IF it's him will show planning. IF there was a fight, and IF he's guilty, there would NOT be this big elaborate scheme to hide his tracks.

JMHO
fran

[carolinalady]

I found this posted on the City Data forum, Cary, NC. Page 41, post # 408

I have no idea who this is, but they were a member before the NC case so they didn't join just to state this. Is this why she was partially clothed?


07-26-2008, 07:00 PM
seajoy88

Member


I agree that even though they say it was not a random killing, the fact that no one has been arrested is a little unnerving.

A friend of mine that lives in the Lochmere area reported information to a detective the day Nancy went missing. While my friend was on her jog that day, she saw a woman by Nancy's description around 8am. She described an item of clothing this woman was wearing that was of interest to the detective. Whether this is a coincidence or not, an item of clothing as my friend described was found in the woods. It was not an item of clothing that was known to the public. I have no idea why the police would not release that information, but maybe it was a false lead. Either way, it's just enough information to make my friend stop running alone even if the police say they don't believe the murder was random.

In my search last night for the news report to indicate who would have jurisdication, I did hear a report prior to Nancy's body being found. It did say that LE had collected some items of interest, but there was no indication of what those items were and may have had absolutely zero to do w/ this case.

I'll go back and see if I can find that report.

[carolinalady]

SleuthyGal post 207, previous thread

“Ya know...it's occurred to me in the past that CELL PHONES is where people who commit crimes often get caught. Cause they're making calls on the move, or, in Scott Peterson's case, they're making calls right near their own home...but in any case their movements are able to be tracked by triangulating the cell signal to the phone and tower.

It's like these folks can't help themselves...they have to be on their phones, making calls. They would have done themselves better evidence-wise by staying off the darn cell phones altogether...turning OFF the phone and just being out of touch for whatever length of time.

I can't tell you how many crimes I've heard about where cell phone records ultimately play a large part in helping to nail a suspect.”


Wonder if he awoke the children up in the middle of the night to go for a ride? Say 4 a.m.? IMO, at 4 a.m., there’s less likelihood of anyone seeing him leave the home. Even a neighborhood party the night before would have most likely been completely over hours before and all those attending asleep. Maybe only asleep for a few hours by that time, but 4 a.m. is a good hour to leave home without being noticed. Better than 2 a.m. or 6 a.m., IMO.


I sooooo hope that IF there is a 4 a.m. visit to the store, LE has got him on tape! I don’t care what he was buying, diapers. It doesn’t matter. He said 6 a.m. and told a whole story with it. IF it’s proven a lie, why? THIS IS IMPORTANT. Because it would mean he was out two hours earlier than he’s reported. Why? THIS IS IMPORTANT.

Just think about this, IF this was premeditated, he COULD have used his knowledge from his j o b to his advantage. STAGING the phone call.

IF he did do this crime, the phone calls after 6 a.m. that day AND the 4 a.m. visit to the store will be two highly damning pieces of evidence. ONE that he was out at 4 a.m., the phone call after 6 a.m., IF it's him will show planning. IF there was a fight, and IF he's guilty, there would NOT be this big elaborate scheme to hide his tracks.

JMHO
fran

I thought it was established that they no longer had Cisco VoIP at their home. And another poster said even if he did have the VoIP system and somehow altered calls, there would be a record of it.

[reddress58]

SleuthyGal post 207, previous thread

“Ya know...it's occurred to me in the past that CELL PHONES is where people who commit crimes often get caught. Cause they're making calls on the move, or, in Scott Peterson's case, they're making calls right near their own home...but in any case their movements are able to be tracked by triangulating the cell signal to the phone and tower.

It's like these folks can't help themselves...they have to be on their phones, making calls. They would have done themselves better evidence-wise by staying off the darn cell phones altogether...turning OFF the phone and just being out of touch for whatever length of time.

I can't tell you how many crimes I've heard about where cell phone records ultimately play a large part in helping to nail a suspect.”


Wonder if he awoke the children up in the middle of the night to go for a ride? Say 4 a.m.? IMO, at 4 a.m., there’s less likelihood of anyone seeing him leave the home. Even a neighborhood party the night before would have most likely been completely over hours before and all those attending asleep. Maybe only asleep for a few hours by that time, but 4 a.m. is a good hour to leave home without being noticed. Better than 2 a.m. or 6 a.m., IMO.


I sooooo hope that IF there is a 4 a.m. visit to the store, LE has got him on tape! I don’t care what he was buying, diapers. It doesn’t matter. He said 6 a.m. and told a whole story with it. IF it’s proven a lie, why? THIS IS IMPORTANT. Because it would mean he was out two hours earlier than he’s reported. Why? THIS IS IMPORTANT.

Just think about this, IF this was premeditated, he COULD have used his knowledge from his j o b to his advantage. STAGING the phone call.

IF he did do this crime, the phone calls after 6 a.m. that day AND the 4 a.m. visit to the store will be two highly damning pieces of evidence. ONE that he was out at 4 a.m., the phone call after 6 a.m., IF it's him will show planning. IF there was a fight, and IF he's guilty, there would NOT be this big elaborate scheme to hide his tracks.

JMHO
fran
Fran, Do you really think he'd say 6am in his affidavit if he were actually there at 4 and had heard the rumors that the store had him on video?

[Just the Fax]

That is interesting. JA doesn't live in the same neighborhood. Yesterday we were assuming BC told her where the cell was; but for JA to say her car is in the driveway means she must be driving by and looking while she's talking to the po-lice. Which means she may also have peaked inside and saw the cell phone. HMMMMMM.

Knowing Brad was right inside, I doubt she would get out and peer into her car . After all, she was not chummy with Brad and she would have likely felt very uneasy about that.
However, I do agree she could have driven by and seen the car in the drive.

[dyrewolfe]

Knowing Brad was right inside, I doubt she would get out and peer into her car . After all, she was not chummy with Brad and she would have likely felt very uneasy about that.
However, I do agree she could have driven by and seen the car in the drive.

Wasn't he supposedly out looking for her at the time she made the call? When he returned home, CPD was already there.

[carolinalady]

Originally Posted by momto3kids
I found this posted on the City Data forum, Cary, NC. Page 41, post # 408

I have no idea who this is, but they were a member before the NC case so they didn't join just to state this. Is this why she was partially clothed?


07-26-2008, 07:00 PM
seajoy88

Member


I agree that even though they say it was not a random killing, the fact that no one has been arrested is a little unnerving.

A friend of mine that lives in the Lochmere area reported information to a detective the day Nancy went missing. While my friend was on her jog that day, she saw a woman by Nancy's description around 8am. She described an item of clothing this woman was wearing that was of interest to the detective. Whether this is a coincidence or not, an item of clothing as my friend described was found in the woods. It was not an item of clothing that was known to the public. I have no idea why the police would not release that information, but maybe it was a false lead. Either way, it's just enough information to make my friend stop running alone even if the police say they don't believe the murder was random.

In my search last night for the news report to indicate who would have jurisdication, I did hear a report prior to Nancy's body being found. It did say that LE had collected some items of interest, but there was no indication of what those items were and may have had absolutely zero to do w/ this case.

I'll go back and see if I can find that report.



http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/media?id=6262404

It was around the 1:20 mark. "A ground & air search has turned up a few items."

[BeBeBru]

Somehow, I got the this information - I think it might have been a post on one of the news station's boards - here it goes - go to The Wolf Web (NCSU BLOG) - Under
Chit Chat find the Missing Runner on page 1. Look for the post at 10:54, 7/13/08 by
khcadwal........this sheds some light on the shopping habits and the 50 dress count of NC. Sounds like she had plans to pick up the clothes at 12 noon on the day she disappeared........Sorry I couldn't cut and paste it.

[reddress58]

Even if BC wasn't home, JA would have no way of knowing that if the garage door was closed. I have to agree with Fax that she probably wouldn't feel comfortable snooping around the car. I may have missed this with all the info. I've processed, but...was Nancy's car in the driveway the whole night? Did she regularly keep it there or in the garage? Sometimes people keep their cars in the driveway if their garages are full of junk. So if he took her car to Fielding Drive, it would have to be in the garage first to load the body without detection. But it looks as if her car was outside in the driveway when JA drove by and from news photos of the po-lice examining the wheels. Do we know what car was driven to the grocery store? I apologize if this has already been determined.

[Just the Fax]

Concerning the purse.....

The media reported the cops removed a Louis Vuitton purse from a car w/o warrant. Sounds like he then let them take it (no mention of cell phone)

"Chief Bazemore said Brad has been cooperating with police, letting them search two cars Monday night and giving them a purse."

It was said that Nancy kept some of her important stuff in the car so Brad could not see it....sounds like this is why her purse would be locked in the car and not in the house.

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6265188

[fran]

Fran, Do you really think he'd say 6am in his affidavit if he were actually there at 4 and had heard the rumors that the store had him on video?

Well, yes, ...........maybe.

I know of one husband who told TWO separate witnesses he went and played golf. Everyone else he said he went fishing.

NEITHER one was ever proven. BUT, he did go to the BAY, not to fish but to dump!

He also said his wife knew this and knew that. Course, she wasn't around to say IF it was TRUE.

He MAY have taken TWO trips to the store and hopes that his attorney can find a way to say that the store cameras, IF it shows him there at 4 a.m., it is really after 6 a.m. like he said.

The other person also said they left their house at 9:30, yet saw something on tv at 9:50. Oh, and his cell phone placed him outside his house 20 minutes later and then kicked into the cell tower he was supposed to be in the first place.

That's his story and he's STILL stickin' to it from DEATH ROW!

The RUMOR, LOL, by the time it got to the media, was he bought bleach. Now WE know it was DETERGENT W/BLEACH. His story is he bought 'detergent.'............NOW, prove him wrong.

IMO, they will, they will........

I truly believe he was AT THE STORE CLOSER TO 4 A.M. I believe the evidence will prove it.;)

JMHO
fran

[d99gr81]

I suppose it is conceivable that she would take off for a short, 5 mile run at 7am and return home in time to shower and then head over to her 8 am painting commitment.

The fact that runner was seen at 8am, makes it that much more unlikely it was Nancy Cooper

With all respect you name says just the fax yet you so willing to just blow of this? Please I am not trying to start anything I just want you to list on hard fact that we no that proves he did it? Not sure how you can say:

The fact that runner was seen at 8am, makes it that much more unlikely it was Nancy Cooper.

How does it in fact make it that much more unlikely that it was not NC???

[fran]

I thought it was established that they no longer had Cisco VoIP at their home. And another poster said even if he did have the VoIP system and somehow altered calls, there would be a record of it.

BRAD SAID he took out the VoIP. Did he? I dunno. I'm NOT going to take his word for it.

I know someone said there would be a record of 'alteration,' but, could he have found another way to alter it without being detected? He does have a degree, I'm assuming it's in computer science. Does he know something others don't or have a way around it? I dunno.....

Until something is proven, I'm sorry, I just can't take his word for it. I do NOT know if he's being truthful. Just like I don't know if EVERYTHING Nancy told her friends is the truth either.

I will say she was right on one thing though!

She feared for her life!? :eek:

Looks like she was justified on that one. :(

JMHO
fran

[momto3kids]

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/media?id=6262404

It was around the 1:20 mark. "A ground & air search has turned up a few items."


Thanks so much for finding that Carolinalady! This interview is also the one Theresa O'Driscoll did the interview on. It appears from the clip she is also one of the main people to begin the search. Obviously she had concern for her friend to be interviewed on TV, but I don't see where she has a statement.

[d99gr81]

BRAD SAID he took out the VoIP. Did he? I dunno. I'm NOT going to take his word for it.

I know someone said there would be a record of 'alteration,' but, could he have found another way to alter it without being detected? He does have a degree, I'm assuming it's in computer science. Does he know something others don't or have a way around it? I dunno.....

Until something is proven, I'm sorry, I just can't take his word for it. I do NOT know if he's being truthful. Just like I don't know if EVERYTHING Nancy told her friends is the truth either.

I will say she was right on one thing though!

She feared for her life!? :eek:

Looks like she was justified on that one. :(

JMHO
fran


I explained this in detail a few times now. Had he changed anything in the Call Manager it would have been logged. There is no hiding it. Not only that he would have NO WAY of altering the Local Exchange Carriers. No offense to any of you but some of you are easy to come up with these wild theories in a way to explain how he did it...yet you don't do that for possibilities he didn't do it. The more I read the more I find reasons to not think he did it. Me ex wife left her purse in the Car every day. Heck I leave my wallet in mine. Its not a stretch at all think think she did as well. Especially if she was trying to hide things from him.

[BeBeBru]

Please disregard my post at 3:40 today as I tried to go there and could not find it.
I have been looking for it again......S0000000000000 Sorry

[Just the Fax]

With all respect you name says just the fax yet you so willing to just blow of this? Please I am not trying to start anything I just want you to list on hard fact that we no that proves he did it? Not sure how you can say:

The fact that runner was seen at 8am, makes it that much more unlikely it was Nancy Cooper.

How does it in fact make it that much more unlikely that it was not NC???

Well, the fact is Nancy was expected at 8 am sharp at her friend's to paint.

If a female runner was seen at 8 am sharp as posted, I simply said "it makes it that much more unlikely it was Nancy Cooper"

[Just the Fax]

I explained this in detail a few times now. Had he changed anything in the Call Manager it would have been logged. There is no hiding it. Not only that he would have NO WAY of altering the Local Exchange Carriers. No offense to any of you but some of you are easy to come up with these wild theories in a way to explain how he did it...yet you don't do that for possibilities he didn't do it. The more I read the more I find reasons to not think he did it. Me ex wife left her purse in the Car every day. Heck I leave my wallet in mine. Its not a stretch at all think think she did as well. Especially if she was trying to hide things from him.

What wild theories are you talking about ?
Mine have been pretty simple....all based on Brad's confessed time line on Saturday morning.

The purse and cell phone mean nothing imo. In the car or house....not an issue at the end of the day.

[fran]

I would like to just say one more thing about the, IMO, inappropriate 'trashing' of the victim the husband and his friends have done in their affidavits.

The defense of this action has been stated by some as approporiate because he was fighting for the custody of his children. He didn't want to loose custody so he was fighting with everything he had.

Well, first I'd like to say that after several years of watching these same sort of cases, I NEVER once recall an INNOCENT person, MAN or WOMAN, come out and say bad things about the victim to either take the suspicion off themselves, or to gain or regain custody of their children. Course, that's just me. ;)

One last thing about this. Can you answer me why then in heck, could he not only say disparging things about the decedent, and it's ok or fair, then why should he ALSO say something so horrid about one of Nancy's friend's child, (possibly a victim). He knew dam* well this was going to be released to the public, in that very same community where both HE and the friend's CHILD lives. Is it ok for him to ruin or disrupt that child's life when he's trying to save his own skin!? Just because that parent is a friend of his murdered wife and chose to stand up for the one who's been silenced?

Sorry, that is the most dispicable thing I've ever seen a NOT suspect do!:furious: Disgraceful and he SHOULD be ashamed of himself! I'm not going to discuss that anymore, but believe me, that little tidbit didn't get past many! Doesn't look good for the NOT suspect at all!

Just sayin'
fran

[stillblv]

I would like to just say one more thing about the, IMO, inappropriate 'trashing' of the victim the husband and his friends have done in their affidavits.

The defense of this action has been stated by some as approporiate because he was fighting for the custody of his children. He didn't want to loose custody so he was fighting with everything he had.

Well, first I'd like to say that after several years of watching these same sort of cases, I NEVER once recall an INNOCENT person, MAN or WOMAN, come out and say bad things about the victim to either take the suspicion off themselves, or to gain or regain custody of their children. Course, that's just me. ;)

One last thing about this. Can you answer me why then in heck, could he not only say disparging things about the decedent, and it's ok or fair, then why should he ALSO say something so horrid about one of Nancy's friend's child, (possibly a victim). He knew dam* well this was going to be released to the public, in that very same community where both HE and the friend's CHILD lives. Is it ok for him to ruin or disrupt that child's life when he's trying to save his own skin!? Just because that parent is a friend of his murdered wife and chose to stand up for the one who's been silenced?

Sorry, that is the most dispicable thing I've ever seen a NOT suspect do!:furious: Disgraceful and he SHOULD be ashamed of himself! I'm not going to discuss that anymore, but believe me, that little tidbit didn't get past many! Doesn't look good for the NOT suspect at all!

Just sayin'
fran

Fran - I definitely missed what he said about one of Nancy's friend's child. What did he say and whom was it about?

[wirehair]

If NC hid her important documents in the car and hid the keys somewhere in the house while she went running and slept with them in her pocket; how did anyone suddenly find those keys and be able to drive the car anywhere. Well....if she were killed at home on Friday night, they were probably in her pocket and "someone just removed them from her pocket after the fact. I would be very interesting to know exactly which car he took to the store. If he came home from the party earlier, she wouldn't have left the keys out in the open if she was afraid he might take something else out of the car. If she didn't run with her keys, they had to be somewhere.

[reddress58]

Even if BC wasn't home, JA would have no way of knowing that if the garage door was closed. I have to agree with Fax that she probably wouldn't feel comfortable snooping around the car. I may have missed this with all the info. I've processed, but...was Nancy's car in the driveway the whole night? Did she regularly keep it there or in the garage? Sometimes people keep their cars in the driveway if their garages are full of junk. So if he took her car to Fielding Drive, it would have to be in the garage first to load the body without detection. But it looks as if her car was outside in the driveway when JA drove by and from news photos of the po-lice examining the wheels. Do we know what car was driven to the grocery store? I apologize if this has already been determined.
I feel kind of ignored here. Could someone please bring me up to date on the car(s) story/facts?

[lunarmodule]

I'm with you, Fran.

For the life of me, if my husband were found murdered and I was completely innocent, why would I ever start badmouthing him? I'm trying to imagine my crazy inlaws trying to get custody of my son. :eek:

Even then, I don't think I could badmouth the person that I "loved and wanted to stay married to." How does that prove I'm a fit parent? It just proves I'm still having to get a tit-for-tat, upper hand in the relationship. With someone who's dead. It makes no sense.

[fran]

I'm with you, Fran.

For the life of me, if my husband were found murdered and I was completely innocent, why would I ever start badmouthing him? I'm trying to imagine my crazy inlaws trying to get custody of my son. :eek:

Even then, I don't think I could badmouth the person that I "loved and wanted to stay married to." How does that prove I'm a fit parent? It just proves I'm still having to get a tit-for-tat, upper hand in the relationship. With someone who's dead. It makes no sense.

EXACTLY! lunamodule!

I don't know why people can't see it that way. That's how it would be for me!

fran

[fran]

I feel kind of ignored here. Could someone please bring me up to date on the car(s) story/facts?

Ahhh......no one's ignoring you. I know how you feel though. That's happened to me more times than I could count! LOL, but I'm still here, just blabbing away anyway, IF even to myself! :D

I THINK she knew her car was there. Someone else was with her, and the other person was freaking out, remember someone in the backgroun?

Anyway, IMO, it may have been the other one that had seen her car there. Just guessing.

fran

[Just the Fax]

If NC hid her important documents in the car and hid the keys somewhere in the house while she went running and slept with them in her pocket; how did anyone suddenly find those keys and be able to drive the car anywhere. Well....if she were killed at home on Friday night, they were probably in her pocket and "someone just removed them from her pocket after the fact. I would be very interesting to know exactly which car he took to the store. If he came home from the party earlier, she wouldn't have left the keys out in the open if she was afraid he might take something else out of the car. If she didn't run with her keys, they had to be somewhere.


The BMW X5 was leased in Brad's name.
After hearing about his controlling behavior, there is no way he did not have his own set of keys to that vehicle.

[raisincharlie]

Concerning the purse.....

The media reported the cops removed a Louis Vuitton purse from a car w/o warrant. Sounds like he then let them take it (no mention of cell phone)

"Chief Bazemore said Brad has been cooperating with police, letting them search two cars Monday night and giving them a purse."

It was said that Nancy kept some of her important stuff in the car so Brad could not see it....sounds like this is why her purse would be locked in the car and not in the house.

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6265188

I heard no reference to the purse being removed from the car, only that Brad gave it to LE, and I just listened to every video report in your link.

I consider the location of the purse puzzling but not as significant as the location of the cell phone. If Brad got the purse from the vehicle to give to LE - he obviously had keys to the same vehicle which would kind of rule out Nancy kept it there to keep him from whatever it contained. Given that, it creates only more questions.

[reddress58]

The BMW X5 was leased in Brad's name.
After hearing about his controlling behavior, there is no way he did not have his own set of keys to that vehicle.
Then her locking the passports in her car, as she told her friends, would do no good.

[fran]

Fran - I definitely missed what he said about one of Nancy's friend's child. What did he say and whom was it about?

I don't want to repeat the child's name nor the friend's name here. They didn't ask for this type of attention.

It is in the legal documents thread. Maybe his rebuttal?

HTH
fran

[reddress58]

Ahhh......no one's ignoring you. I know how you feel though. That's happened to me more times than I could count! LOL, but I'm still here, just blabbing away anyway, IF even to myself! :D

I THINK she knew her car was there. Someone else was with her, and the other person was freaking out, remember someone in the backgroun?

Anyway, IMO, it may have been the other one that had seen her car there. Just guessing.

fran
That still doesn't satisfy my curiosity about which car was driven to the grocery store. If hers was outside all night then he couldn't have used it for the purpose we suspect he did because it would be outside the garage.

[Just the Fax]

I heard no reference to the purse being removed from the car, only that Brad gave it to LE, and I just listened to every video report in your link.

I consider the location of the purse puzzling but not as significant as the location of the cell phone. If Brad got the purse from the vehicle to give to LE - he obviously had keys to the same vehicle which would kind of rule out Nancy kept it there to keep him from whatever it contained. Given that, it creates only more questions.


WRAL

"Cary police said today that Brad Cooper was cooperating with them, answering questions and allowing them to search his house and cars. About 3:45 p.m., police searched the couple’s BMW sedan and BMW SUV. They also removed a Louis Vuitton purse from one of the vehicles."

[Just the Fax]

Then her locking the passports in her car, as she told her friends, would do no good.

Guess not. By his own admission, he removed them from her car.

[fran]

I explained this in detail a few times now. Had he changed anything in the Call Manager it would have been logged. There is no hiding it. Not only that he would have NO WAY of altering the Local Exchange Carriers. No offense to any of you but some of you are easy to come up with these wild theories in a way to explain how he did it...yet you don't do that for possibilities he didn't do it. The more I read the more I find reasons to not think he did it. Me ex wife left her purse in the Car every day. Heck I leave my wallet in mine. Its not a stretch at all think think she did as well. Especially if she was trying to hide things from him.


I know you explained it to me, and I respect you as a poster and as an professional who knows his field. HOWEVER, until it is PROVEN that he didn't change the records, sorry,............it doesn't mean there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY he could have. MAYBE he found a way.

I don't begrudge you at all for feeling he did NOT do this crime. After all, he needs people to believe him, or IF he were to be arrested, he would NOT be able to receive a fair trial. You are proof that even studying everything, he has believers. HE needs that.

Just remember though, you're comparing HIS situation with yours. The OTHER party cheated on YOU and you are here to tell about it.

Oh, and I'm assuming she's around, to tell her side too.

Nancy doesn't have that luxury.

Just sayin'
fran

[reddress58]

WRAL

"Cary police said today that Brad Cooper was cooperating with them, answering questions and allowing them to search his house and cars. About 3:45 p.m., police searched the couple’s BMW sedan and BMW SUV. They also removed a Louis Vuitton purse from one of the vehicles."
Doesn't mean it was the purse she was presently using. Could still be in a bag, new from the store.

[fran]

That still doesn't satisfy my curiosity about which car was driven to the grocery store. If hers was outside all night then he couldn't have used it for the purpose we suspect he did because it would be outside the garage.

OH, I get it. Sorry, don't know the answer. I'm hoping LE knows!:eek:

fran

[carolinalady]

Well, the fact is Nancy was expected at 8 am sharp at her friend's to paint.

If a female runner was seen at 8 am sharp as posted, I simply said "it makes it that much more unlikely it was Nancy Cooper"

I thought that JA said she was expected between 8 and 9am in the 911 call.

Is it different in the affidavit? I honestly don't recall. I guess I'll go back and read it and listen to the 911 call again.

[Just the Fax]

That still doesn't satisfy my curiosity about which car was driven to the grocery store. If hers was outside all night then he couldn't have used it for the purpose we suspect he did because it would be outside the garage.


It seems the 2 car garage will only accomodate 1 car because of other 'stuff". The X5 has been shown in the drive in news shots. The friend said the X-5 was 'in the driveway' Saturday when she called 911.

When I drove by the other day, the white BMW 325 sedan was in the drive ...assume the X-5 was in the garage....or was it at the SBI lab :eek:

[Just the Fax]

I thought that JA said she was expected between 8 and 9am in the 911 call.

Is it different in the affidavit? I honestly don't recall. I guess I'll go back and read it and listen to the 911 call again.


No, she was expected at 8 am

[carolinalady]

That still doesn't satisfy my curiosity about which car was driven to the grocery store. If hers was outside all night then he couldn't have used it for the purpose we suspect he did because it would be outside the garage.

If the party was at the neighbors across the street, perhaps one of the people who left after Nancy would remember if her car was in the driveway or not.

[fran]

Then her locking the passports in her car, as she told her friends, would do no good.

Uhmmmm........I thought I read that's where Brad took the passports from, was from her car!

I don't know where I saw it, but I absolutely remember reading that. They were off somewhere and he left her, went back to the car while she was with the kids, and he removed the passports FROM the car.

It may be from an affidavit of one of her friends. Don't recall the source.

JMHO
fran

[raisincharlie]

WRAL

"Cary police said today that Brad Cooper was cooperating with them, answering questions and allowing them to search his house and cars. About 3:45 p.m., police searched the couple’s BMW sedan and BMW SUV. They also removed a Louis Vuitton purse from one of the vehicles."

You might want to correct your link to correspond to the WRAL link then.

So, either the purse was in his car or hers. If it was in hers it still doesn't jive with the rumor she kept stuff there to keep it from Brad if he had a key, and if LE had to force the vehicle open I suspect they were certainly wondering why.

Truth is it pretty much validates Jessica Adam in somke respects.

[wirehair]

I would have no problem what so ever if I thought my good friend had disappeared stopping at the house and walking right beside that car in the driveway on my way to the door to talk to BC in person. I would want to see the reaction on his face. Then I would have looked again on my way back down the driveway as I walked to my car. I would not have gone into the house even if invited in.

[Just the Fax]

Doesn't mean it was the purse she was presently using. Could still be in a bag, new from the store.


Sounds like something she would do, but how did she pay for it ?

I think the bag the cops removed w/o a sw is the same bag Brad gave them before they left that day.
W/O a SW, they could not just take it

[reddress58]

I know you explained it to me, and I respect you as a poster and as an professional who knows his field. HOWEVER, until it is PROVEN that he didn't change the records, sorry,............it doesn't mean there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY he could have. MAYBE he found a way.

I don't begrudge you at all for feeling he did NOT do this crime. After all, he needs people to believe him, or IF he were to be arrested, he would NOT be able to receive a fair trial. You are proof that even studying everything, he has believers. HE needs that.

Just remember though, you're comparing HIS situation with yours. The OTHER party cheated on YOU and you are here to tell about it.

Oh, and I'm assuming she's around, to tell her side too.

Nancy doesn't have that luxury.

Just sayin'
fran
I went on BC website today and saw that he posted a training plan 2008 for the Lake Placid IM, which took place this month. He had already run up to six miles (as he wrote in Jan. 2008 post) and explained how he was using some computerized system to measure his physical statistics. He says in his affidavit that he had not trained for an IM since June 2007 (the month he completed the Arizona IM) and to reference the website for confirmation. He's posted goals and talked about a training run for the July 2008 IM in plain print yet says he wasn't training!! So, Fran, you're right. Things can be proven wrong.

[raisincharlie]

Uhmmmm........I thought I read that's where Brad took the passports from, was from her car!

I don't know where I saw it, but I absolutely remember reading that. They were off somewhere and he left her, went back to the car while she was with the kids, and he removed the passports FROM the car.

It may be from an affidavit of one of her friends. Don't recall the source.

JMHO
fran

You are correct Fran - the passports were reported to have been taken from her car.

[reddress58]

Uhmmmm........I thought I read that's where Brad took the passports from, was from her car!

I don't know where I saw it, but I absolutely remember reading that. They were off somewhere and he left her, went back to the car while she was with the kids, and he removed the passports FROM the car.

It may be from an affidavit of one of her friends. Don't recall the source.

JMHO
fran
They were on an outing...the whole family. He would have the keys at that time because he was probably driving.

[CARYISHOME]

It is very frustrating to write something and try to post it only to have the server down. I'll try again.

About JA riding by the house: Perhaps, instead, she had talked with someone who lived in close proximity to the house who could look out their window and see the car in the driveway.

Also, about the 911 call: I got the impression that someone came into the room while she was on the phone. I heard a chair scrapping on the floor. Maybe it was JA, maybe it was someone else. Did any of you get the same impression or is it just my imagination?

The question about the car being in the driveway or the garage is a good one. Knowing what we know about BC I would not be surprised if his car was kept in the garage. OTH, her car was newer, seems like that car would be in the garage - especially if it was leased (how did you know it was leased, JTF?). Of course, maybe her car was easier to get to with kids and all if it was outside. Lots of maybes here, I know.

BUT...if I had used that car to haul a body in I don't think I would park it right out front for anyone to see...UNLESS it was ALWAYS outside.

This is just me thinking out loud....

[Just the Fax]

You might want to correct your link to correspond to the WRAL link then.

So, either the purse was in his car or hers. If it was in hers it still doesn't jive with the rumor she kept stuff there to keep it from Brad if he had a key, and if LE had to force the vehicle open I suspect they were certainly wondering why.

Truth is it pretty much validates Jessica Adam in somke respects.

She drove the X-5, so we can likely assume her purse would be in that car, not the car of the enemy.

Like I said earlier, Brad likely had his own key to that car.
No way he lets Nancy have that much control over something that she does not own outright.

[carolinalady]

I listened to the 911 call again and she initially says she was expected at 8am. Later in the call, she says "no later than 9."

In the affidavit, it says "around 8am."

[raisincharlie]

It is very frustrating to write something and try to post it only to have the server down. I'll try again.

About JA riding by the house: Perhaps, instead, she had talked with someone who lived in close proximity to the house who could look out their window and see the car in the driveway.

Also, about the 911 call: I got the impression that someone came into the room while she was on the phone. I heard a chair scrapping on the floor. Maybe it was JA, maybe it was someone else. Did any of you get the same impression or is it just my imagination?

The question about the car being in the driveway or the garage is a good one. Knowing what we know about BC I would not be surprised if his car was kept in the garage. OTH, her car was newer, seems like that car would be in the garage - especially if it was leased (how did you know it was leased, JTF?). Of course, maybe her car was easier to get to with kids and all if it was outside. Lots of maybes here, I know.

BUT...if I had used that car to haul a body in I don't think I would park it right out front for anyone to see...UNLESS it was ALWAYS outside.

This is just me thinking out loud....

Nancy's car seems to my way of thinking, the perfect vehicle to haul her body in, provided blood was not associated with the murder. Her DNA would be all over that car - pretty good cover.

[Just the Fax]

I listened to the 911 call again and she initially says she was expected at 8am. Later in the call, she says "no later than 9."

In the affidavit, it says "around 8am."

Sounds like the 911 caller was sure she would have called if she was not going to be there at 8 am

[fran]

I just read #10 of his rebuttal and I would bet he installed an ADDITIONAL traditional phone line. Cisco provides their employees with VoIP and it's pretty much a necessity for working from home these days. It would be very difficult for a family to use their company provided IP phone during working hours and may explain all the disconnects.


WoWser!
:eek:

OK, so you mean he was...............not telling the truth? or he was..........."fudging".....................

fran

[Blondieskatz]

It would be easy to establish if NC called BC that morning while he was on his way to the store. Remember she called because one of the children wanted juice. I would hope that LE has already ask the children if they saw their mom that morning.

[raisincharlie]

She drove the X-5, so we can likely assume her purse would be in that car, not the car of the enemy.

Like I said earlier, Brad likely had his own key to that car.
No way he lets Nancy have that much control over something that she does not own outright.

I agree he certainly would not be inclined to agree to not having a key to the car. No way, unless it happened to disappear like those passports.

[Blondieskatz]

Knowing Brad was right inside, I doubt she would get out and peer into her car . After all, she was not chummy with Brad and she would have likely felt very uneasy about that.
However, I do agree she could have driven by and seen the car in the drive.

I thought during that time frame, BC was driving around looking for NC.

[Blondieskatz]

Sorry, I see that has already been pointed out. Must finish thread before posting....

[Just the Fax]

Whichever car he used, it was likely in the garage at the time of the murder.
Too much commotion moving cars around and into the garage to load a body.

He could have just as easily placed her in the trunk of the sedan (assuming no blood).
In some ways, this would be safer in case of the remote chance he was pulled by the cops for speeding.

[SleuthyGal]

I know you explained it to me, and I respect you as a poster and as an professional who knows his field. HOWEVER, until it is PROVEN that he didn't change the records, sorry,............it doesn't mean there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY he could have. MAYBE he found a way.

Just sayin'
fran

I also work in the telecom field. I don't know about the "Call Manager" program but I do know that there is NO WAY anyone can change the LEC (local exchange carrier) record...because they would never have access to it. Not even a telecom professional of BC's caliber. It simply isn't possible for him to get to THAT. Note: I'm not saying he couldn't do something else or play with his call settings or calling software...but at the LEC level, nopey. He could not, nor could anyone else.

[fran]

I went on BC website today and saw that he posted a training plan 2008 for the Lake Placid IM, which took place this month. He had already run up to six miles (as he wrote in Jan. 2008 post) and explained how he was using some computerized system to measure his physical statistics. He says in his affidavit that he had not trained for an IM since June 2007 (the month he completed the Arizona IM) and to reference the website for confirmation. He's posted goals and talked about a training run for the July 2008 IM in plain print yet says he wasn't training!! So, Fran, you're right. Things can be proven wrong.

Thank you!

:D
fran

PS...;) I'm sure he will come up with an explanation for the discrepancy. :rolleyes:

[Just the Fax]

I thought during that time frame, BC was driving around looking for NC.


She first called Brad at 9.
There was quite a while before she called 911 and when Brad said he drove around.

[OregonMommy]

I don't want to repeat the child's name nor the friend's name here. They didn't ask for this type of attention.

It is in the legal documents thread. Maybe his rebuttal?

HTH
fran


It's in his affadavit. I agree with Fran...I was sickened when I read that. What kind of person would bring that kind of attention on a child? There was no reason for including that, other than to diss the parents. But for what??? I re-read his affadavit last night and thought that it was so odd that he was so mean-spirited and so defensive.

[fran]

I also work in the telecom field. I don't know about the "Call Manager" program but I do know that there is NO WAY anyone can change the LEC (local exchange carrier) record...because they would never have access to it. Not even a telecom professional of BC's caliber. It simply isn't possible for him to get to THAT. Note: I'm not saying he couldn't do something else or play with his call settings or calling software...but at the LEC level, nopey. He could not, nor could anyone else.

Thank you for the information.

My opinion is, always be prepared to expect, the unexpected.

I know I sound like a broken record about this, but I know for a fact, even someone who is uneducated and fresh out of high school, could come up with a solution on a project that several phd's had been working on for two years.

It could be as simple as turning the experiment upside down. :waitasec:

Meaning, I guess, that although EVERYONE who works with this says there is no way, with the right solution, there COULD BE. ;)

Just sayin'
fran

[fran]

No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that his company provided VoIP phone is a bennie, why would he disconnect it? Most families I know of have 2 lines - most often one IP and one traditional. Can you point me to where he said he disconnected his Cisco IP phone?

Is the Cisco IP phone the same as the VoIP system? IF yes, it's in his rebuttal affidavit in the legal document thread, I beleive.

fran

PS.....See, he didn't say he had TWO lines. :rolleyes:

[raisincharlie]

I thought during that time frame, BC was driving around looking for NC.


Blonieskatz,

The time frame of what Brad did with respect to driving around is not really a given. In Jessica adam's affidavit she indicated Brad called her at 1230 asking for Carrie's number. At that time he also indicated that he was putting the girls in the car to go look.

Jessica said after that point she called 911 and then got into her car to go over to the residence to meet the police.

None of that indicates that Brad wasn't out earlier looking but it does tend to suggest Jessica did not go by the residence until after she called 911 as she says this is when she left to go over there. So this leaves a window between 925 and 1230 that there is no reference as to what Brad was doing other than postponing and then canceling his tennis match.

[Just the Fax]

No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that his company provided VoIP phone is a bennie, why would he disconnect it? Most families I know of have 2 lines - most often one IP and one traditional. Can you point me to where he said he disconnected his Cisco IP phone?

It was Brad's affidavit.

As far as 2 lines, most of my buds are considering going to cell only and leaving Internet to the cable folks.....land lines are a waste of money imo.

[reddress58]

Before I sign off for the evening, here are my thoughts: We can all see that there are discrepancies to exactly what NC told her friends, or in the friends' remembering of the details. Brad has done somewhat of a decent job covering his tracts and attempting to disprove some of these accusations by referencing a paper trail.

But...in the end...all we have to do is listen to the terror in JA's voice on her 911 call to know that whatever NC was feeling toward her husband, her friends knew it! And, as Fran has pointed out numerous times...JA's fears were not unfounded.

[CARYISHOME]

It was Brad's original affidavit.

As far as 2 lines, most of my buds are considering going to cell only and leaving Internet to the cable folks.....land lines are a waste of money imo.

We gave up our land line some time ago - and we're old foggies!!!

[Just the Fax]

Before I sign off for the evening, here are my thoughts: We can all see that there are discrepancies to exactly what NC told her friends, or in the friends' remembering of the details. Brad has done somewhat of a decent job covering his tracts and attempting to disprove some of these accusations by referencing a paper trail.

But...in the end...all we have to do is listen to the terror in JA's voice on her 911 call to know that whatever NC was feeling toward her husband, her friends knew it! And, as Fran has pointed out numerous times...JA's fears were not unfounded.

Wonder if you were expecting a friend (in a happy marriage) to come over at 8 am and she blew you off. You would likely call the house, but would you ever suspect foul play a few hours later ?

IMO, just goes to show her friends knew he was capable of this unthinkable act.

[CARYISHOME]

Whichever car he used, it was likely in the garage at the time of the murder.
Too much commotion moving cars around and into the garage to load a body.

He could have just as easily placed her in the trunk of the sedan (assuming no blood).
In some ways, this would be safer in case of the remote chance he was pulled by the cops for speeding.

Agree.

[CARYISHOME]

Wonder if you were expecting a friend (in a happy marriage) to come over at 8 am and she blew you off. You would likely call the house, but would you ever suspect foul play a few hours later ?

IMO, just goes to show her friends knew he was capable of this unthinkable act.


Agree, again.

[raisincharlie]

Thought this was interesting :

http://www.squawkfox.com/2008/02/13/the-cost-of-doing-an-ironman-triathlon/

Brad's hobbies weren't exactly cheap - add in he has the gym membership he references and so on - he was equally capable of spending a fair amount of money that did not benefit his family in any way it seems.

cannot take credit for this link it was brought to my attention by some really good sleuthers. Thanks ! :)

[Just the Fax]

Thought this was interesting :

http://www.squawkfox.com/2008/02/13/the-cost-of-doing-an-ironman-triathlon/

Brad's hobbies weren't exactly cheap - add in he has the gym membership he references and so on - he was equally capable of spending a fair amount of money that did not benefit his family in any way it seems.

cannot take credit for this link it was brought to my attention by some really good sleuthers. Thanks ! :)

Yep, all about Brad. :rolleyes:

[Just the Fax]

I bet the cops took the clothing she was wearing the night she came home from the Cookout. Upon any death, it is natural for one's bladder and Rectum to relax, releasing body fluids. This could possibly be good CE

Maybe that is why the 2nd trip was for laundry detergent ....

[SleuthyGal]

More musings:

- Was NC one of those who was usually on time or did she usually run late to things? That would be important to know to determine what is 'usual and customary' in that morning's timeline.

- I was just outside walking my dog down the street. Quiet neighborhood. And yet, there were people out and about. It would be hard to be completely unseen if you were out walking down a typical street in Cary. Even at 7am. Someone would see you cause people do look/notice things. That leads me to believe that NC was NOT out and jogging that morning, despite what story BC is telling.

[raisincharlie]

More musings:

- Was NC one of those who was usually on time or did she usually run late to things? That would be important to know to determine what is 'usual and customary' in that morning's timeline.

- I was just outside walking my dog down the street. Quiet neighborhood. And yet, there were people out and about. It would be hard to be completely unseen if you were out walking down a typical street in Cary. Even at 7am. Someone would see you cause people do look/notice things. That leads me to believe that NC was NOT out and jogging that morning, despite what story BC is telling.

If you can take something from Jessica Adam it may be that Nancy was pretty reliable about time but sometimes a bit late. I say that because she says in the 911 call Nancy was to be there between 8 and 9. In her affidavit she reports calling Brad at 925 or so. So it didn't take her long to check up really.

[Cheyenne130]

I can't believe that he would reference his own website that contradicts his claim in his rebuttal affidavit! :eek:

It makes me question his other statements and claims that records would back him up. It seems that he may have been saying whatever he thought he needed to say to win the custody issue.

[Cheyenne130]

Am I allowed to copy and paste something here that is from Brad's website?

[raisincharlie]

I can't believe that he would reference his own website that contradicts his claim in his rebuttal affidavit! :eek:

It makes me question his other statements and claims that records would back him up. It seems that he may have been saying whatever he thought he needed to say to win the custody issue.

I agree but he sure did reference that website and it sure does, in his own words disagree with a signed affidavit for use in court. :crazy:

[SleuthyGal]

Someone should take a 'picture' or do a screen capture of his website cause I bet it will suddenly get changed.... just sayin'

[Raebie]

Question:

If LE viewed the children as witnesses or having material information, would they have agreed to let them leave the country an possibly have their recollections "tainted" by Nancy's relatives?

[Just the Fax]

Cisco provides him with VoIP for free as a bennie. He says in #10 of his rebuttal that he installed a TRADITIONAL line for Nancy. Why would he need to disconnect his FREE Cisco provided VoIP in order to get an additional traditional phone line? VoIP runs over cable, they are totally independent!

I took it that Nancy disliked the VoIP phone cause she did not trust him.
(at least that is what her buds said)
He said he went to Best buy and bought her a standard Vtech house phone.

[raisincharlie]

Question:

If LE viewed the children as witnesses or having material information, would they have agreed to let them leave the country an possibly have their recollections "tainted" by Nancy's relatives?

Perhaps this is why the agreement calls for no discussion of the murder and why the children are required to attend therapy. Dunno, to me that seems like one of those d if you do and d if you don't. What would stop the father from doing the same ?

[SleuthyGal]

I think children that young are not really seen as 'material witnesses' because they don't know truth from fantasy and can not be cross-examined with accuracy. That's not to say they didn't see or hear something, but I don't think the prosecution would or could hang their hat on anything the kids say.

[momto3kids]

Have we all come to think the LV purse was left in the car by NC or it was put there by BC?

[Just the Fax]

I think children that young are not really seen as 'material witnesses' because they don't know truth from fantasy and can not be cross-examined with accuracy. That's not to say they didn't see or hear something, but I don't think the prosecution would or could hang their hat on anything the kids say.

Through child psychologists, the DA interviewed David temple's 4 year old son about what he might have witnessed when Temple killed his pregnant mom .

Also, the cops interviewed Bobby Cutt's very young son about what he witnessed when his mom was murdered by his father.

[SleuthyGal]

standard Vtech house phone.

I use 'standard Vtech phones' on my VoIP line. Most VoIP services allow you to use a regular plug in or cordless phone...as long as you plug one extension into the VoIP router. My Vtech system has 1 base station, which I have plugged into my VoIP router, and 3 other extensions, which only have to be recharged in their little base stations plugged into any electrical outlet.

[Just the Fax]

Have we all come to think the LV purse was left in the car by NC or it was put there by BC?


I think she left it there.
What good would it do for him either way ?

[raisincharlie]

Have we all come to think the LV purse was left in the car by NC or it was put there by BC?

I haven't reached a firm stance on that. To me it makes no sense for the purse to have been in the car - none. But then there could be a logical reason for it to be there. As to Brad putting it there, I have thought that possible as well for reasons which are lenghty to explain, but yes I think it is equally possible he put it in the car.


i.e if the purse was in the house and the cell was in the purse - he would hear it ring. I'm sure he could explain why he didn't answer it. By putting it in the car it is obvious he can't hear it ring.

[SleuthyGal]

Through child psychologists, the DA interviewed David temple's 4 year old son about what he might have witnessed when Temple killed his pregnant mom .

Also, the cops interviewed Bobby Cutt's very young son about what he witnessed when his mom was murdered by his father.

Yes I know. But the kids will not be testifying in court and will not be cross-examined. That's what I meant by 'material witness' subject to cross-examination.

[Raebie]

A 4 year old would know if her dad woke her up before sunlight to go for a ride in the car. Or if she heard any shouting during the night.

[Just the Fax]

I use 'standard Vtech phones' on my VoIP line. Most VoIP services allow you to use a regular plug in or cordless phone...as long as you plug one extension into the VoIP router. My Vtech system has 1 base station, which I have plugged into my VoIP router, and 3 other extensions, which only have to be recharged in their little base stations plugged into any electrical outlet.

I assume he meant he changed back to the traditional AT&t service ?
He said he bought a Vtech phone at Best buy

[SleuthyGal]

I assume he meant he changed back to the traditional AT&t service ?
He said he bought a Vtech phone at Best buy

I'd want to see the records/proof on who his service provider is/was. Knowing the model of phone he bought doesn't tell us anything about the service powering that phone.

[SusieClue]

Thought this was interesting :

http://www.squawkfox.com/2008/02/13/the-cost-of-doing-an-ironman-triathlon/

Brad's hobbies weren't exactly cheap - add in he has the gym membership he references and so on - he was equally capable of spending a fair amount of money that did not benefit his family in any way it seems.

cannot take credit for this link it was brought to my attention by some really good sleuthers. Thanks ! :)

That is the absolute truth. I have a friend whose husband has 3 or 4 racing bikes - all of the bells and whistles, etc. and clearly has spent in the tens of thousands of dollars range all the while monitoring her spending very closely, getting angry if she purchases clothing for the kids that he considers to be too expensive. It's very odd and too familiar, I see.

[Just the Fax]

Yes I know. But the kids will not be testifying in court and will not be cross-examined. That's what I meant by 'material witness' subject to cross-examination.

Yes but their statements can be brought in as evidence if the judge allows.

[SleuthyGal]

A 4 year old would know if her dad woke her up before sunlight to go for a ride in the car. Or if she heard any shouting during the night.

Yes I agree with that. I hope the 4 yr old was questioned the next day or very soon thereafter. I assume her memory of that night/morning could fade easily as the days/weeks go on.

[SleuthyGal]

Yes but their statements can be brought in as evidence if the judge allows.

Oh then that's very good news. Maybe one of them heard or saw something that LE will find useful.

[Just the Fax]

I'd want to see the records/proof on who his service provider is/was. Knowing the model of phone he bought doesn't tell us anything about the service powering that phone.

Well if there is doubt, he clearly lied big time in his affidavit.

[Cheyenne130]

That is the absolute truth. I have a friend whose husband has 3 or 4 racing bikes - all of the bells and whistles, etc. and clearly has spent in the tens of thousands of dollars range all the while monitoring her spending very closely, getting angry if she purchases clothing for the kids that he considers to be too expensive. It's very odd and too familiar, I see.

My son recently told me about a friend of his that bought a pair of pedals for his bike at a cost of $400.00. It shaved a few grams off the weight of the bike. That was the reason for them.

[Just the Fax]

Sounds like the Cooper's were in debt to their eyeballs because of both of their spending habits.

[SusieClue]

I haven't reached a firm stance on that. To me it makes no sense for the purse to have been in the car - none. But then there could be a logical reason for it to be there. As to Brad putting it there, I have thought that possible as well for reasons which are lenghty to explain, but yes I think it is equally possible he put it in the car.


i.e if the purse was in the house and the cell was in the purse - he would hear it ring. I'm sure he could explain why he didn't answer it. By putting it in the car it is obvious he can't hear it ring.

I sort of wonder if he wasn't initially planning on parking the car near the coffee house she is known to frequent before a run... leaving her purse and phone inside...kind of removes the crime scene from his house.

This leads to a BIG QUESTION: Have the Cary police brought in the search and rescue dogs or bloodhounds or what have you to track Nancy's scent from the house? Remember that with Laci, the dogs couldn't track her scent in the direction that Scott said she went but rather they tracked it to the street route that Scott ended up taking her - to her final resting place.

If they haven't used dogs, WHY NOT? Also, they could use the dogs that can smell decomposition to check out the cars as in little Caylee Anthony's case.

It will be interesting to hear what all they have netted from their investigation.

[Raebie]

I would think examining their credit card purchases would be a very easy thing to do.

[momto3kids]

I haven't reached a firm stance on that. To me it makes no sense for the purse to have been in the car - none. But then there could be a logical reason for it to be there. As to Brad putting it there, I have thought that possible as well for reasons which are lenghty to explain, but yes I think it is equally possible he put it in the car.


i.e if the purse was in the house and the cell was in the purse - he would hear it ring. I'm sure he could explain why he didn't answer it. By putting it in the car it is obvious he can't hear it ring.

I personally can't believe she left a LV in her car when there has been an increase of breakins around here. Within 3 months there have been 7 vandalism & burglary (some forcible) cases around her home with .