Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #18

[chauncey7381]

you may be thinking. Swinging going in Lochmere?

Just waiting on the ME report. I've read no facts or evidence yet to convince me Brad Cooper murdered his wife. It's "nudding" but hearsay, opinion, speculation.

The truth will come out, the longer CPD sits on this without an arrest, the more I'm convinced of Brad Cooper's complete innocence.

[raisincharlie]

Check out "Theories", page 8, post #195 -- I had not heard that bit of info before.

I have, heard of a shovel being recovered as well, also brought to LE's attention. Do you reckon if it is true, there is a logical reason for why LE searched Brad's place of employment ?

In Chief Bazemore's press conference of July 14 at 630 pm - a media person asks her if anyone has come forward saying they saw Nancy on the 12th - she says NO. So if someone did see her and told LE and LE believed it to be so - why did Chief Bazemore say NO?

ETA - the Chief could have said NO in the 1:30 or 10pm presser on 14
July - I may have my times messed up - but not the comment.

[Zoe]

I have, heard of a shovel being recovered as well, also brought to LE's attention. Do you reckon if it is true, there is a logical reason for why LE searched Brad's place of employment ?



If that's true, don't know the logic behind it -- IIRC, someone, perhaps the Chief, said they search to look for info to "rule in" someone as well as to rule out someone. However, my retired homicide detective friend seems to think that the Cisco search keeps BC in the forefront in that LE wouldn't necessarily execute a search warrant in order to attempt to prove BC innocent--they were looking for something - now, whether it was something specific or a covering the bases and see what we find kind of search, well, maybe one day we'll be privy to that info.

Of course, again, my posts are speculation based on life experience and my musings w/folks who used to do this kind of work.

[raisincharlie]

If that's true, don't know the logic behind it -- IIRC, someone, perhaps the Chief, said they search to look for info to "rule in" someone as well as to rule out someone. However, my retired homicide detective friend seems to think that the Cisco search keeps BC in the forefront in that LE wouldn't necessarily execute a search warrant in order to attempt to prove BC innocent--they were looking for something - now, whether it was something specific or a covering the bases and see what we find kind of search, well, maybe one day we'll be privy to that info.

Of course, again, my posts are speculation based on life experience and my musings w/folks who used to do this kind of work.

I tend to agree rule in - rule out - but once it moves beyond the residence to a very specific place, it is because something led them there and it is usually not something to rule one out. It is interesting to speak with LE folks, unattached to the case. I doubt the probable cause section of the warrant on Cisco said - we want to pry through Cisco's data and search Brad's office to rule out Brad instead of looking for a killer somewhere. :crazy:


ETA - even a defense attorney chimed in on the Cisco search:

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6294423

"In order to even acquire a warrant to search a separate place connected to an individual there has to be probable cause for a judge to believe that that individual was connected with the commission of an offense and evidence would be found there," he said.
Knudsen, a former prosecutor and longtime defense attorney, suspects one of the things the search at Cisco concentrated on was Cooper's computers. Exactly what, if anything was turned up on Cooper is sealed up in the search warrant.
"It's pretty clear now that he's a suspect. Not just a person of interest, but a suspect," Knudsen said.

[EntreNous]

you may be thinking. Swinging going in Lochmere?

Just waiting on the ME report. I've read no facts or evidence yet to convince me Brad Cooper murdered his wife. It's "nudding" but hearsay, opinion, speculation.

The truth will come out, the longer CPD sits on this without an arrest, the more I'm convinced of Brad Cooper's complete innocence.
What makes you think that chauncey? It takes time to put a case together. The autopsy isn't back yet, the DNA evidence either. If BC did it and the LE makes an arrest before everything is in they run the risk of him getting off on a technicality in a trial. As someone in a previous post stated, there's no statute of limitations on murder but a person cannot be tried for the same murder twice. I'm sure if the LE thinks BC is their man, they're going to proceed with extreme caution.

My husband's ex-girlfriend was murdered here in our home town and while we all felt we knew it was her, then current, boyfriend that killed her, no arrest was made until 20 years later. They finally got the break they needed and he was convicted of murder. Granted, what clinched it was DNA. At the time of the murder they didn't have the technology they have now. But the point is, sometimes an arrest can't be made overnight if there's no eye witness to the crime or they don't find the perp standing over the body while holding the murder weapon. It takes time to build a case and it's obvious this case is complex.

[carolinalady]

There sure was alot of hmmmm, hawwww, hmmm when JA was asked by the 911 dispatcher if Brad had ever been physical with Nancy.

Why would she hesitate to tell the 911 dispatcher if there was physical violence? And why would she hesitate to include that in her affidavit.

[carolinalady]

JA holds the key I still say. Is it just ironic the Adam's bought a condo when NC stated it was over?

According to 411.com lookup of the address, someone is living there (I know that it's not always up to date). So, at least at the time that the phone listing were last updated for that site, it has someone occupying that address. So, I'm not sure it would be empty for Nancy to move into.

My guess, the condo was investment property.

[Zoe]

I tend to agree rule in - rule out - but once it moves beyond the residence to a very specific place, it is because something led them there and it is usually not something to rule one out. It is interesting to speak with LE folks, unattached to the case. I doubt the probable cause section of the warrant on Cisco said - we want to pry through Cisco's data and search Brad's office to rule out Brad instead of looking for a killer somewhere. :crazy:


ETA - even a defense attorney chimed in on the Cisco search:

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6294423

"In order to even acquire a warrant to search a separate place connected to an individual there has to be probable cause for a judge to believe that that individual was connected with the commission of an offense and evidence would be found there," he said.
Knudsen, a former prosecutor and longtime defense attorney, suspects one of the things the search at Cisco concentrated on was Cooper's computers. Exactly what, if anything was turned up on Cooper is sealed up in the search warrant.
"It's pretty clear now that he's a suspect. Not just a person of interest, but a suspect," Knudsen said.

the section above that i "bolded" is prescisely what my friend said. of course, he also added that LE can "know" but to prove, even close to "beyond reasonable doubt," well, that takes time, skill and sometimes a dose of luck.

[raisincharlie]

Why would she hesitate to tell the 911 dispatcher if there was physical violence? And why would she hesitate to include that in her affidavit.


Have to ask her.

[raisincharlie]

One other rumor that perhaps Pat Bazemore dispells in the 14th July 630 presser relates to if Bella saw Nancy that morning.

At 6 minutes into the presser a reporter asks if Bella saw Nancy that morning - Chief Bazemore says the last person to have seen Nancy alive was Brad.

Just for info.

The confirmation of no sightings is between 1120 and 1145 minutes into the presser.

[raisincharlie]

the section above that i "bolded" is prescisely what my friend said. of course, he also added that LE can "know" but to prove, even close to "beyond reasonable doubt," well, that takes time, skill and sometimes a dose of luck.

Yep - lets hope they have the luck necessary to bring this to a conclusion with justice prevailing.

[Jess]

According to 411.com lookup of the address, someone is living there (I know that it's not always up to date). So, at least at the time that the phone listing were last updated for that site, it has someone occupying that address. So, I'm not sure it would be empty for Nancy to move into.

My guess, the condo was investment property.

According to Nancy's sister, Jill Dean, of Edmonton, Nancy was planning on taking the girls and moving to Ottawa to be near her sister Krista. This was on a local newscast, I'm thinking CTV Edmonton two or three days after her body was found. I am sorry but I have no link to this.

These plans could have been 'finalized" during the family vacation ?? Perhaps that is the whereabouts of the passports is , to me, very important.

[Sewing_Buddy]

Thought about it a bit more - went through a couple of affidavits again and recalling some early info:

Nancy had helped JA paint before - on the 12th she was to help JA paint again and there was the curious statement that JA was going to help Nancy "organize" later in the day.

Looking at those statements it does seem possible that Nancy was in the mind of moving out and if JA had a "spare" condo for example - could be it was to happen the weekend Nancy went missing. Could also be that Nancy herself told Brad she was moving out and this simple fact started quite a tiff. From the affidavits, it was stated that Nancy had asked Brad to move out, and in one of those affidavits, when talking about the water being turned off, the person also mentions that Brad was living somewhere else when that happened.

So Onescout's theory about Nancy moving out that weekend seems quite plausible. Except maybe she moving "down" the road instead of to Canada. Given the pending separation and Brad saying Cisco was helping with the green card issue - it seems likely, but it just didn't happen soon enough.

Since it wouldn't need to be kept a secret from Brad (now that Nancy is dead) why wouldn't JA include in her affadvit that Nancy had plans to move into a condo that weekend....if it were true.
Just curious.

[Onescout]

According to 411.com lookup of the address, someone is living there (I know that it's not always up to date). So, at least at the time that the phone listing were last updated for that site, it has someone occupying that address. So, I'm not sure it would be empty for Nancy to move into.

My guess, the condo was investment property.

Good find! Seeing how JA bought the condo a year ago, maybe the renter only had a year lease and was moving out, perfect timing for NC and the kids.A transitional place.... Timing sounds right.

[2Daughters1Dog]

you fine folks may have already gotten through this, I was gone yesterday afternoon and have read all of #17 but none of this thread. A fellow poster was kind enough to pm me the likely address of Carey Clark (based on voting records, because no Clarke, *Carey* or similar owns property):

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Here are some comments from #17 I am going to respond to:

Onescout said: Oh yeah and another thing that bugs me BC said he went to look for Carrie but didn't have her address...duh...and went looking for her car....hmmmm...how dumb does that sound to you guys?

HOw did he know where to go and what her car was like and omigod this all sounds so not right!

I responded:

I believe he said he didn't know her EXACT address, but went to the subdivision/community ( a townhouse as I recall). If he knew what her car looked like, presumably it would have been parked in front of her unit.

Onescout then quoted my response and posted:

It was a wild goose chase, a red herring whatever you want to call it...there could have been hundreds of townhomes in that subdivision. And many townhomes have garages, in that case he would've really been out SOS.
Are you kidding me?






Now, here is the tax map of where we can deduce Carey lives:

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


Looking at that tax map pretty quickly, there are a total of 65-68 total units in her subdivision, spread over 4 short roads. From end to end, it's about 0.2 miles. It would take no more than 5 minutes to slowly drive through the whole area.

BTW, none of them have garages


furthermore, look at the tax map again and see where this subdivision is located. North of Lochmere Drive off Kildaire Farm Rd. Within 1/2 mile of the Crescent Commons H-T and the Lifetime Fitness.

The way he describes his route, he went by Lifetime Fitness and then lastly by Carey's "condo" (really a cluster home or townhouse).

So, to summarize:

She lived in a small subdivision of townhome/cluster homes.
None of those had garages.
He described going by her house as his last attempt, after Lifetime Fitness.

[raisincharlie]

Since it wouldn't need to be kept a secret from Brad (now that Nancy is dead) why wouldn't JA include in her affadvit that Nancy had plans to move into a condo that weekend....if it were true.
Just curious.

I don't know honestly. The only reason I can think of is the intended purpose of the affidavit and the confirmation that Nancy's death was a homicide. It is possible upon counsul's advice, that the affidavit was short and pointed. I also think since there was an upcoming hearing scheduled, and it would be known to counsul that the affidavits are subject to public release, that many things were not told to avoid one side having a complete view of the case in chief for the custody hearing.

[raisincharlie]

you fine folks may have already gotten through this, I was gone yesterday afternoon and have read all of #17 but none of this thread. A fellow poster was kind enough to pm me the likely address of Carey Clark (based on voting records, because no Clarke, *Carey* or similar owns property):

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Here are some comments from #17 I am going to respond to:

Onescout said: Oh yeah and another thing that bugs me BC said he went to look for Carrie but didn't have her address...duh...and went looking for her car....hmmmm...how dumb does that sound to you guys?

HOw did he know where to go and what her car was like and omigod this all sounds so not right!

I responded:

I believe he said he didn't know her EXACT address, but went to the subdivision/community ( a townhouse as I recall). If he knew what her car looked like, presumably it would have been parked in front of her unit.

Onescout then quoted my response and posted:

It was a wild goose chase, a red herring whatever you want to call it...there could have been hundreds of townhomes in that subdivision. And many townhomes have garages, in that case he would've really been out SOS.
Are you kidding me?






Now, here is the tax map of where we can deduce Carey lives:

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


Looking at that tax map pretty quickly, there are a total of 65-68 total units in her subdivision, spread over 4 short roads. From end to end, it's about 0.2 miles. It would take no more than 5 minutes to slowly drive through the whole area.

BTW, none of them have garages


furthermore, look at the tax map again and see where this subdivision is located. North of Lochmere Drive off Kildaire Farm Rd. Within 1/2 mile of the Crescent Commons H-T and the Lifetime Fitness.

The way he describes his route, he went by Lifetime Fitness and then lastly by Carey's "condo" (really a cluster home or townhouse).

So, to summarize:

She lived in a small subdivision of townhome/cluster homes.
None of those had garages.
He described going by her house as his last attempt, after Lifetime Fitness.


Thanks for the info.

Given the route, Lifetime appears on the way but I still wonder why Carey's complex was the last place to go instead of the first place since he seemed to think that was who Nancy went running with and by that time it was well over 6 hours later, if not longer.

[fran]

Check out "Theories", page 8, post #195 -- I had not heard that bit of info before.

I had seen that awhile back Zoe. I think it's a redherring.

That person may have found 'something' pertaining to clothing attire a jogger or runner may wear. But they hadn't yet found Nancy, so it's understandable the detective would have been interested in it. IF LE had found Nancy without a top and they had found a top, I don't believe they would have said this is NOT a random act.

It's like when Laci went missing and before they found her. They had several alleged sightings of her. But when she was found wearing the pants from her last night seen alive by anyone other that her husband, NOT one of those witnesses was called even by the defense. It was NOT Laci they saw, because she was already dead before daylight.

I don't blame anyone that doesn't run alone, especially now they found one of their own murdered. Just to be safe, they may want to wait until LE solves this crime. Heck, there hasn't even been anything like this where one of my daughters runs and I've always told her I didn't like the idea of her running by herself. Especially at night! Where ever one is isolated, woods, parks, beaches, leaves them vulnerable to be jumped by unknown assailants.

JMHO
fran

[2Daughters1Dog]

I woke up to someone trying to beat me this morning. You would think it was BC himself on the attack.:D

Still the question today, WHO killed NC?

I'm sorry, but I can't let this go.

I can only assume, based on things you said yesterday, that I am this "someone" you speak of.

I even went so far as to just now recheck this. Yours was about the 5th post I caught up on by quoting. I did not quote only you nor disagree/question your posts. Yet this is apparently now your mindst towards me.

I assume someone else is now referring to me as a troll.


You people really need to get a grip on reality. You are the ones attacking me for questioning your conclusions. You are the ones using name-calling. Not me.

[2Daughters1Dog]

raisin - I have no idea.

[raisincharlie]

raisin - I have no idea.

Okay - me neither. There is a cafe and possibly another restaurant at Lifetime - perhaps he thought they stopped off for lunch there. Possible

[momto3kids]

Thanks for the info.

Given the route, Lifetime appears on the way but I still wonder why Carey's complex was the last place to go instead of the first place since he seemed to think that was who Nancy went running with and by that time it was well over 6 hours later, if not longer.

RC....there is absolutely NO reason to have made CC the last stop. All he had to do was come out of Lochemere Dr., turn right then turn right back in on Glen Echo.

To get to LTF you have to go out at on Tryon Rd to re-enter onto Regency pkwy.

If his intention was to go to CC he should have gone there 1st to check for the car. Remember that is what he called JA about...Carey. IMO

[2Daughters1Dog]

RC...I don't know if she was that bold to him. She spoke to him when he called at 12:30, but JA didn't call the LE until 2:15.

I think he freaked out when she offered to come right over..he panicked obviously.

in her affidavit, she says she immediately called the cops after the 12:30 call he made to her.


Someone else mentioned JA called Brad a second time. neither one of them says this in their affidavit. They both say he called her.

[2Daughters1Dog]

btw, cause I gotta go - mt3, I'm not questioning YOU as to when she called. If you say 2:15, I believe 2:15. But her affidavit does say "I immediately".

[raisincharlie]

RC....there is absolutely NO reason to have made CC the last stop. All he had to do was come out of Lochemere Dr., turn right then turn right back in on Glen Echo.

To get to LTF you have to go out at on Tryon Rd to re-enter onto Regency pkwy.

If his intention was to go to CC he should have gone there 1st to check for the car. Remember that is what he called JA about...Carey. IMO


Thanks - the maps are great but without the visuals, and of course not knowing squat about the area and its intricacies - this helps. I just find this interesting, the one person who may have been with Nancy is the last to be checked on - just seems very unusual to me.

[momto3kids]

in her affidavit, she says she immediately called the cops after the 12:30 call he made to her.


Someone else mentioned JA called Brad a second time. neither one of them says this in their affidavit. They both say he called her.

OK...so what was BC doing for 2.5 hours if she did call at 12:30? Remember she says he told her he 'was putting the girls in the car?' Wasn't it 3pm he received a call to come home by the police?

Times were told by the chief...2:15 or 2:51 some have said...Would the chief lie about this?

[momto3kids]

Thanks - the maps are great but without the visuals, and of course not knowing squat about the area and its intricacies - this helps. I just find this interesting, the one person who may have been with Nancy is the last to be checked on - just seems very unusual to me.

All the places BC mentioned should had taken approx 1 hour max. Unless he jogged the trails with the girls in tow he could only drive around the parking lots to look for NC.

[maconrich]

Physically going to Lifetime still seems odd too -- unless it was (as had been suggested) to try to get the girls to think mom was in one of the rooms. That's the only thing that seems to even remotely fit. I'm sure he didn't go there so they could compare the video image to any taken at HT...

[raisincharlie]

OK...so what was BC doing for 2.5 hours if she did call at 12:30? Remember she says he told her he 'was putting the girls in the car?' Wasn't it 3pm he received a call to come home by the police?

Times were told by the chief...2:15 or 2:51 some have said...Would the chief lie about this?

I think we can confirm when Jessica made the first call to 911.

It was at 1:50 pm on 12 July according to this :

http://www.townofcary.org/news/news2008/police-missingcooper6.htm


Just to add - last night we were talking about the conversation JA had with the dispatcher named Michelle - who told her to give her 35 to 45 minutes to work on it and for JA to call back then.

I'm thinking the 251 time might actually be the time LE responded to the residence...

[momto3kids]

Physically going to Lifetime still seems odd too -- unless it was (as had been suggested) to try to get the girls to think mom was in one of the rooms. That's the only thing that seems to even remotely fit. I'm sure he didn't go there so they could compare the video image to any taken at HT...

MCR...this is what a few of us discussed the other night. You can't gain entry without an ID for any reason, employee's either.

I find Bella & Katie from what I have seen on tv, are well behaved and follow instructions. I think it was the grandparents stated they had not asked about NC, (I can be wrong who said this). My point is...how easy with these large areas at LTF to tell them not to bother mommy, just wave from the door, entrance, etc. that she will see them.

[maconrich]

MCR...this is what a few of us discussed the other night. You can't gain entry without an ID for any reason, employee's either.

I find Bella & Katie from what I have seen on tv, are well behaved and follow instructions. I think it was the grandparents stated they had not asked about NC, (I can be wrong who said this). My point is...how easy with these large areas at LTF to tell them not to bother mommy, just wave from the door, entrance, etc. that she will see them.

Which could explain the statement that Bella may have seen her mom that day. Gotcha, TY!!

[raisincharlie]

Which could explain the statement that Bella may have seen her mom that day. Gotcha, TY!!

This is an interesting aspect - Bella and what she may have or may not have seen and if she said anything.

At 6 minutes into the 14 July 630 pm presser (repeating myself here), a reporter specifically asks Chief Bazemore if Bella had indeed seen Nancy on that morning. The Chief respond by saying the last person to have seen Nancy alive was Brad. Either the Chief is unaware that Bella possibly saw Nancy, or she is intentionally and effectively shying away from answering the question.

The only reason she might avoid answering that is if Bella did see something and did say something and the information is considered to now be part of the investigation and LE does not want that out. By not answering, it leaves the question open, had she said it was part of the investigation, the normal assumption would be yes. Not sure of what to make of it actually but I will say, I do not see how a judge could have given temp custody of those children to the GP's without something more than what was in the plaintiff motion for temp custody.

[Cheyenne130]

This is an interesting aspect - Bella and what she may have or may not have seen and if she said anything.

At 6 minutes into the 14 July 630 pm presser (repeating myself here), a reporter specifically asks Chief Bazemore if Bella had indeed seen Nancy on that morning. The Chief respond by saying the last person to have seen Nancy alive was Brad. Either the Chief is unaware that Bella possibly saw Nancy, or she is intentionally and effectively shying away from answering the question.

The only reason she might avoid answering that is if Bella did see something and did say something and the information is considered to now be part of the investigation and LE does not want that out. By not answering, it leaves the question open, had she said it was part of the investigation, the normal assumption would be yes. Not sure of what to make of it actually but I will say, I do not see how a judge could have given temp custody of those children to the GP's without something more than what was in the plaintiff motion for temp custody.

I'm even more curious as to why Brad agreed to the temporary custody arrangement without a judgement being made. That makes no sense to me.

[raisincharlie]

I'm even more curious as to why Brad agreed to the temporary custody arrangement without a judgement being made. That makes no sense to me.

I am as well considering the rash of affidavits to refute the original claims. I have an idea but it is just that, an idea.

[Anderson]

I have been concerned about something for awhile. I apologize in advance if this is something that you sleuths have already discussed in detail. Hanna Pritchard notes in her affidavit that Nancy had found a disturbing note. Apparently Hanna has seen this note, so wouldn't that be first hand information?

"Nancy found an extremely disturbing note that Brad had written to himself, and that Nancy had showed me. It had each of the girls name listed on it with different facts underneath like Bella's favorite color is yellow, loves chicken nuggets. We found it quite strange since these were not things that you would forget. On the other side of the paper was a list of financial items like closing accounts, looking up blue books on cars and checking on life insurance policies."

I imagine that they didn't photcopy this. I also imagine that Brad would assume that this was something that nobody had seen. Can you really make this up? This fits with the "erased" theory.

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/07/23/3258895/1216912148-Plaintiff_affidavits2.pdf

I have to go, but I will check back later for your thoughts on the post above.

[raisincharlie]

I have been concerned about something for awhile. I apologize in advance if this is something that you sleuths have already discussed in detail. Hanna Pritchard notes in her affidavit that Nancy had found a disturbing note. Apparently Hanna has seen this note, so wouldn't that be first hand information?

"Nancy found an extremely disturbing note that Brad had written to himself, and that Nancy had showed me. It had each of the girls name listed on it with different facts underneath like Bella's favorite color is yellow, loves chicken nuggets. We found it quite strange since these were not things that you would forget. On the other side of the paper was a list of financial items like closing accounts, looking up blue books on cars and checking on life insurance policies."

I imagine that they didn't photcopy this. I also imagine that Brad would assume that this was something that nobody had seen. Can you really make this up? This fits with the "erased" theory.

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/07/23/3258895/1216912148-Plaintiff_affidavits2.pdf

I have to go, but I will check back later for your thoughts on the post above.

If Ms. Pritchard saw it herself, it is indeed first hand knowledge. I doubt it was photcopied either but it could be possible, with a pending separation, that Nancy gave it to her lawyer. As you recall there was quite a flurry of motions, one relating specifically to the issue of Ms. Stubbs turning over her notes relating to conversations with Nancy, and one for her removal as the plaintiff's counsul. Someone wanted to know pretty badly what she knew. Just a thought.

[Onescout]

Which could explain the statement that Bella may have seen her mom that day. Gotcha, TY!!

These are all great theories. It would be yet another explanation for the need to drive out there.

[raisincharlie]

All the places BC mentioned should had taken approx 1 hour max. Unless he jogged the trails with the girls in tow he could only drive around the parking lots to look for NC.

Looking at the N & O photos - certainly there was no vehicular access to many of those trails. You are correct, driving around would do one little good unless one was extremely lucky to find Nancy in a parking lot at the precise moment one entered it.

[raisincharlie]

Physically going to Lifetime still seems odd too -- unless it was (as had been suggested) to try to get the girls to think mom was in one of the rooms. That's the only thing that seems to even remotely fit. I'm sure he didn't go there so they could compare the video image to any taken at HT...

If he had the X5, with Nancy's purse in it, he could have tried to enter Lifetime on her card to show the girls Nancy was there, if that is what he was aiming to do. Not sure how the card thing works or if id is also required at check in. If it is just a simply swipe the card with no assistance from a person at the desk, it could have been done. But I think since Nancy was not reported to have been at the club, that didn't happen.

[momto3kids]

This is an interesting aspect - Bella and what she may have or may not have seen and if she said anything.

At 6 minutes into the 14 July 630 pm presser (repeating myself here), a reporter specifically asks Chief Bazemore if Bella had indeed seen Nancy on that morning. The Chief respond by saying the last person to have seen Nancy alive was Brad. Either the Chief is unaware that Bella possibly saw Nancy, or she is intentionally and effectively shying away from answering the question.

The only reason she might avoid answering that is if Bella did see something and did say something and the information is considered to now be part of the investigation and LE does not want that out. By not answering, it leaves the question open, had she said it was part of the investigation, the normal assumption would be yes. Not sure of what to make of it actually but I will say, I do not see how a judge could have given temp custody of those children to the GP's without something more than what was in the plaintiff motion for temp custody.

I am trying to clean the garage and just can't leave more than 20 minutes and I am back on here..:)

I have a question about something I think was stated on here...
Did NC family ask for her cap she used to jog in?
If not what were the things they did ask for?

RC..it is on the webpage about Bella seeing her mom. It was posted by DD. Is this a slip up? LFT is the only thing I can think occured since mommy was no where to be found on Saturday. Would DD not tell the truth about this one thing she posted?

[raisincharlie]

I am trying to clean the garage and just can't leave more than 20 minutes and I am back on here..:)

I have a question about something I think was stated on here...
Did NC family ask for her cap she used to jog in?
If not what were the things they did ask for?

RC..it is on the webpage about Bella seeing her mom. It was posted by DD. Is this a slip up? LFT is the only thing I can think occured since mommy was no where to be found on Saturday. Would DD not tell the truth about this one thing she posted?

I'm certainly not questioning what DD posted on the webpage. Does she say Bella herself told either her or someone else this ? I don't know what to make of it - it is equally possible Bella saw her Mum as opposed to having not seen her. All I know for sure is Chief Bazemore totally dances around that issue when asked a direct question.

But I still hold the opinion, that temp custody was granted based on more than what was posted on the web in the ex parte motion.

[Star12]

"RC..it is on the webpage about Bella seeing her mom. It was posted by DD. Is this a slip up? LFT is the only thing I can think occured since mommy was no where to be found on Saturday. Would DD not tell the truth about this one thing she posted?"

If DD says that Bella saw her Mommy, does that not also mean that DD would have necessarily seen Nancy??? Otherwise that is not first-hand knowledge from Bella. Does it not make more sense, since the Art2mis posting was on July 14, that this is something that Brad told to DD???

[chauncey7381]

[QUOTE=EntreNous;2476834]What makes you think that chauncey? It takes time to put a case together. The autopsy isn't back yet, the DNA evidence either. If BC did it and the LE makes an arrest before everything is in they run the risk of him getting off on a technicality in a trial.

Entre---

That's just it, what case, is there even a case against anyone at this juncture? No one has been named a POI, or a suspect. Earlier this year, CPD was involved in a homicide, a missing lady who was found charred, an estranged husband angry over money, CPD had DNA evidence back in no time, and the husband was charged in a few weeks.

When I hear from friends that CPD is out setting up roadblocks and passing out flyers periodically, it makes me suspect they have no smoking gun against the perp(s), and that TOD was after 7 a.m., that Saturday morning.

Chief Bazemore has not stated anything to the public that I am aware which makes me feel comfy about jogging alone in the Regency Park/Koka Booth Amphitheatre area.
IMO, it's time for CPD to shed a little light on this murder and explain why they feel it was an isolated incident.

Would like to know the locale of the sealed search warrant. Interesting it's okay for it to be known Brad Cooper's office was searched, yet not okay for one locale to be known as it were would further fuel speculation. WOW.

There have been some heinous crimes committed against women in the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill-Fayetteville area this year, some remain unsolved. I'd really like to see some closure on this murder, Michelle Young's and Jenna Nielsen.

Why hasn't a reward been established for Nancy Cooper, given her social stature in Lochmere and the community? What about Cisco supporting Brad Cooper? Progress Energy put up reward money for Michelle Young and another lady who was employed there and slain last year.

Tick tock.

[Onescout]

Looking at the N & O photos - certainly there was no vehicular access to many of those trails. You are correct, driving around would do one little good unless one was extremely lucky to find Nancy in a parking lot at the precise moment one entered it.

I believe someone offered to watch the kids so he could run the trails....

[Onescout]

[QUOTE=EntreNous;2476834]What makes you think that chauncey? It takes time to put a case together. The autopsy isn't back yet, the DNA evidence either. If BC did it and the LE makes an arrest before everything is in they run the risk of him getting off on a technicality in a trial.

Entre---

That's just it, what case, is there even a case against anyone at this juncture? No one has been named a POI, or a suspect. Earlier this year, CPD was involved in a homicide, a missing lady who was found charred, an estranged husband angry over money, CPD had DNA evidence back in no time, and the husband was charged in a few weeks.

When I hear from friends that CPD is out setting up roadblocks and passing out flyers periodically, it makes me suspect they have no smoking gun against the perp(s), and that TOD was after 7 a.m., that Saturday morning.

Chief Bazemore has not stated anything to the public that I am aware which makes me feel comfy about jogging alone in the Regency Park/Koka Booth Amphitheatre area.
IMO, it's time for CPD to shed a little light on this murder and explain why they feel it was an isolated incident.

Would like to know the locale of the sealed search warrant. Interesting it's okay for it to be known Brad Cooper's office was searched, yet not okay for one locale to be known as it were would further fuel speculation. WOW.

There have been some heinous crimes committed against women in the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill-Fayetteville area this year, some remain unsolved. I'd really like to see some closure on this murder, Michelle Young's and Jenna Nielsen.

Why hasn't a reward been established for Nancy Cooper, given her social stature in Lochmere and the community? What about Cisco supporting Brad Cooper? Progress Energy put up reward money for Michelle Young and the another lady who was employed there and slain last year.

Tick tock.


I couldn't agree with you more about the reward, it is most confusing that the husband (no matter the marriage) has not offered a reward and hired a PI , even if it's only to clear himself!

[raisincharlie]

<snip>

Chief Bazemore has not stated anything to the public that I am aware which makes me feel comfy about jogging alone in the Regency Park/Koka Booth Amphitheatre area.
IMO, it's time for CPD to shed a little light on this murder and explain why they feel it was an isolated incident.



At 10:37 into this press conference Chief Bazemore explains why CaryPD believes it is an isolated incident:

http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/3207082/

In the event the link does not work - it is the 14 July - 6:30 pm presser.

[2Daughters1Dog]

"RC..it is on the webpage about Bella seeing her mom. It was posted by DD. Is this a slip up? LFT is the only thing I can think occured since mommy was no where to be found on Saturday. Would DD not tell the truth about this one thing she posted?"

If DD says that Bella saw her Mommy, does that not also mean that DD would have necessarily seen Nancy??? Otherwise that is not first-hand knowledge from Bella. Does it not make more sense, since the Art2mis posting was on July 14, that this is something that Brad told to DD???

yes, you're right.

The DD/art2mis post was part of the searching phase, and she simply stated something like "she was last seen by BC and his daughter".

I would doubt at that time anyone had/had thought to directly ask the child "have you seen your Mommy and when".

Now, having agreed with that, I have to disagree with the "theory" that he went to Lifetime purely so he could take the kids inside and offer up some ruse about "wave to Mommy".


I am not a member of LTF - not a member of any HC or other establishment CURRENTLY that requires any type of pass like that. And so I have no idea how many members there are at LTF. But my experience is that if the people behind the desk know you, an access pass isn't a must. They're not in the business of telling customers "sorry you didn't follow our little policy and it doesn't matter if I know your or not".

So to say it was a misstep by him to check there (or claim he did) when he would have KNOWN she couldn't be there without her pass is too big of a reach, IMO.

[Deduction]

At 10:37 into this press conference Chief Bazemore explains why CaryPD believes it is an isolated incident:

http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/3207082/

In the event the link does not work - it is the 14 July - 6:30 pm presser.

She also says in that pres confrence she has no reason to believe Nancy is not alive. She repeats at least twice that Nancy left the home to go jogging.
So then do you believe Nancy left the home to go jogging?

[2Daughters1Dog]

I believe someone offered to watch the kids so he could run the trails....

Nancy Adams said she offered to watch the kids so he could go look for her. BC said he was taking the kids with him. There was no mention of this offer being "so he could run the trails (if he needed to)".

While it would have been better for him to leave the girls - what if he is innocent, and what if he could have found her still alive on one of the trails - I can also see a panicked person clinging to his family at that point.

[raisincharlie]

She also says in that pres confrence she has no reason to believe Nancy is not alive. She repeats at least twice that Nancy left the home to go jogging.
So then do you believe Nancy left the home to go jogging?

On 14 July - yes. Not since 15 July however.

[sunflowers]

This is an interesting aspect - Bella and what she may have or may not have seen and if she said anything.

At 6 minutes into the 14 July 630 pm presser (repeating myself here), a reporter specifically asks Chief Bazemore if Bella had indeed seen Nancy on that morning. The Chief respond by saying the last person to have seen Nancy alive was Brad. Either the Chief is unaware that Bella possibly saw Nancy, or she is intentionally and effectively shying away from answering the question.

The only reason she might avoid answering that is if Bella did see something and did say something and the information is considered to now be part of the investigation and LE does not want that out. By not answering, it leaves the question open, had she said it was part of the investigation, the normal assumption would be yes. Not sure of what to make of it actually but I will say, I do not see how a judge could have given temp custody of those children to the GP's without something more than what was in the plaintiff motion for temp custody.

this last sentence is absolutely correct----I do not see how a judge could have given temp custody of those children to the GP's without something more than what was in the plaintiff motion for temp custody

it would be very unusual to allow temp custody with just what we've seen.

however, the other strange thing is that i'm not sure that the judge made the decision. you all correct me, please, if i misread this somewhere, but i was under the impression that both parties worked this out in the judge's chambers.

i believe that means that Brad for some reason agreed to this arrangement, and that it wasn't a decision handed down by the judge but rather one in which both parties decided on together.

regardless, though, of whether that understanding is correct, there still must have been compelling conversation about some information, facts, opinions, etc that allowed this "agreement" to be reached or that allowed the judge to take away custody from father, even temporarily. that's rarely done.

[raisincharlie]

this last sentence is absolutely correct----I do not see how a judge could have given temp custody of those children to the GP's without something more than what was in the plaintiff motion for temp custody

it would be very unusual to allow temp custody with just what we've seen.

however, the other strange thing is that i'm not sure that the judge made the decision. you all correct me, please, if i misread this somewhere, but i was under the impression that both parties worked this out in the judge's chambers.

i believe that means that Brad for some reason agreed to this arrangement, and that it wasn't a decision handed down by the judge but rather one in which both parties decided on together.

regardless, though, of whether that understanding is correct, there still must have been compelling conversation about some information, facts, opinions, etc that allowed this "agreement" to be reached or that allowed the judge to take away custody from father, even temporarily. that's rarely done.

A judge did order that temp custody be given over to the GP's in response to the Ex Parte petition on 16 July.

The hearing scheduled for the 25th - was resloved in judge's chambers between the parties.

[sunflowers]

"RC..it is on the webpage about Bella seeing her mom. It was posted by DD. Is this a slip up? LFT is the only thing I can think occured since mommy was no where to be found on Saturday. Would DD not tell the truth about this one thing she posted?"

If DD says that Bella saw her Mommy, does that not also mean that DD would have necessarily seen Nancy??? Otherwise that is not first-hand knowledge from Bella. Does it not make more sense, since the Art2mis posting was on July 14, that this is something that Brad told to DD???

that's what i think. i think brad told diane that bella had seen her mom, and diane wasn't suspicious at that time, & just took brad's word for it since why would he lie. JA would not have believed brad, but maybe good friends without the intimate info about nancy & brad's relationship would have assumed that brad was telling the truth.

[2Daughters1Dog]

personally, I take that to mean that BC came to the decision that at least near term, it was in the kids best interests overall.

It has been afterall, a media and neighborhood circus(I assume, haven't been in Lochmere since then and live in Raleigh).


Let's say he is innocent. Let's say his attorney's advice to him was this: it will take X days for the autopsy/DNA to be all done. When it's back and clears you completely, then you can regain custody. And since you're cleared, you won't be bothered by LE, sneered at in public, whispered about, etc.

[sunflowers]

A judge did order that temp custody be given over to the GP's in response to the Ex Parte petition on 16 July.

The hearing scheduled for the 25th - was resloved in judge's chambers between the parties.

got it. thanks. so the judge made the decision. it's so unlikely that a judge would make that decision without something more than we've seen.

[raisincharlie]

got it. thanks. so the judge made the decision. it's so unlikely that a judge would make that decision without something more than we've seen.

The only things we have seen are speculation. I find it highly unlikely a judge would remove two children from their remaining biological parent on speculation alone. Something very wrong with that picture.

[Deduction]

On 14 July - yes. Not since 15 July however.

RC the point I am trying to make is this: She also says in that pres confrence she has no reason to believe Nancy is not alive. She repeats at least twice that Nancy left the home to go jogging. She also gives the time of the 911 call that now conflicts with the time posted on the website. Therefore, the chief can be in error, she is human , and I believe this does prove that. Can she also be in error about her isolated case theory? Can anyone here admit there is even a remote possibility even a .0001 % chance of her being in error on that?

[carolinalady]

I couldn't agree with you more about the reward, it is most confusing that the husband (no matter the marriage) has not offered a reward and hired a PI , even if it's only to clear himself!


According to lots of posters in response to the "information request" on BC's atty's homepage, this would be straight out of the OJ playbook and would look even more suspicious.

[raisincharlie]

RC the point I am trying to make is this: She also says in that pres confrence she has no reason to believe Nancy is not alive. She repeats at least twice that Nancy left the home to go jogging. She also gives the time of the 911 call that now conflicts with the time posted on the website. Therefore, the chief can be in error, she is human , and I believe this does prove that. Can she also be in error about her isolated case theory? Can anyone here admit there is even a remote possibility even a .0001 % chance of her being in error on that?

She was wrong about the body being found in a pond but the caller reported it that way. WCSO who recovered the body said she was found in the dirt.

Had she said in press conference we think Nancy has been murdered - talk about a rush to judgement - hope is a good thing. I suspect the 2:51 time is the time Cary PD responded to the house - as the call was made at 1:50 and JA is advised at that time to call back in 35 to 45 minutes - the times seem to fall in place. Based on LE criteria used for the definition of an isolated case - I do not believe she was wrong in saying so because she clearly says there were no reports of suspicious activities, no evidence found to indicate anything else, the same as there were no reports of anyone seeing Nancy that morning.

Could she be wrong - anything is possible but given the training, expertise and her reliance on seasoned investigators - I find it hard to believe they all were wrong. I believe she is qouted as saying 32 officers on the case actually.

[carolinalady]

The only things we have seen are speculation. I find it highly unlikely a judge would remove two children from their remaining biological parent on speculation alone. Something very wrong with that picture.

We know that the judge heard testimony from LE and the plantiffs. We just don't know what was said. I wonder how they made it a "finding of fact" that Brad attempted suicide as a teenager and made threats of suicide this past winter?

Honestly, I have no clue as the the burden of proof in an emergency hearing. So, do they need some type of documentation or do they accept that Nancy told her family this?

[sunflowers]

I don't know honestly. The only reason I can think of is the intended purpose of the affidavit and the confirmation that Nancy's death was a homicide. It is possible upon counsul's advice, that the affidavit was short and pointed. I also think since there was an upcoming hearing scheduled, and it would be known to counsul that the affidavits are subject to public release, that many things were not told to avoid one side having a complete view of the case in chief for the custody hearing.

makes sense. only reveal what was relevent to the custody, not show their full hand to the defense & public

[carolinalady]

makes sense. only reveal what was relevent to the custody, not show their full hand to the defense & public

Well, that and plus it would make Nancy and her attorney look very bad (in the court's eye) if they were attempting to flee to Canada.

Not saying that she was planning to flee to Canada. But, BC references that Nancy's attorney advised her to flee to Canada for a more favorable custody hearing. Hopefully that was a misunderstanding. The children are North Carolina residents and the custody would be handled in local courts.

If she was moving somewhere w/i the local area, that would be moot.

[raisincharlie]

We know that the judge heard testimony from LE and the plantiffs. We just don't know what was said. I wonder how they made it a "finding of fact" that Brad attempted suicide as a teenager and made threats of suicide this past winter?

Honestly, I have no clue as the the burden of proof in an emergency hearing. So, do they need some type of documentation or do they accept that Nancy told her family this?


They seem to like the phrase "based upon information and belief" - I am not sure what that means. I don't suspect the judge required everything to be addressed and may have looked at it and said - prove these items to me. The police giving information is most curious because it was a civil action don't you think ? I don't know th eburden of proof either really but if you recall some wrongful death cases - the burden is significantly lower - I think they use the "preponderance of the evidence" as a standard rather than resonable doubt. Dunno for sure though.

ETA - the more likely it is than that it is not ?

[raisincharlie]

Gotta run.

Deduction glad you stuck around, it is good to "talk" with you and it is good to have different perspectives. I do understand where you are coming from and I do respect it.

[christine2448]

FYI chat is always open to discuss these case 'real time' with feller posters :D

To join java chat click below

http://www.serenity-irc.net/java/index.php

put nickname in

put websleuths in for the channel name


for Mirc Users:

open MIRC window

go to file

select server

go to Serenity IRC (hilight)

select random

then hit select on the right side

If you have chat saved to favorites delete them or they will go to old server

type in # websleuths for channel name then hit join

[SleuthSayer]

[QUOTE=EntreNous;2476834]
Why hasn't a reward been established for Nancy Cooper, given her social stature in Lochmere and the community? What about Cisco supporting Brad Cooper? Progress Energy put up reward money for Michelle Young and another lady who was employed there and slain last year.


Michelle Young was a Progress Energy employee. The company put up a reward 8 months after her death when the case was still unsolved. Cynthia Moreland was also a Progress Energy employee. The company put up a reward right away in her case, however, she was abducted while in the company parking garage.

Are there examples of large companies putting up rewards in the cases of deaths of spouses of an employee, at a scene that does not involve the company, within weeks of the crime?

As far as Cisco supporting Brad Cooper, I think that you may not appreciate the scale of a company like Cisco. They have close to 65,000 employees worldwide. The site where Brad works has more than 3000 employees. He is no company executive. Anyone with any kind of authority to speak on behalf of the company probably first heard of Brad Cooper when you did. Surely some of the tiny percentage of Cisco's 65,000 employees who have actually worked with Brad may have some opinion of whether or not he would be involved in this, the company executives and spokespeople would know no more than anyone here. (Of course with the exception of the legal department in California, who would know whatever was in the search warrant served on the company.) I'm sure that they hope that their employee is not involved, but they would just be speculating like the rest of us.

[Just the Fax]

[quote=chauncey7381;2477418]

Michelle Young was a Progress Energy employee. The company put up a reward 8 months after her death when the case was still unsolved. Cynthia Moreland was also a Progress Energy employee. The company put up a reward right away in her case, however, she was abducted while in the company parking garage.

Are there examples of large companies putting up rewards in the cases of deaths of spouses of an employee, at a scene that does not involve the company, within weeks of the crime?

As far as Cisco supporting Brad Cooper, I think that you may not appreciate the scale of a company like Cisco. They have close to 65,000 employees worldwide. The site where Brad works has more than 3000 employees. He is no company executive. Anyone with any kind of authority to speak on behalf of the company probably first heard of Brad Cooper when you did. Surely some of the tiny percentage of Cisco's 65,000 employees who have actually worked with Brad may have some opinion of whether or not he would be involved in this, the company executives and spokespeople would know no more than anyone here. (Of course with the exception of the legal department in California, who would know whatever was in the search warrant served on the company.) I'm sure that they hope that their employee is not involved, but they would just be speculating like the rest of us.

Jason Young was snubbed by his employer, ChartOne. When he tried to return from his 1 month of 'family leave', he was promptly fired.

Brad Cooper is on 'paid administrative leave' from Cisco.
This form of 'leave' is not related to vacation, personal days or family leave. Think of it as 'you are being investigated in your wife's murder and we would prefer you stay home until you are cleared'.

[Bob&Bob]

This was interesting.

http://scaredmonkeys.net/index.php?topic=3074.msg399411

reply #33

__________________
"In the Olympics there is no tomorrow."~a commentator

[Just the Fax]

This was interesting.

http://scaredmonkeys.net/index.php?topic=3074.msg399411

reply #33

__________________
"In the Olympics there is no tomorrow."~a commentator

Comment in the WRAL website comment area:

I work with someone who said her best friend was down at the police station yesterday getting her P.I. license. She mentioned to one of the guys there, "You guys have some action going on in Cary, huh?" He nodded. She said, "I think the husband did it." To which he replied, "We know who did it."

The police are carefully crafting their case. It is important that they be able to put this person away, and in the meantime they cannot damage their case, so they must be tightlipped and protective of their information. It doesn't mean they don't know anything. In fact, the family probably knows everything they know, and did not want Brad at that news conference. If he is guilty, and they know it, they could not stand to be in the same room as him, faking solidarity. I think that is why he was not there. The family did not want him there. But the police can't tell us that.

jmflu
July 16, 2008 12:19 p.m.

http://www.wral.com/golo/page/1896337/?id=3214017&d_full_comments=1&d_comments_page=2#comments_block (http://www.wral.com/golo/page/1896337/?id=3214017&d_full_comments=1&d_comments_page=2#comments_block)

[2Daughters1Dog]

B&B - I personally find that to be a lot of hearsay. a. could be somebody on an ego trip - the person that posted it or evn the person getting the PI license b. one reason hearsay inadmissible is the likelihood of even a syllable of response being changed. response might have been "we think we know" or "we're pretty sure we know". c. Even in lil' ol' Cary, I can't believe a cop would blurt that out to anybody like that.

[2Daughters1Dog]

ps - if Brad gets arrested and charged between now and 8/17, please let my suspecters know I'm not Brad since you won't have heard from me. I'm just heading out on vacation. 0-)

[The Saint]

the stickers being on the car but all white points to bleach having caused it.

is detergent with bleach strong enough to bleach stickers like that or would it need to
be concentrated bleach like Clorox?

[Deduction]

On 14 July - yes. Not since 15 July however.

the stickers being on the car but all white points to bleach having caused it.

is detergent with bleach strong enough to bleach stickers like that or would it need to
be concentrated bleach like Clorox?

I don't know if Tide purchased at 4:30 am as opposed to Tide with bleach for front load purchased at 6:25am would be more powerful, but I am getting this mental picture of Brad out there with the scrub brush scrubbing away to make those stickers all white. Reaching!

[EntreNous]

I am trying to clean the garage and just can't leave more than 20 minutes and I am back on here..:)

I have a question about something I think was stated on here...
Did NC family ask for her cap she used to jog in?
If not what were the things they did ask for?

RC..it is on the webpage about Bella seeing her mom. It was posted by DD. Is this a slip up? LFT is the only thing I can think occured since mommy was no where to be found on Saturday. Would DD not tell the truth about this one thing she posted?

I apologize profusely but can someone explain this post? I've been at work the past couple of days and am still playing catch up.
My questions are...
Who is DD?
What website?
Who or what is LFT?

[SleuthSayer]

[quote=SleuthSayer;2477799]
Brad Cooper is on 'paid administrative leave' from Cisco.
This form of 'leave' is not related to vacation, personal days or family leave. Think of it as 'you are being investigated in your wife's murder and we would prefer you stay home until you are cleared'.

Understood -- and that's really my point. Cisco wants no part of this. He is clearly being investigated in connection with a crime given that a search warrant was served for his office. If for no other reason than the publicity alone, they would rather he get his "situation" resolved before he come back to work at the Cisco site.

I was responding to the question of "why isn't Cisco coming out in support of Brad?". I was simply pointing out that you aren't likely to see any huge company put their corporate reputation on the line for some no-name cubicle dweller in North Carolina. If this were some Mom & Pop business where everyone knows everyone, you might see the owner coming out to say "oh, we all know Brad and we're sure that he couldn't be involved in something like this." But, as I said, anyone who would be qualified to make a statement for a company like Cisco knows no more (and quite possibly less) about Brad than anyone here.

[The Saint]

DD
refers to nancy's friend, ms.duncan (diane? diana?)

here is a blogspot where you can read to posts that refer to one of the cooper daughters seeing their mom.

http://nancycooper.blogspot.com/2008/07/map-of-searched-areas.html (http://nancycooper.blogspot.com/2008...hed-areas.html)

Anonymous said... "No one has answered the first question on this blog....who was the last to see her and where/when was it? I am told her youngest child saw her at 12 midnight when she got home Friday...is this true?
July 14, 2008 8:56 AM"



-snip-
art2mis said...
Her husband and elder child saw her leaving for her run Saturday morning.

JULY 14, 2008 11:26 AM


eta: LTF is the Life Time Fitness gym - the place where brad claims he went to find nancy

[EntreNous]

[QUOTE=EntreNous;2476834]What makes you think that chauncey? It takes time to put a case together. The autopsy isn't back yet, the DNA evidence either. If BC did it and the LE makes an arrest before everything is in they run the risk of him getting off on a technicality in a trial.

Entre---

That's just it, what case, is there even a case against anyone at this juncture? No one has been named a POI, or a suspect. Earlier this year, CPD was involved in a homicide, a missing lady who was found charred, an estranged husband angry over money, CPD had DNA evidence back in no time, and the husband was charged in a few weeks.

When I hear from friends that CPD is out setting up roadblocks and passing out flyers periodically, it makes me suspect they have no smoking gun against the perp(s), and that TOD was after 7 a.m., that Saturday morning.

Chief Bazemore has not stated anything to the public that I am aware which makes me feel comfy about jogging alone in the Regency Park/Koka Booth Amphitheatre area.
IMO, it's time for CPD to shed a little light on this murder and explain why they feel it was an isolated incident.

Would like to know the locale of the sealed search warrant. Interesting it's okay for it to be known Brad Cooper's office was searched, yet not okay for one locale to be known as it were would further fuel speculation. WOW.

There have been some heinous crimes committed against women in the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill-Fayetteville area this year, some remain unsolved. I'd really like to see some closure on this murder, Michelle Young's and Jenna Nielsen.

Why hasn't a reward been established for Nancy Cooper, given her social stature in Lochmere and the community? What about Cisco supporting Brad Cooper? Progress Energy put up reward money for Michelle Young and another lady who was employed there and slain last year.

Tick tock.
Chauncey, anytime there is a murder there is a case. Regardless of whether or not a POI or suspect has been named it's still a murder case. In a murder case it is routine to start from the inside and work your way out, i.e. looking very closely at the people that saw the deceased last and or those that lived with the deceased or were engaged in an intimate relationship with the deceased. In Nancy's case the person who last saw her alive, the person who lived with her and was involved in the most intimate relationship with her happens to be BC and there is irrefutable proof that BC & NC's relations had gone sour both from legal documentation and eye witness accounts. It's simple logic to explore BC's possible involvement in NC's death. To think there is no murder case is either an extreme instance of denial or pure defiance.

Me thinks thou protests too much.

[EntreNous]

DD
refers to nancy's friend, ms.duncan (diane? diana?)

here is a blogspot where you can read to posts that refer to one of the cooper daughters seeing their mom.

http://nancycooper.blogspot.com/2008/07/map-of-searched-areas.html (http://nancycooper.blogspot.com/2008...hed-areas.html)

Anonymous said... "No one has answered the first question on this blog....who was the last to see her and where/when was it? I am told her youngest child saw her at 12 midnight when she got home Friday...is this true?
July 14, 2008 8:56 AM"



-snip-
art2mis said...
Her husband and elder child saw her leaving for her run Saturday morning.

JULY 14, 2008 11:26 AM

Thank you so much! I saw the nic "art2mis", she and her husband run the NC blog. Don't know how I missed that comment since I've followed it from the beginning. I even posted a comment there the same day. And now that I've had a chance to sit down and organize my thoughts I finally figured it was Diana Duncan. There are so many people involved in


eta: LTF is the Life Time Fitness gym - the place where brad claims he went to find nancy

Thank you so much! I saw the nic "art2mis", she and her husband run the NC blog. Don't know how I missed that comment since I've followed it from the beginning. I even posted a comment there the same day. And now that I've had a chance to sit down and organize my thoughts I finally figured it was Diana Duncan however I was totally stumped on Lifetime. There are so many people involved in this case. Whew!

Thanks again!:blowkiss:

[CyberPro]

[QUOTE=chauncey7381;2477418]
<SNIP>
In a murder case it is routine to start from the inside and work your way out, i.e. looking very closely at the people that saw the deceased last and or those that lived with the deceased or were engaged in an intimate relationship with the deceased. In Nancy's case the person who last saw her alive, the person who lived with her and was involved in the most intimate relationship with her happens to be BC and there is irrefutable proof that BC & NC's relations had gone sour both from legal documentation and eye witness accounts. <SNIP>

This is not only true in a murder case, think about it from a pure logic standpoint. I discover I am missing something, it does not matter what, it could be my car keys. Now, Do I go to the neighbor's house and start looking for my keys? Do I put an ad in the paper first? Call my Mother? No! I begin looking where I last saw them, or where the last place I remember having them, and retrace my steps from that point.

In this case, BC says he saw her leave to go running, and she does not return for a long time, her car is in the driveway, so we know she did not leave the state, at least under her own power.

She COULD have been abducted, but it does seem strange that LE and the friends took such an active role in searching for her to begin with. I was keeping my eyes open, and might have participated in a search, had I known that one was going on. I was in the Regency Park area in the woods that weekend anyway, and I was looking for anything that might have indicated she was there, or had been, but I also had it in the back of my mind that she might have voluntarily left. This was before they mentioned her kids, much less her husband. I think it was a day or two before it even came out in the WRAL site that she was married.

Now, on access to Lifetime. I have not been a member all that long, but you have an ID card. It is a plastic card, similar to a credit card. There is a bar code on the back, and you cannot swipe it in yourself. You hand it to someone behind the counter and they swipe it for you. They look down at the computer screen, and I think they usually call you by name. When you get your membership card, they take a picture of you with a webcam, and if you have a family membership they also take pictures of your kids. I am not sure if your picture pops up on the screen when you enter or not, but since you could theoretically use someone else's membership card since it does not have your picture on it, I would not be at all surprised to find that your picture is displayed. It would also help if you have the kids in tow that they knew you were bringing your kids in, and not just some random kids.

There are also several security cameras around the parking lot and entrances of Lifetime Fitness.

CyberPro

[Sewing_Buddy]

[QUOTE=sunflowers;2477542]I do not see how a judge could have given temp custody of those children to the GP's without something more than what was in the plaintiff motion for temp custody

it would be very unusual to allow temp custody with just what we've seen.

however, the other strange thing is that i'm not sure that the judge made the decision. you all correct me, please, if i misread this somewhere, but i was under the impression that both parties worked this out in the judge's chambers.

i believe that means that Brad for some reason agreed to this arrangement, and that it wasn't a decision handed down by the judge but rather one in which both parties decided on together.

QUOTE]


After 5 days (July 12-July 17) of being in charge of Bella and Katie, I wonder if Brad was overwhelmed. It wasn't his usual routine to be their 24-hour caretaker so between diapers, feedings, squabbles, naptime, baths, bedtime, etc. maybe he was overwhelmed. I know Nancy's parents had them some of that time but until the court order, wasn't he mainly watching them at his friend's house?
His personality seems to be portrayed as "it's all about me" and watching 2 kids full-time would definitely put a crimp in that style!!!! Would that be enough to convince him to give up custody?

[sunflowers]

ps - if Brad gets arrested and charged between now and 8/17, please let my suspecters know I'm not Brad since you won't have heard from me. I'm just heading out on vacation. 0-)

lol have a good vacation.

[Star12]

[QUOTE=sunflowers;2477542]I do not see how a judge could have given temp custody of those children to the GP's without something more than what was in the plaintiff motion for temp custody

it would be very unusual to allow temp custody with just what we've seen.

however, the other strange thing is that i'm not sure that the judge made the decision. you all correct me, please, if i misread this somewhere, but i was under the impression that both parties worked this out in the judge's chambers.

i believe that means that Brad for some reason agreed to this arrangement, and that it wasn't a decision handed down by the judge but rather one in which both parties decided on together.

QUOTE]


After 5 days (July 12-July 17) of being in charge of Bella and Katie, I wonder if Brad was overwhelmed. It wasn't his usual routine to be their 24-hour caretaker so between diapers, feedings, squabbles, naptime, baths, bedtime, etc. maybe he was overwhelmed. I know Nancy's parents had them some of that time but until the court order, wasn't he mainly watching them at his friend's house?
His personality seems to be portrayed as "it's all about me" and watching 2 kids full-time would definitely put a crimp in that style!!!! Would that be enough to convince him to give up custody?

Possibly that, and the information his attorneys were receiving from the Rentz's attorneys. It's usually a back-and-forth process, with the parties separated and the attorneys going back and forth with each other. In this case, however, I certainly don't know if that was the scenario. But I have seen many "courthouse steps" settlements done this way.

[carolinalady]

the stickers being on the car but all white points to bleach having caused it.

is detergent with bleach strong enough to bleach stickers like that or would it need to
be concentrated bleach like Clorox?

I thought that someone said there were NO stickers on either car.

Also, detergent w/ bleach is color safe non-chlorine bleach.

[sunflowers]

A judge did order that temp custody be given over to the GP's in response to the Ex Parte petition on 16 July.

The hearing scheduled for the 25th - was resloved in judge's chambers between the parties.

wanted to make sure everybody saw Raisincharlie's comment that the judge order the temp custody on july 16th & temp custody was not settled in the judge's chambers.

Rather, the july 25th hearing re custody was resolved in the judge's chambers with brad & nancy's sister & grandparents.

[Star12]

wanted to make sure everybody saw Raisincharlie's comment that the judge order the temp custody on july 16th & temp custody was not settled in the judge's chambers.

Rather, the july 25th hearing re custody was resolved in the judge's chambers with brad & nancy's sister & grandparents.

And I think that JTF said it was on the 4th floor. It really doesn't matter where the settlement happened. What was significant is that it was settled between the parties instead of being heard by the judge.

[MoonFlwr]

[QUOTE=sunflowers;2477542]I do not see how a judge could have given temp custody of those children to the GP's without something more than what was in the plaintiff motion for temp custody

it would be very unusual to allow temp custody with just what we've seen.

however, the other strange thing is that i'm not sure that the judge made the decision. you all correct me, please, if i misread this somewhere, but i was under the impression that both parties worked this out in the judge's chambers.

i believe that means that Brad for some reason agreed to this arrangement, and that it wasn't a decision handed down by the judge but rather one in which both parties decided on together.

QUOTE]


After 5 days (July 12-July 17) of being in charge of Bella and Katie, I wonder if Brad was overwhelmed. It wasn't his usual routine to be their 24-hour caretaker so between diapers, feedings, squabbles, naptime, baths, bedtime, etc. maybe he was overwhelmed. I know Nancy's parents had them some of that time but until the court order, wasn't he mainly watching them at his friend's house?
His personality seems to be portrayed as "it's all about me" and watching 2 kids full-time would definitely put a crimp in that style!!!! Would that be enough to convince him to give up custody?

I had thought about that! (Brad giving up because of the work involved in taking care of 2 little girls).

I don't know, custody is a big thing! May be a stretch!?

[The Saint]

I thought that someone said there were NO stickers on either car.

Also, detergent w/ bleach is color safe non-chlorine bleach.


bumped from last night ---

post #247
zoe said:



" I don't know that the "non-presence" of license plate stickers means anything at all, but, I am truly curious about it. I drove past the Cooper residence this morning [separate loonnnggg post on impressions board] and stopped to look at the license tag on BC's vehicle [the SUV was not present in the driveway]. It is absolutely white in the upper left and right corners. I thought while reading everything here about it that perhaps it was just faded from numerous car washes/weather but that is not what I think now. Mine is faded from numerous car washes and the weather but I can still see the very faded expiration month and I've had my tag much longer than BC has been in the US. Again, not sure what this means in the big picture but it is an oddity."

(http://www.websleuths.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2476750)

[carolinalady]

bumped from last night ---

post #247
zoe said:



" I don't know that the "non-presence" of license plate stickers means anything at all, but, I am truly curious about it. I drove past the Cooper residence this morning [separate loonnnggg post on impressions board] and stopped to look at the license tag on BC's vehicle [the SUV was not present in the driveway]. It is absolutely white in the upper left and right corners. I thought while reading everything here about it that perhaps it was just faded from numerous car washes/weather but that is not what I think now. Mine is faded from numerous car washes and the weather but I can still see the very faded expiration month and I've had my tag much longer than BC has been in the US. Again, not sure what this means in the big picture but it is an oddity."

(http://www.websleuths.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2476750)

I took that to mean it was not faded and was white b/c the stickers were not there. The background of North Carolina plates are white.

Edited to add: Also, the picture that RaisinCharlie directed everyone to (of the SUV tag) seemed to have no stickers. It didn't look like white stickers, just a smooth surface in the corners of the plates.

[tsfkms]

Hello.

I have been reading the boards since the beginning of this case and haven't posted anything on the discussion board yet. Please let me know if you think this topic is better placed in the "off-topic" thread.

Some things have been bothering me:
1. MM providing two affadavits that seem somewhat contradictory.
2. According to MM's affadavit for the defendant, he and Nancy spent time at the beach without their respective spouses.
3. The Blueline radio site said something about Nancy's tragic murder breaking up the neighborhood's superficial camaraderie, and just before imploding, someone will be thrown to the lions.

Yesterday, DD posted on her blog about her worry that the tragedy of Nancy's death might cause deep cracks in her neighborhood and community. I share DD's concern and hope that this case is solved quickly and that "collateral damage" (such an awful term ,IMO) is limited.

I'm wondering what your take is...

Thanks!

[momto3kids]

[QUOTE=EntreNous;2478223]

This is not only true in a murder case, think about it from a pure logic standpoint. I discover I am missing something, it does not matter what, it could be my car keys. Now, Do I go to the neighbor's house and start looking for my keys? Do I put an ad in the paper first? Call my Mother? No! I begin looking where I last saw them, or where the last place I remember having them, and retrace my steps from that point.

In this case, BC says he saw her leave to go running, and she does not return for a long time, her car is in the driveway, so we know she did not leave the state, at least under her own power.

She COULD have been abducted, but it does seem strange that LE and the friends took such an active role in searching for her to begin with. I was keeping my eyes open, and might have participated in a search, had I known that one was going on. I was in the Regency Park area in the woods that weekend anyway, and I was looking for anything that might have indicated she was there, or had been, but I also had it in the back of my mind that she might have voluntarily left. This was before they mentioned her kids, much less her husband. I think it was a day or two before it even came out in the WRAL site that she was married.

Now, on access to Lifetime. I have not been a member all that long, but you have an ID card. It is a plastic card, similar to a credit card. There is a bar code on the back, and you cannot swipe it in yourself. You hand it to someone behind the counter and they swipe it for you. They look down at the computer screen, and I think they usually call you by name. When you get your membership card, they take a picture of you with a webcam, and if you have a family membership they also take pictures of your kids. I am not sure if your picture pops up on the screen when you enter or not, but since you could theoretically use someone else's membership card since it does not have your picture on it, I would not be at all surprised to find that your picture is displayed. It would also help if you have the kids in tow that they knew you were bringing your kids in, and not just some random kids.

There are also several security cameras around the parking lot and entrances of Lifetime Fitness.

CyberPro

Thanks for explaining this and being so specific. I have not been there, but my children have. I have someone very close to me that works there and has told my you do NOT get in even as an employee with out going thru this routine.

Does this card have your name on it?

So if this is the routine to get in...hmmm...wonder why BC went to ask if NC had checked in?

A--she doesn't carry anything but a piece of gum on her when she she jogs, NO ID on her to gain entry

B--he could have called just as easy to see if NC checked in

C--she didn't drive since her car was at home, so he had no need to look for a vehicle

D--she supposedly had gone jogging, so why would she be working out also?

E--she was to be painting at 8am, left to go jogging at 7am. Not enough time in my books to get a jog in and work out session

IMO there was absolutely NO reason to go to LTF.

ALIBI IMO to get on camera to say he was looking.
Where else could he get put on camera to say....SEE I was looking!!!

He had to find a place that she MIGHT have gone to show an attempt was made by him.

Now lets hope they swiped his card before they would give out any information to him about anyone of their members.

Now I hope he did go in and with the girls....

BIG RED FLAG in my books. Just another one to add to the Who Killed NC?

[IMHO63]

CyberPro Quote:

Now, on access to Lifetime. I have not been a member all that long, but you have an ID card. It is a plastic card, similar to a credit card. There is a bar code on the back, and you cannot swipe it in yourself. You hand it to someone behind the counter and they swipe it for you. They look down at the computer screen, and I think they usually call you by name. When you get your membership card, they take a picture of you with a webcam, and if you have a family membership they also take pictures of your kids. I am not sure if your picture pops up on the screen when you enter or not, but since you could theoretically use someone else's membership card since it does not have your picture on it, I would not be at all surprised to find that your picture is displayed. It would also help if you have the kids in tow that they knew you were bringing your kids in, and not just some random kids.

There are also several security cameras around the parking lot and entrances of Lifetime Fitness.

CyberPro[/QUOTE]

I belong to LTF and when your card is swiped your picture does pop up. I only know this because I purchased something at the snack bar and could actually see the screen.

[momto3kids]

I belong to LTF and when your card is swiped your picture does pop up. I only know this because I purchased something at the snack bar and could actually see the screen.


Do you have your name on the card or somehow identifies you on it since there is no picture on it?
Or does it have your photo on it? I thought I read it didn't have one on it. Correct me if I am wrong.

[CyberPro]

Do you have your name on the card or somehow identifies you on it since there is no picture on it?
Or does it have your photo on it? I thought I read it didn't have one on it. Correct me if I am wrong.

Mom,

The name is printed in fairly small letters on the front lower corner of the card, but it does not have a picture on it.

CyberPro

[momto3kids]

Hi Jess....yesterday was a little rough, huh? Not x1, but x2.

[momto3kids]

Has anyone heard if the CPD handed out fliers today like they had been on Saturday mornings?

[Jess]

Hi Momt3!!!

In every case I have followed , this always happens !! You have to develop a thick skin :D

My mind is a little foggy. Where was it said that he went to the gym?? Was it on the blog ? by Artemis ?

[momto3kids]

Hi Momt3!!!

In every case I have followed , this always happens !! You have to develop a thick skin :D

My mind is a little foggy. Where was it said that he went to the gym?? Was it on the blog ? by Artemis ?

I am happy I have thick skin for days like those.:clap:

BC stated it in his affidavit saying he went inside and spoke the lady at the desk.

This morning I see the discussion was about the areas he went looking for BC. Something a little unusual was noted. He went by CC last!!! :confused:

[EntreNous]

Hello.

I have been reading the boards since the beginning of this case and haven't posted anything on the discussion board yet. Please let me know if you think this topic is better placed in the "off-topic" thread.

Some things have been bothering me:
1. MM providing two affadavits that seem somewhat contradictory.
2. According to MM's affadavit for the defendant, he and Nancy spent time at the beach without their respective spouses.
3. The Blueline radio site said something about Nancy's tragic murder breaking up the neighborhood's superficial camaraderie, and just before imploding, someone will be thrown to the lions.

Yesterday, DD posted on her blog about her worry that the tragedy of Nancy's death might cause deep cracks in her neighborhood and community. I share DD's concern and hope that this case is solved quickly and that "collateral damage" (such an awful term ,IMO) is limited.

I'm wondering what your take is...

Thanks!

Hi there! And welcome!

As to MM's two affidavits, I agree. I agree, I found that strange. Maybe he feels like he just wants to remain neutral so he's going to say something on both sides but, I dunno. It was weird to me too.

As to Morwick and NC vacationing together, yes!!! I thought that really odd. And sorry if I offend anyone but that would be highly inappropriate to me personally. Maybe if it was a group, but just the two adults and the kids. I'd be feeling super awkward!

I don't know so much that their circle of friendship was superficial. I think especially in this day and age people really need a circle of friends that would stand up for you, support you, etc. I don't think there's anything superficial about that. Now, their designer cars, handbags, etc. yeah, that's superficial. I'm a stylist so trust me, I know it's superficial. Some people just need more, bigger, shinier stuff to feel better about themselves than others. I do think this will cause a crack in their circle. But I don't know that it's necessarily the kind they're referring to.

[CARYISHOME]

It bothers me that the grandparents said the girls had not asked about their mother, even after several days. Why not?

Did someone tell them a story that would satisfy their curiosity or wonderment? Like NC went on a trip and will be back...

Did they see something so horrible they supressed their memory about it and chose to believe everything was alright?

Did they hear grown-ups talking and it scared them so badly they just didn't say anything?

I have a hard time believing they never asked. It's possible, I know, but it's just weird.

[Jess]

I'll have to go back and reread his affidavit. I missed that !( Course for a while there were soooo many to read ! ) and I was keeping an ear and eye on the local media to see if we got any "extra' news or tidbits.

[Anderson]

If Ms. Pritchard saw it herself, it is indeed first hand knowledge. I doubt it was photcopied either but it could be possible, with a pending separation, that Nancy gave it to her lawyer. As you recall there was quite a flurry of motions, one relating specifically to the issue of Ms. Stubbs turning over her notes relating to conversations with Nancy, and one for her removal as the plaintiff's counsul. Someone wanted to know pretty badly what she knew. Just a thought.

Thanks raisincharlie, I do remember the motion for Ms. Stubbs to turn over her notes, but not for her removal. I had not put this together at all. That note sounds very incriminating to me, but would it hold much weight in court?

[momto3kids]

Please correct me if I am wrong with any of this.....

The SW was signed at 2am by Judge Stephens (16th)
By 3am LE was knocking on SH door wanting DNA sample from BC
Search took ? hours. I am thinking I heard 16 hours...Am I close?
Search concluded at 7pm (if it was a 16 hour search)
Judge signs Ex Parte @ 4:45 the 16th, 14 hours after the search began
Possible search was not even completed

Was something found during the search for NC family to move so quickly?

[momto3kids]

Hi there! And welcome!

As to MM's two affidavits, I agree. I agree, I found that strange. Maybe he feels like he just wants to remain neutral so he's going to say something on both sides but, I dunno. It was weird to me too.

As to Morwick and NC vacationing together, yes!!! I thought that really odd. And sorry if I offend anyone but that would be highly inappropriate to me personally. Maybe if it was a group, but just the two adults and the kids. I'd be feeling super awkward!

I don't know so much that their circle of friendship was superficial. I think especially in this day and age people really need a circle of friends that would stand up for you, support you, etc. I don't think there's anything superficial about that. Now, their designer cars, handbags, etc. yeah, that's superficial. I'm a stylist so trust me, I know it's superficial. Some people just need more, bigger, shinier stuff to feel better about themselves than others. I do think this will cause a crack in their circle. But I don't know that it's necessarily the kind they're referring to.

The crack in their circle is IMO definitely going to occur.
I hear when people divorce and the crack that occurs in friendships and relationships.

Husbands and wives telling each other to
NOT get involved because it not their business,
or don't take sides since both of the spouses are liked,
or to watch what they say so they don't get dragged into it.

Crack in this circle will be huge IMO.

The friends will start talking amoungst themselves and 1 slips and says one thing, another knows something else. Talking just between them will bring somethings out that no one knew or one kept as a secret.

Imagine on the stand and what is about to come out. Some might need to get prepared to have a BAD day.

[EntreNous]

That sounds about right on the stats. Not sure on the amt. of time on the search.

[Jess]

" Upon information and belief Nancy Cooper never went jogging on July 12th 2008."

Information from who ??? LE? friends ???

I believe there must have been something as I believe Mr. Rentz did not have any "connections or pull " from his former position with the Alberta Government to get temporary custody at the ex parte hearing.

[tsfkms]

Hi there! And welcome!

<SNIP>
I don't know so much that their circle of friendship was superficial. I think especially in this day and age people really need a circle of friends that would stand up for you, support you, etc. I don't think there's anything superficial about that. Now, their designer cars, handbags, etc. yeah, that's superficial. I'm a stylist so trust me, I know it's superficial. Some people just need more, bigger, shinier stuff to feel better about themselves than others. I do think this will cause a crack in their circle. But I don't know that it's necessarily the kind they're referring to.

EntreNous,

Thanks for the welcome.

I was wondering about the "superficial" label, too.

Based on what I've read, it seems that various neighbors were privy to things that I might find embarrassing (like who was having an affair with whom....) and it might not have been clear who knew what, and who was comfortable with whom knowing what...

There seems to have been a weird comraderie (or it seems weird to me, anyway): BC and SH, NC and SH, and even though MM expresses concern about BC possibly feeeling "uncomfortable," BC comes to dinner and stays. However, that, too is curious, because JA says in her affadavit that she thought NC would be uncomfortable dining with the CM and MM. It all sounds very weird to me.

[momto3kids]

IMO the judge needed to be shown proof why the children were in harms way. I bet it wasn't hard. But very unusal also to move them out so quick.
Then to make sure the family they were going to be with was also fit.

I would venture to say BC dad had some proof such as emails, $$ paid out to NC, etc., as well as Ms. Stubbs in what NC might have supplied her with.

To be signed before the search was complete speaks volumes....I still wonder if they found something during the search of the home or at the location where NC was found, or the leg work done by LE before NC was found.

[The Saint]

it is weird and then nancy ends up murdered.

[momto3kids]

" Upon information and belief Nancy Cooper never went jogging on July 12th 2008."

Information from who ??? LE? friends ???

I believe there must have been something as I believe Mr. Rentz did not have any "connections or pull " from his former position with the Alberta Government to get temporary custody at the ex parte hearing.

Jess...I don't believe it was to do with 'pull' either.

I think it was Mr.Rentz who said he didn't believe NC ever went jogging. :waitasec:
I want to say it was at a press conference when a reporter asked about the jogging time or if they thought NC ever went jogging.

[Jess]

I agree, Mom. In the affidavit it says that the grandparents are 'fit and proper persons'. says who ?? Was there time to get any references ? ( I happen to believe that it was the right thing to have been done) There has to be something MORE !

[The Saint]

" Upon information and belief Nancy Cooper never went jogging on July 12th 2008."

Information from who ??? LE? friends ???

I believe there must have been something as I believe Mr. Rentz did not have any "connections or pull " from his former position with the Alberta Government to get temporary custody at the ex parte hearing.
it could be from what the investigators told them but i think was more likely that the running partners who were training with her told her family that nancy wouldn't have run alone w/o telling them.

plus, carey said she never had plans to run w/ her and did not run w/ her that day.

[momto3kids]

tsfkms

:Welcome-12-june:

[EntreNous]

The complexities abound, that's for sure. I don't think theirs was a typical circle of friends. They definitely were hipsters in a way. DD lists in her favorite things in her blog profile, music by Tool, Filter, Nine Inch Nails, Tori Amos among others. While none of them are my favorite my family is very musical and I am very familiar with them. Their music is very dark in nature. The lyrics are pretty vulgar and the first three mentioned are very hard driving rock. Now, my hubby is a drummer so he does listen to a lot of rock but I thought these were kind of odd music choices of an upper middle class, middle age mom. More power to her if that's what she likes but it is different.

[momto3kids]

I agree, Mom. In the affidavit it says that the grandparents are 'fit and proper persons'. says who ?? Was there time to get any references ? ( I happen to believe that it was the right thing to have been done) There has to be something MORE !

Absolutely has got to be more!
The LE had already begun doing their leg work after they met with BC for the missing person report. They just needed to find NC, positively ID her, get the SW and move in.

I really do not think the day the search is being done they would take those kids without finding out something out before this. The search most likely sealed what they needed to know without a shadow of a doubt, "who killed NC" IMO

[tsfkms]

it could be from what the investigators told them but i think was more likely that the running partners who were training with her told her family that nancy wouldn't have run alone w/o telling them.

plus, carey said she never had plans to run w/ her and did not run w/ her that day.

I'm thinking friends voiced their opinions/suspicions.

I really hope that the children didn't witness anything...and subsequently say something...

[momto3kids]

The complexities abound, that's for sure. I don't think theirs was a typical circle of friends. They definitely were hipsters in a way. DD lists in her favorite things in her blog profile, music by Tool, Filter, Nine Inch Nails, Tori Amos among others. While none of them are my favorite my family is very musical and I am very familiar with them. Their music is very dark in nature. The lyrics are pretty vulgar and the first three mentioned are very hard driving rock. Now, my hubby is a drummer so he does listen to a lot of rock but I thought these were kind of odd music choices of an upper middle class, middle age mom. More power to her if that's what she likes but it is different.

I just learned something new. I had no idea about the music. That really surprises me, I must say. As you always hear, you never knows what goes on behind closed doors.

[CARYISHOME]

It bothers me that the grandparents said the girls had not asked about their mother, even after several days. Why not?

Did someone tell them a story that would satisfy their curiosity or wonderment? Like NC went on a trip and will be back...

Did they see something so horrible they supressed their memory about it and chose to believe everything was alright?

Did they hear grown-ups talking and it scared them so badly they just didn't say anything?

I have a hard time believing they never asked. It's possible, I know, but it's just weird.

Does anyone else wonder about this?

[The Saint]

I'm thinking friends voiced their opinions/suspicions.

I really hope that the children didn't witness anything...and subsequently say something...

i'm afraid that they did hear or see something and that's one of the reasons why brad did
not want nancy's friend to watch them while he went out "looking" for nancy.

[The Saint]

Does anyone else wonder about this?
i hope it doesn't have something to do with what brad may have told them.

[momto3kids]

it could be from what the investigators told them but i think was more likely that the running partners who were training with her told her family that nancy wouldn't have run alone w/o telling them.

plus, carey said she never had plans to run w/ her and did not run w/ her that day.

I think it is rather strange CC had absolutely nothing extra to say, except about her plans to jog.

You can tell she wants to distance herself on this one!

I still want to hear from DD husband. Being neighbors, across the streets form each other, you know he saw who did what at the home, and had to hear something.

Just to say mute after living a few years across the street....strange:waitasec:

[EntreNous]

I just learned something new. I had no idea about the music. That really surprises me, I must say. As you always hear, you never knows what goes on behind closed doors.

Thank you. I feel the same. I was very hesitant to post that because I didn't want to be thought of as a narrow minded bitty.:crazy: But I thought it was interesting insight.

[momto3kids]

i'm afraid that they did hear or see something and that's one of the reasons why brad did
not want nancy's friend to watch them while he went out "looking" for nancy.

Children at the ages of Bella & Katie haven't learned to tell a lie yet, they have learned to say NO in fear of getting in trouble. Children at 4yo talk freely and candidly. Just maybe Bella said something that put this over the edge.

[tsfkms]

Does anyone else wonder about this?

I, too, wonder about this. And it gives me the willies to think about.

My hope is that Mr. Rentz was right when he said in the presser that children are resilient and the girls will come out of this all right if everything is handled in the right way.

I hope and trust that the children are in a stable, healthy environment and that their mental health care providers are at the top of their game.

[Deduction]

The crack in their circle is IMO definitely going to occur.
I hear when people divorce and the crack that occurs in friendships and relationships.

Husbands and wives telling each other to
NOT get involved because it not their business,
or don't take sides since both of the spouses are liked,
or to watch what they say so they don't get dragged into it.

Crack in this circle will be huge IMO.

The friends will start talking am