Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #19

[christine2448]

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


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


Newbies.....

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y171/christine2448/websleuths.jpg

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

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

[SleuthSayer]

The stuff about possible alterations of the VOIP are speculation only, but worthy of a look.

ok, thanks. I knew bits and pieces of the info below. Thanks for recapping.


BC is a CCIE for VOIP with Cisco. According to his affidavit, NC Called him from home during his trips to the store, allegedly to get him to pick up some juice. IIRC, he said she called from home. According to an affidavit from one of the friends, BC had previously installed a Cisco VOIP unit in their home, and NC felt that BC was able to monitor and interrupt the calls to and from home. BC rebuts this claim, and stated that he had removed/replaced the Cisco phone with a normal VTech phone from Best Buy due to a request by NC.


I read his statement about having a Cisco VoIP system at home, but I'm not sure what he means by that. Cisco doesn't sell consumer grade (i.e., home) VoIP systems. The VoIP systems Cisco sells are intended for small/medium businesses up to large corporations. They would be vast overkill for use as a home phone system. Even for someone with CCIE level skill in working with such a system, the hassle factor would seem to outweigh any benefit you can get from it.

The consumer level VoIP products that Cisco sells are Linksys brand (Linksys is a Cisco subsidiary since their acquisition). Maybe that's what Brad was referring to.

I also read where some of the affidavits of Nancy's friends said that Nancy believed that Brad was using the VoIP system to monitor her calls. That makes little sense to me. It is in fact significantly more difficult to eavesdrop on a VoIP network than it is a plain old telephone system. If you want to eavesdrop on telephone calls, you can go to Radio Shack and pay $30 for one of these (http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2123175) then go to Target and get a $40 voice recorder and connect it in some clandestine place inside [or under] the house. If you want to eavesdrop remotely, you can hook the Radio Shack device to a laptop instead of a recorder and access that laptop via the Internet.

All of the above is much easier than trying to eavesdrop on VoIP calls.


The speculation is that BC was able to configure a phone device, it could have been a computer, fax, or a command in the VOIP system to place the call from home to the cell, thereby to establish a time anchor where an adult (presumably NC) was able to call his cell from home. If this IS actually true, it would mean that she was alive at approximately the time that she was supposed to go for the run. Speculation seems to be running that she was unable to run, walk, talk etc. at that time.


Yeah, as others have said, there are a number of fairly trivial ways to place a phone call from somewhere other than where you are. I don't see how VoIP makes this any easier.

[RaleighNC]

There is an ability with services like Vonage to have a "soft phone" wherein your PC acts as your phone. Any time you access the web and start your "soft phone", if someone calls your number, it rings on your PC. This is helpful for businesses and folks who might travel frequently. I am not sure that calls initiated with a "sfot phone" register differently on the network than those that go through the telephone adapter at home - because the network may not distinguish them. With VoIP, you can get a NY number that rings in NC, or a Cali number that rings in Alaska, etc. Some folks use it so they can have a local number for where they used to live so friends can call wihtout toll charges. There is a lot of flexibility with VoIP.


Alternatively, you can take your telephone adapter and reconnect it somewhere else to have your phone "move". Only downside to this - because of 911 - if you disconnect your telephone adapter - you have to confirm that you have not "moved" it and that has to be kept on record.

I am not sure that TWC provides this type of soft phone service. I know Vonage does. With that - it would be easy to call yourself "from" home to your mobile phone using your laptop at Starbucks or any other network......

[jumpstreet]

Yeah, as others have said, there are a number of fairly trivial ways to place a phone call from somewhere other than where you are. I don't see how VoIP makes this any easier.

Given this, even if TWC records were to show that a call was made from the home to BC's mobile at a certain time of day, it wouldn't seem to conclusively prove anything. [ Though perhaps would help with a 'reasonable doubt' factor... if it ever comes to that... ]

[fran]

I didn't get the impression that Nancy thought Brad was easdropping on her phone calls from work through VoIP but more keeping a log of her calls and having the ability to cause her home phone calls to suddenly disconnect for no reason.

Of course Brad countered that he'd discontinued this VoIP because Nancy had asked him to. He may have done that, but I believe he could have hooked and unhooked it at will without Nancy knowing it. I know you may need a special kind of phone,but guys like this have a way of making one think you don't believe what your eyes see or that you go along with them and think, 'they wouldn't do that, I'm just being paranoid.'

I know it's been said that once the phone call goes from the server or router or whatever into the public space the call is traceable and can't be tampered with. But, like I said before, it's not possible until someone figures out how to do it.

Is it possible for Brad to have hidden the fact he had his home phone connected to VoIP? I mean within his computers?'

I know once the phone call transfers to public access it can't be changed by him,.........but would this include TWC if it is on their service and not through the world wide internet?

Is this why they want records of TWC?

Thanks for all of the information you techies are supplying. I know my question sound simple, and well, they are. This is from a gal that only knows how to turn the computer on and off and access the internet. Give me just one glitch and I'm off to the Geek Squad!:rolleyes:

:)
fran

[EntreNous]

Is there a way he could monitor her calls from his computer at work?

[momto3kids]

Since I know nothing abou this phone system....

It appears there are so many variables BC could have used with the phones.

LE has got to have someone who is sharp and understands the phone system inside & out with all the possible avenues and devices BC could have used to...
A--monitor NC
B--place calls at particular times to certain phones from certain phones

Just one slip up from LE or their expert can toss the entire phone allegations out of court when NC friends go on the stand, especially if this is BC's expertise.

IMO...This is possibly what is holding up the LE in going to the GJ along with waiting for the DNA results.

[EntreNous]

You could be right MT3K. It could be so technical that it's gibberish to the average lay person or juror. They may be waiting for the DNA for backup.

[momto3kids]

You could be right MT3K. It could be so technical that it's gibberish to the average lay person or juror. They may be waiting for the DNA for backup.


This has gotten so confusing with all the possibilities BC could have used and hearing this is what he essentially does for a living, I am sure LE wants it absolutely clear to the jury how he did it. The more sophisticated he got shows how he intentionally tried to NOT get caught and deceive everyone. IMHO

[CARYISHOME]

I don't think it is as difficult as we're making it. It all just seems too much for someone who just committed as crime of passion...

[raisincharlie]

I don't think it is as difficult as we're making it. It all just seems too much for someone who just committed as crime of passion...

I agree - I think the KISS principle most likely applies.

[EntreNous]

I don't think it is as difficult as we're making it. It all just seems too much for someone who just committed as crime of passion...

The monitoring possibility has nothing to do with premeditation to my thinking. But goes a long way in supporting the controlling allegations. Likewise, using the "soft call" feature after the fact could totally be something someone would do in an effort to cover their tracks, whether it was a crime of passion or not.

And I really don't mean to insult a jurors intelligence but I learned not to take anything for granted when it comes to jurors after the OJ trial.

[jumpstreet]

I don't think it is as difficult as we're making it. It all just seems too much for someone who just committed as crime of passion...

This has occurred to me too. Who knows what happened, but it does seem a real stretch to think someone who committed a crime of passion would have the presence of mind to think (and want to spend time) "faking" a phone call from home just to (theoretically) set up an alibi.

BC probably knows enough to know that this wouldn't prove anything anyway (as many have asserted on this board, it's fairly easy to fake this...BC would know it's easy to fake... so why waste time on something that would prove nothing for you... it doesn't make sense).

If it's a crime of passion scenario, I'm thinking one would be much more worried about making doubly sure everything is squeaky clean in the crib. Setting up a (meaningless) fake phone call would seem hardly worth the while.

[CARYISHOME]

The monitoring possibility has nothing to do with premeditation to my thinking. But goes a long way in supporting the controlling allegations. Likewise, using the "soft call" feature after the fact could totally be something someone would do in an effort to cover their tracks, whether it was a crime of passion or not.

And I really don't mean to insult a jurors intelligence but I learned not to take anything for granted when it comes to jurors after the OJ trial.

I agree we shouldn't take anything for granted. I'm just saying that things probably got to be very surreal for someone that early Saturday morning; seems to me it would take an incredible amount of thought and planning to do all the things we're suggesting was done.

I admit I am not familiar with"soft calls, etc." I guess I would not be an intelligent juror.....

[raisincharlie]

This has occurred to me too. Who knows what happened, but it does seem a real stretch to think someone who committed a crime of passion would have the presence of mind to think (and want to spend time) "faking" a phone call from home just to (theoretically) set up an alibi.

BC probably knows enough to know that this wouldn't prove anything anyway (as many have asserted on this board, it's fairly easy to fake this, BC would know this, so why bother).

If it's a crime of passion scenario, I'm thinking one would be much more worried about making doubly sure everything is squeaky clean in the crib. Setting up a (meaningless) fake phone call would seem hardly worth the while.

Because Brad said Nancy called him from home - doesn't mean for certain the call generated from the landline. LE already knows this answer - a check of Nancy's cell phone itself might list it and definitely records could answer the question quickly.

[Fairy1]

I agree we shouldn't take anything for granted. I'm just saying that things probably got to be very surreal for someone that early Saturday morning; seems to me it would take an incredible amount of thought and planning to do all the things we're suggesting was done.

I admit I am not familiar with"soft calls, etc." I guess I would not be an intelligent juror.....

This is why they have expert witnesses at trial! I do feel that IF BC killed Nancy, it was a crime of passion and not premeditated. However, depending on when it occurred, he could have had a few hours to devise a plan of explanation (after the fact) and to carry it out. If he is an expert in this computer/phone discipline, he would likely have used it to his advantage.

[jumpstreet]

Because Brad said Nancy called him from home - doesn't mean for certain the call generated from the landline. LE already knows this answer - a check of Nancy's cell phone itself might list it and definitely records could answer the question quickly.

Right. Here's how I have it:

If the landline records show that the home phone called his mobile, then it would seem to prove nothing definitively (either he's telling the truth, and she did call, OR... it was faked (as others have said, faking is (relatively) easy).

If her mobile records show that her mobile phone called his mobile, then it also would seem to prove nothing definitively (either he's telling the truth (he could say his affidavit statement meant she was @ home, not necessarily using the landline), OR,... it was faked (not so sure how easy it is to fake the mobile-to-mobile, given tower triangulation, etc, but perhaps it's possible too...)

In any case, if the premise is that BC isn't telling the truth, that implies that he took the time and effort to fake one form of the calls (whichever one is in the records).

My thought is that this would seem a real stretch in a crime-of-passion scenario, given the overhead. It just doesn't pass the "bang for the buck" test. [ It would seem almost ridiculous to assume that BC would waste his time working on something that he would surely know wouldn't prove anything anyway... ]

The other option of course is that neither the mobile phone records, or the landline records show that any calls were made. That would seem unlikely, given BC's attorneys are subpoenaing the information, and given that would directly contradict the statements in his affidavit. If this is the scenario, then nothing was "faked", and he just (irrationally) made up the story in his sworn affidavit as a measure of desperation. (Seems unlikely, but who knows).

[EntreNous]

I agree we shouldn't take anything for granted. I'm just saying that things probably got to be very surreal for someone that early Saturday morning; seems to me it would take an incredible amount of thought and planning to do all the things we're suggesting was done.

I admit I am not familiar with"soft calls, etc." I guess I would not be an intelligent juror.....

I wasn't familiar with this either until I read about it here. I didn't mean to imply that anyone isn't intelligent if they're not familiar with it.

What I meant was that many times people can be presented something they perceive to be confusing or too technical for them to decipher. Rather than trying to understand it and rely on expert testimony they will wave it off as a lot of fancy nonsense. KWIM?

[CARYISHOME]

I wasn't familiar with this either until I read about it here. I didn't mean to imply that anyone isn't intelligent if they're not familiar with it.

What I meant was that many times people can be presented something they perceive to be confusing or too technical for them to decipher. Rather than trying to understand it and rely on expert testimony they will wave it off as a lot of fancy nonsense. KWIM?

Sure, I know what you mean. I don't think it's nonsense at all and I suppose if he had the time to get everything else together he might do the technical stuff, too.

I just think other more basic things were being taken care of...could be wrong, though.

[raisincharlie]

<snip>

My thought is that this would seem a real stretch in a crime-of-passion scenario, given the overhead. It just doesn't pass the "bang for the buck" test. [ It would seem almost ridiculous to assume that BC would waste his time working on something that he would surely know wouldn't prove anything anyway... ]




Well, if you read Brad's affidavit - he does spend a lot of time and words trying to prove what he cannot prove. For instance, the whole conversation about giving Nancy $300 a week - he claims he can prove it because his records will show a regular withdrawal of that amount. In previous lines he admits to giving Nancy cash - so how does he prove that those regular withdrawals were actually given to Nancy ? Unless someone witnessed it or he had her email someone with verification, or sign for it - he can't prove anything he claims except he took out money. So in the affidavit at least, he is attempting to prove something he cannot prove. Seems to be a pattern there.

[Fairy1]

Well, if you read Brad's affidavit - he does spend a lot of time and words trying to prove what he cannot prove. For instance, the whole conversation about giving Nancy $300 a week - he claims he can prove it because his records will show a regular withdrawal of that amount. In previous lines he admits to giving Nancy cash - so how does he prove that those regular withdrawals were actually given to Nancy ? Unless someone witnessed it or he had her email someone with verification, or sign for it - he can't prove anything he claims except he took out money. So in the affidavit at least, he is attempting to prove something he cannot prove. Seems to be a pattern there.


He cannot prove it. He's been doing damage control from the get go. So much of what is in his custody affidavit has NOTHING to do with his parenting skills, yet EVERYTHING to do with why his wife is dead. Classic. IMO, of course. :)

[CyberPro]

<DISCLAIMER: The following post is predicated on the supposition that BC murdered NC. This might not be true, but it will save a lot of words in the post to get that clear up front>

OK,

I have a feeling that this was not really planned. It might have been, but I have the feeling that all this running to the store was to have an alibi for the survellence video and possible receipts at the store.

I tend to disagree that the (perhaps faked) phone calls would not be overly helpful. While I DO agree that getting the crib cleaned up would be a priority, I also think that if the deed was done earlier, it gives him HOURS of time that did not exist. In other words, if we suppose that she returned home at 1AM, since we understand that she might have been later than 12:30 leaving. Now, there is a confrontation that escalates, or perhaps he was awating her return and the event happens shortly after her arrival. Let's say it was a sudden event, not planned. OK, there is shock. He can't believe it happened, what to do now? His life is going to be ruined! So, he develops a plan. Dump her, clean up and then he knows that he needs to anchor her at a place that will make his running story believable. So, the trips to the store and the phone calls. IF she was alive to make the phone calls, then it was daylight when she calls. It would be harder to believe that she did NOT go for a run and encounter a stranger this way, especially when he is tied to the house taking care of the kids. Dutiful father that he is, he is even willing to cancel his tennis game and let NC have time away from the parenting duties for a while.

There could be up to 5 or 6 hours that do not have to be explained away if she makes this one phone call at about 6:15.

CyberPro

[Fairy1]

<DISCLAIMER: The following post is predicated on the supposition that BC murdered NC. This might not be true, but it will save a lot of words in the post to get that clear up front>

OK,

I have a feeling that this was not really planned. It might have been, but I have the feeling that all this running to the store was to have an alibi for the survellence video and possible receipts at the store.

I tend to disagree that the (perhaps faked) phone calls would not be overly helpful. While I DO agree that getting the crib cleaned up would be a priority, I also think that if the deed was done earlier, it gives him HOURS of time that did not exist. In other words, if we suppose that she returned home at 1AM, since we understand that she might have been later than 12:30 leaving. Now, there is a confrontation that escalates, or perhaps he was awating her return and the event happens shortly after her arrival. Let's say it was a sudden event, not planned. OK, there is shock. He can't believe it happened, what to do now? His life is going to be ruined! So, he develops a plan. Dump her, clean up and then he knows that he needs to anchor her at a place that will make his running story believable. So, the trips to the store and the phone calls. IF she was alive to make the phone calls, then it was daylight when she calls. It would be harder to believe that she did NOT go for a run and encounter a stranger this way, especially when he is tied to the house taking care of the kids. Dutiful father that he is, he is even willing to cancel his tennis game and let NC have time away from the parenting duties for a while.

There could be up to 5 or 6 hours that do not have to be explained away if she makes this one phone call at about 6:15.

CyberPro

Yes. IMO - his major mistake was the Carrie story. He purposely chose someone he did not know well and that none of NC's friends knew well. That may have worked, but who knows what Carrie has told LE? For all we know, she had to work that day!

[momto3kids]

He cannot prove it. He's been doing damage control from the get go. So much of what is in his custody affidavit has NOTHING to do with his parenting skills, yet EVERYTHING to do with why his wife is dead. Classic. IMO, of course. :)

I agree 100%.

I have read his affidavits a few times today and shake my head at some of his statements. The affidavit was to say he was a good father, he was doing everything in the best interest of his children, etc...
.
but instead he is talking about the $8k painting NC liked to buy,
explain his trip to HT,
explain his phone system,
where he went to look for NC...hello this is not about being a good husband :eek:

IMO he needs to think of an explaination why he went to LTF desk, and why he went to Carey's last if that was where he was supposedly going when he left the house after JA phone call.

[Fairy1]

None of his "explanations" will help him. LE will have forensic evidence. In the end, the phone calls, the trips to the grocery store, the financial evidence, etc. will not be important. They will know and will be able to prove - beyond the shadow of a doubt - who killed Nancy Cooper. I am hopeful anyway.....

[SleuthSayer]

I didn't get the impression that Nancy thought Brad was easdropping on her phone calls from work through VoIP but more keeping a log of her calls and having the ability to cause her home phone calls to suddenly disconnect for no reason.

The way I read it, they perceived the behavior of the unexplained disconnects to be evidence that he was monitoring her calls. Not that he was intentionally trying to disconnect them.

In any case, my point is that you would think that rather than just having a log of who she called and when she called them, it would be much more valuable to him to have recordings of every call. And, you can get that with with an standard technology "old world" telephone system and a $30 Radio Shack device.

So, the conspiracy theory that he was doing something sneaky with the VoIP system seems a bit far fetched to me.

[momto3kids]

The murder case in Cary this past Feb, they got the ex-husband arrested were a few key items...computer, video at a convience store purchasing gas, a few fibers in a back seat, and leaves in the windshield. The one thing I believe nailed him is he stated his ex had not come over to settle a dispute, a neighbor stepped forward to say the ex WAS there and they saw the car.

If just 1 person can place the vehicle at the dump site it would most likely move this case as fast as the other one did.

IMO this is why the CPD is trying to get just 1 person to say they saw something. They probably don't want to wait just like we don't for the DNA to return, but this is what they need at this point since no one saw NC jogging or a vehicle.

[Fairy1]

The murder case in Cary this past Feb, they got the ex-husband arrested were a few key items...computer, video at a convience store purchasing gas, a few fibers in a back seat, and leaves in the windshield. The one thing I believe nailed him is he stated his ex had not come over to settle a dispute, a neighbor stepped forward to say the ex WAS there and they saw the car.

If just 1 person can place the vehicle at the dump site it would most likely move this case as fast as the other one did.

IMO this is why the CPD is trying to get just 1 person to say they saw something. They probably don't want to wait just like we don't for the DNA to return, but this is what they need at this point since no one saw NC jogging or a vehicle.

We don't know for sure if anyone saw anything, do we? If I did, I would not be front and center...yet.

[MoonFlwr]

I have a question for the websleuthers who are locals to this case and have been down and mentioned Holly Springs Road.
I know it's been said that it is busy and it's thought that people wouldn't jog/run down it....but would that be the same at the time Nancy supposedly went for her run? (Busy first thing in the morning, too?)
Been meaning to ask for a while, but I keep getting distracted!

[Star12]

I have a question for the websleuthers who are locals to this case and have been down and mentioned Holly Springs Road.
I know it's been said that it is busy and it's thought that people wouldn't jog/run down it....but would that be the same at the time Nancy supposedly went for her run? (Busy first thing in the morning, too?)
Been meaning to ask for a while, but I keep getting distracted!

There's just basically no place to run on Holly Springs Road. It's two lane, and more like a country road, no sidewalk, no path, grown up wild vegetation at the edges of the road. It's not even pedestrian friendly, not jogger friendly, and certainly not runner friendly. Type of road where you would have to watch your footing. There are many wonderful paths very close by that are beautifully maintained much, much more suitable for running.

[MoonFlwr]

There's just basically no place to run on Holly Springs Road. It's two lane, and more like a country road, no sidewalk, no path, grown up wild vegetation at the edges of the road. It's not even pedestrian friendly, not jogger friendly, and certainly not runner friendly. Type of road where you would have to watch your footing. There are many wonderful paths very close by that are beautifully maintained much, much more suitable for running.

Ahh, ok! :)

Clear picture in my head now. Thank you, Star!

[carolinalady]

Thanks to all for the VoIP information!

[RaleighNC]

Honestly, I do think that BC would have taken the time to fake a phone call if he did it. Like CyberPro says - if the phone records would at least show a call originating from home at the time a HT receipt / surveillance tape shows him elsewhere, it could be the reasonable doubt he needs.

I also think that in times of stress, and looking to cover your tracks, you would revert back to what you know -i.e. what appears to be the easiest thing to do for you and using his VoIP knowledge would be so easy for him. While he might clean up -we've all heard that it wasn't his strong suit - and really - for a guy that worked as much as he did, etc - why would we expect him to be an expert cleaner?

So - you go with what you know.

While explaining how easy it is made sense to a lot of us - when I went to jury duty is was amazed at what appeared to be the lowest common denominator. it's not a stretch to think that enough jurors would not get it and use it for reasonable doubt.

I would also think that is why someone would subpeona the phone records, and then release them to the public and say "here, as you can clearly see, Nancy called Brad from home while he was out running errands, and before her run". With everything else being released that tries to sway the court of public opinion, why not that?

Not everyone has WS where they bat these ideas around and determine it's an easy fake.

[Roy23]

Yes. IMO - his major mistake was the Carrie story. He purposely chose someone he did not know well and that none of NC's friends knew well. That may have worked, but who knows what Carrie has told LE? For all we know, she had to work that day!


I just to do not agree with most of this. Brad doesn't have to prove anything. LE does. I have a feeling that if Brad did this, he planned very well and this was not spur of the moment backtracking. The Carrie story may mean nothing since another of Nancy's friends thought Carrie was running with Nancy too.

If Brad is guilty I believe he will be caught but I still think he planned pretty well. Of course, none of us have any real knowledge of the evidence yet. Had they found anything that signified a struggle I believe that Brad would at least be a person of interest at this point.

[EntreNous]

Which other friend thought Nancy was running with Carrie?

[raisincharlie]

I just to do not agree with most of this. Brad doesn't have to prove anything. LE does. I have a feeling that if Brad did this, he planned very well and this was not spur of the moment backtracking. The Carrie story may mean nothing since another of Nancy's friends thought Carrie was running with Nancy too.

If Brad is guilty I believe he will be caught but I still think he planned pretty well. Of course, none of us have any real knowledge of the evidence yet. Had they found anything that signified a struggle I believe that Brad would at least be a person of interest at this point.

I think it is a stretch to believe Brad doesn't have to prove anything. Every time a defense lawyer opens his mouth in court it is an effort to disprove what the state has claimed - the way to do that is for Brad to provide to his lawyer proof something is one way and not the way the DA says. On face value and by law - he isn't required to prove anything but in reality if he doesn't prove something in some manner he is gone before the trial starts and his lawyer can sit in chair and never say a word.

[raisincharlie]

Yes. IMO - his major mistake was the Carrie story. He purposely chose someone he did not know well and that none of NC's friends knew well. That may have worked, but who knows what Carrie has told LE? For all we know, she had to work that day!

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/08/06/3338505/clarkaffidavit.pdf

Bet LE has heard this.

[Roy23]

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/08/06/3338505/clarkaffidavit.pdf

Bet LE has heard this.


Yeah, I knew about that. RC wasn't there someone else who stated that they thought Nancy was to go jogging with Carey the morning in question? As far as the other issue, Brad and his attorneys have to create doubt. Let's just hope this case is tied to physical evidence instead of circumstancial evidence.

[Topsail Girl]

Hey Roy I'm not RC but I believe if anyone else thought Nancy was going running with Carey it was because BRAD told them that. Not because Nancy told them that. She never intended running that morning - she was scheduled to help her friend paint.. That' sjust MY opinion obviously. Honestly though I don't recall hearing anyone else saying Nancy was running with Carey.

[raisincharlie]

Yeah, I knew about that. RC wasn't there someone else who stated that they thought Nancy was to go jogging with Carey the morning in question? As far as the other issue, Brad and his attorneys have to create doubt. Let's just hope this case is tied to physical evidence instead of circumstancial evidence.

Roy - I do remember something somewhere that some of the neighbors thought Nancy had gone with Carey but in the same piece it was also mentioned that they spoke with Carey that very Saturday and found out that it was not the case. Wish I could remember where I read that, but I do recall it.

For whoever did it - yes, lets hope there is a strong case that can be proven to put one more murderer behind bars.

[carolinalady]

Yeah, I knew about that. RC wasn't there someone else who stated that they thought Nancy was to go jogging with Carey the morning in question? As far as the other issue, Brad and his attorneys have to create doubt. Let's just hope this case is tied to physical evidence instead of circumstancial evidence.

I don't think anyone stated that they knew she was running w/ Carey that morning. Clea Morwick stated in a FoxNews interview that Nancy told her that Nancy was going for a jog/run in the morning.

On the board where Aikohead deleted his user account, one post (in the thread he started on the HOW board when she was missing) stated she went running every morning while BC watched the girls.

[strach304]

Ok guys, sorry if I missed it but have they released her TOD and COD? Many of us here remember Michelle Young and the problems with dna that caused. I know LE worked very hard to try and place Jason Young at their house in the time frame of her murder.

I don't see an easy out for Brad if her death occurred sometime before her jog or soon after she came home from that party. He's backed into a corner with the statements he has made of seeing her leave to jog that morning.

[d99gr81]

There is an ability with services like Vonage to have a "soft phone" wherein your PC acts as your phone. Any time you access the web and start your "soft phone", if someone calls your number, it rings on your PC. This is helpful for businesses and folks who might travel frequently. I am not sure that calls initiated with a "sfot phone" register differently on the network than those that go through the telephone adapter at home - because the network may not distinguish them. With VoIP, you can get a NY number that rings in NC, or a Cali number that rings in Alaska, etc. Some folks use it so they can have a local number for where they used to live so friends can call wihtout toll charges. There is a lot of flexibility with VoIP.


Alternatively, you can take your telephone adapter and reconnect it somewhere else to have your phone "move". Only downside to this - because of 911 - if you disconnect your telephone adapter - you have to confirm that you have not "moved" it and that has to be kept on record.

I am not sure that TWC provides this type of soft phone service. I know Vonage does. With that - it would be easy to call yourself "from" home to your mobile phone using your laptop at Starbucks or any other network......

Yes this is true but easy traced to know where you are. Your IP will register... Data takes hops to and from locations. These providers can tell when the origin of the call is.

[raisincharlie]

Ok guys, sorry if I missed it but have they released her TOD and COD? Many of us here remember Michelle Young and the problems with dna that caused. I know LE worked very hard to try and place Jason Young at their house in the time frame of her murder.

I don't see an easy out for Brad if her death occurred sometime before her jog or soon after she came home from that party. He's backed into a corner with the statements he has made of seeing her leave to jog that morning.

No TOD or COD released as of yet Strach.

Hello !

[d99gr81]

I didn't get the impression that Nancy thought Brad was easdropping on her phone calls from work through VoIP but more keeping a log of her calls and having the ability to cause her home phone calls to suddenly disconnect for no reason.

Of course Brad countered that he'd discontinued this VoIP because Nancy had asked him to. He may have done that, but I believe he could have hooked and unhooked it at will without Nancy knowing it. I know you may need a special kind of phone,but guys like this have a way of making one think you don't believe what your eyes see or that you go along with them and think, 'they wouldn't do that, I'm just being paranoid.'

I know it's been said that once the phone call goes from the server or router or whatever into the public space the call is traceable and can't be tampered with. But, like I said before, it's not possible until someone figures out how to do it.

Is it possible for Brad to have hidden the fact he had his home phone connected to VoIP? I mean within his computers?'

I know once the phone call transfers to public access it can't be changed by him,.........but would this include TWC if it is on their service and not through the world wide internet?

Is this why they want records of TWC?

Thanks for all of the information you techies are supplying. I know my question sound simple, and well, they are. This is from a gal that only knows how to turn the computer on and off and access the internet. Give me just one glitch and I'm off to the Geek Squad!:rolleyes:

:)
fran


IP phones dropping calls is normal and happens all the time. If this was TW VOIP he can not disconnect a call remotely. If this is a Cisco phone... this can ALL be traced if he did disconnect a call. Those commands must come from the Call Manager on a Cisco system and can not be hidden.

[EntreNous]

IP phones dropping calls is normal and happens all the time. If this was TW VOIP he can not disconnect a call remotely. If this is a Cisco phone... this can ALL be traced if he did disconnect a call. Those commands must come from the Call Manager on a Cisco system and can not be hidden.

This could be why LE had a SW on his office at Cisco, no?

[d99gr81]

Well, if you read Brad's affidavit - he does spend a lot of time and words trying to prove what he cannot prove. For instance, the whole conversation about giving Nancy $300 a week - he claims he can prove it because his records will show a regular withdrawal of that amount. In previous lines he admits to giving Nancy cash - so how does he prove that those regular withdrawals were actually given to Nancy ? Unless someone witnessed it or he had her email someone with verification, or sign for it - he can't prove anything he claims except he took out money. So in the affidavit at least, he is attempting to prove something he cannot prove. Seems to be a pattern there.

Its more proof then just a bitter friend saying she didn't get money... so you are saying for months he just with drew 300 dollars every week just to have proof?

[fran]

TOD

Well, we know she was at the party until after 12 midnight. She most likely ate something at the BBQ.

IIRC, Brad said she ate something prior to going jogging at 7 a.m.

The stomach content most likely will be the closest determination they can come to the TOD. That and perhaps any insect activity.

Like I've said, there's different length of time for digestion of various foods. It'll come down to how digested her food is.

All the VoIP knowledge and all the phone calls and store visits aren't going to mean anything IF Nancy was murdered shortly after returning from the neighborhood gathering. IF Brad did this, he could have planned all he wanted to and used all his expertise, but IMHO, he most likely never even considered 'stomach contents.'

Circumstantial, yes..........powerful, most definitely.

JMHO
fran

[d99gr81]

He cannot prove it. He's been doing damage control from the get go. So much of what is in his custody affidavit has NOTHING to do with his parenting skills, yet EVERYTHING to do with why his wife is dead. Classic. IMO, of course. :)

If I was innocent and my murdered wife had embellished her complaints to friends and now had to defend myself against those same friends to save my kids... I would drag her butt through the mud too. Especially if she had been horrible to me.

[fran]

IP phones dropping calls is normal and happens all the time. If this was TW VOIP he can not disconnect a call remotely. If this is a Cisco phone... this can ALL be traced if he did disconnect a call. Those commands must come from the Call Manager on a Cisco system and can not be hidden.

Yes, but I understand that he can, I think you call it minimize them, so they're more difficult to detect and may even be written over or something like that.

I'm not a techy, so I'm sure these seem simple to one who's job it is to work with these things. So pardon if it makes no sense.

JMHO
fran

[Roy23]

TOD

Well, we know she was at the party until after 12 midnight. She most likely ate something at the BBQ.

IIRC, Brad said she ate something prior to going jogging at 7 a.m.

The stomach content most likely will be the closest determination they can come to the TOD. That and perhaps any insect activity.

Like I've said, there's different length of time for digestion of various foods. It'll come down to how digested her food is.

All the VoIP knowledge and all the phone calls and store visits aren't going to mean anything IF Nancy was murdered shortly after returning from the neighborhood gathering. IF Brad did this, he could have planned all he wanted to and used all his expertise, but IMHO, he most likely never even considered 'stomach contents.'

Circumstantial, yes..........powerful, most definitely.

JMHO
fran


I am not saying this happened but if they determine TOD to be late Saturday morning, Saturday afternoon, or even Sunday---then it is pretty powerful evidence as well. Not holding my breath on it.

[raisincharlie]

Its more proof then just a bitter friend saying she didn't get money... so you are saying for months he just with drew 300 dollars every week just to have proof?

No - I am saying because he withdrew money - it does not in any way shape or form prove he actually gave that amount of money to Nancy every week. Pretty simple.

[fran]

I am not saying this happened but if they determine TOD to be late Saturday morning, Saturday afternoon, or even Sunday---then it is pretty powerful evidence as well. Not holding my breath on it.

Oh, absolutely, the stomach content could be powerful evidence to show Brad didn't do this crime as well as prove he did.

But like you, I'm not holding my breath that it is going to exonerate him.

JMHO
fran

[EntreNous]

No - I am saying because he withdrew money - it does not in any way shape or form prove he actually gave that amount of money to Nancy every week. Pretty simple.

I agree. I usually withdraw my money for the week to keep me from using my check card. It keeps me on budget better. Anyway, the point is, if I needed to I could say that I was drawing it out to give to my spouse.

That would fall under covering your tracks, I'd think.

[fran]

If I was innocent and my murdered wife had embellished her complaints to friends and now had to defend myself against those same friends to save my kids... I would drag her butt through the mud too. Especially if she had been horrible to me.

You see, THIS is where Brad MAY have made a fatal error as well as his attorney. Frankly, I'm REALLY surprised that this attorney allowed all these affidavits to fly back and forth. REALLY surprised.

When Brad lawyered up, he basically invoked his right to NOT incriminate himself and NOT speak to LE without his lawyer present. He SHOULD HAVE kept to the game plan. As it is, those affidavits were a WEALTH of information for LE.

I've even seen statements by highly seasoned LE who said they've never before seen a case like this and LE is thrilled with all of this information offered by a lawyered-up NOT suspect.

The majority of the affidavits offered by the defendent were geared more towards proving he did NOT kill his wife, rather than the custody issue. Some people may not agree, but believe me, LE sees it that way and it definitely didn't get past them.

Brad would have benefitted more by NOT saying another word other than what needed to be said in court before the judge. His affidavits were for benefit of the court of public opinion. He didn't need to prove anything to them, it was LE he needed to be wary of. What he actually did was hand them everything on a silver platter, IMO.

NOT a smart move. :waitasec: IMO, he's now realizing that but it's too late.:bang:

JMHO
fran

[Jaydee0158]

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/08/06/3338505/clarkaffidavit.pdf

Bet LE has heard this.

Does anyone else find it odd that Carey's affidavit is so short? I guess short and to the point is preferable.

[Jaydee0158]

Hey Roy I'm not RC but I believe if anyone else thought Nancy was going running with Carey it was because BRAD told them that. Not because Nancy told them that. She never intended running that morning - she was scheduled to help her friend paint.. That' sjust MY opinion obviously. Honestly though I don't recall hearing anyone else saying Nancy was running with Carey.

Not running? I thought one of her friends at the party DID say she was going to run the next morning. A short run (3 - 5 miles) would not be out of the question for someone who wanted to keep up with training for a half; some is better than none. I also recall JA saying that some of their route was off the beaten path. If that is so, and she did run, that raises some questions.

[raisincharlie]

Does anyone else find it odd that Carey's affidavit is so short? I guess short and to the point is preferable.

I don't find it odd at all. To the point perhaps, but not odd given someone was possibly trying to imply she may have been the last one to see Nancy Saturday.

[carolinalady]

Not running? I thought one of her friends at the party DID say she was going to run the next morning. A short run (3 - 5 miles) would not be out of the question for someone who wanted to keep up with training for a half; some is better than none. I also recall JA saying that some of their route was off the beaten path. If that is so, and she did run, that raises some questions.

It was Clea Morwick in her FoxNews interview.

Also, look at my post #41 of this thread. The HOW board had information on it, too about her running everyday. Aikohead on that board was believed to be Mike Morwick (Clea's husband).

[Topsail Girl]

Not running? I thought one of her friends at the party DID say she was going to run the next morning. A short run (3 - 5 miles) would not be out of the question for someone who wanted to keep up with training for a half; some is better than none. I also recall JA saying that some of their route was off the beaten path. If that is so, and she did run, that raises some questions.

Sorry Jaydee I didn't do well getting my point across - I don't think she made it to run whether or not she PLANNED to run. I think she was dead before her planned or unplanned run.

[EntreNous]

You see, THIS is where Brad MAY have made a fatal error as well as his attorney. Frankly, I'm REALLY surprised that this attorney allowed all these affidavits to fly back and forth. REALLY surprised.

When Brad lawyered up, he basically invoked his right to NOT incriminate himself and NOT speak to LE without his lawyer present. He SHOULD HAVE kept to the game plan. As it is, those affidavits were a WEALTH of information for LE.

I've even seen statements by highly seasoned LE who said they've never before seen a case like this and LE is thrilled with all of this information offered by a lawyered-up NOT suspect.

The majority of the affidavits offered by the defendent were geared more towards proving he did NOT kill his wife, rather than the custody issue. Some people may not agree, but believe me, LE sees it that way and it definitely didn't get past them.

Brad would have benefitted more by NOT saying another word other than what needed to be said in court before the judge. His affidavits were for benefit of the court of public opinion. He didn't need to prove anything to them, it was LE he needed to be wary of. What he actually did was hand them everything on a silver platter, IMO.

NOT a smart move. :waitasec: IMO, he's now realizing that but it's too late.:bang:

JMHO
fran

I agree he's certainly made all the wrong moves for an innocent man. The fact that he stopped showing up for press conferences immediately following the discovery of the body and failing to attend even one memorial, prayer vigil, etc. speaks volumes. I don't care how private you are, you attend the memorial service of your dead wife and mother of your children. They weren't so estranged that he couldn't go to the party the night before she disappeared so in my mind, if he could attend the last party with her, he could attend her funeral.

[Jaydee0158]

Sorry Jaydee I didn't do well getting my point across - I don't think she made it to run whether or not she PLANNED to run. I think she was dead before her planned or unplanned run.

Oh, I see. I didn't read it that way, but now understand what you meant to say.

[Jaydee0158]

It was Clea Morwick in her FoxNews interview.

Also, look at my post #41 of this thread. The HOW board had information on it, too about her running everyday. Aikohead on that board was believed to be Mike Morwick (Clea's husband).

Thanks -- I went back to that post and read. I've been on vacation and there has been so much posted, there is no way to go back and try to catch up... too much rehashing and makes my head spin. I did read all the press updates and theory updates, though.
:confused:

Looks like everyone just has to wait for the facts to come out by way of LE.

[fran]

I agree he's certainly made all the wrong moves for an innocent man. The fact that he stopped showing up for press conferences immediately following the discovery of the body and failing to attend even one memorial, prayer vigil, etc. speaks volumes. I don't care how private you are, you attend the memorial service of your dead wife and mother of your children. They weren't so estranged that he couldn't go to the party the night before she disappeared so in my mind, if he could attend the last party with her, he could attend her funeral.

See this is where all the contradictions come into play. In his affidavits he stated he "loved my wife." His actions completely contradicted his words. Well, even some of his words contradicted his 'other' words.:crazy:

Circumstantial evidence, yes. Proof of his guilt, no. But, it's piling one circumstance after the other that point to his guilt, that MAY convict him. We saw this in another case. When the volume of circumstances piles too high, there's no other reason except the accused is guilty.:bang:

We only know SOME of what MAY point to Brad Cooper's guilt. What we know so far is NOT enough. But I'm willing to bet, by his affidavits, LE has a LOT. LE's time to show their hand would be during the trial, IF there is one.:behindbar

FWIW, I still haven't seen one shred of evidence this crime was committed by anyone other than the usual suspect. :rolleyes:

JMHO
fran

[Topsail Girl]

Oh, I see. I didn't read it that way, but now understand what you meant to say.


LOL well that's because I let my fingers engage before my brain did LOL and I didn't type it the way I was thinkin' it in my head. :crazy:

[d99gr81]

I have a question for the websleuthers who are locals to this case and have been down and mentioned Holly Springs Road.
I know it's been said that it is busy and it's thought that people wouldn't jog/run down it....but would that be the same at the time Nancy supposedly went for her run? (Busy first thing in the morning, too?)
Been meaning to ask for a while, but I keep getting distracted!

It is not busy at that time on Saturday... Very very little traffic.

[fran]

It was Clea Morwick in her FoxNews interview.

Also, look at my post #41 of this thread. The HOW board had information on it, too about her running everyday. Aikohead on that board was believed to be Mike Morwick (Clea's husband).


Because through the affidavits it appears that Nancy had a long personal conversation with Clea the night before she disappeared, I tend to believe Nancy did have plans to run that morning. Maybe a short run, but plans to do so just the same.

Guess Brad's fatal mistake here was he inserted Carey's name and it wasn't necessary to make it sound believeable.

See, this is what these guys do, (well, IF he did this crime:rolleyes:), they give out too much information. IMO, they think it makes their story sound truthful as to the events, when in fact, too much information, down to minute by minute accounts, makes the explanation sound scripted.

JMHO
fran

[FullDisclosure]

Because through the affidavits it appears that Nancy had a long personal conversation with Clea the night before she disappeared, I tend to believe Nancy did have plans to run that morning. Maybe a short run, but plans to do so just the same.

Guess Brad's fatal mistake here was he inserted Carey's name and it wasn't necessary to make it sound believeable.

See, this is what these guys do, (well, IF he did this crime:rolleyes:), they give out too much information. IMO, they think it makes their story sound truthful as to the events, when in fact, too much information, down to minute by minute accounts, makes the explanation sound scripted.

JMHO
fran


I also tend to believe NC intended to be out of the house for a while that morning (before her plans to paint with JA later) based on what Clea has stated.

I don't think Brad necessarily was lying about her running with Carey. Perhaps Nancy lied to him about her plans that morning. I think we have evidence that she wasn't always truthful with him. Remember, their marriage was in shambles at this point.

Just trying to look at different sides.

[raisincharlie]

Chief Bazemore is confident:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1174638.html

"While I will not comment on the specifics of our work, I will say that I am very pleased with the progress we're making and am very proud of the tireless and professional effort that is underway."

[FullDisclosure]

Does anyone else find it odd that Carey's affidavit is so short? I guess short and to the point is preferable.

I don't find it odd, I find it brilliant. If I were Carey, I'd keep to the point. Answer the big question and that's it. I'm sure she wants as little involvement in this as possible.

I agree, short and to the point is definitely preferable.

[FullDisclosure]

It is not busy at that time on Saturday... Very very little traffic.

Someone on the board drove it last saturday at the time of day Nancy was reported by Brad to have gone out for her run. That sleuther (was it you, d99 or someone else?) reported fairly light traffic and a few joggers out on Holly Springs road, IIRC.

I would go back and try to find the post, but there are sooo many it would take forever! Does that poster want to refresh our memories? :)

[momto3kids]

I am beginning to wonder if these affidavits did more harm than good. Some of the statements had no reason to be put on there and needed to wait until the trial with a jury IMO.

[ncnative]

On WRAL TV news at noon today, I heard the tail end of something like, Cary PD chief thanks everyone for their help/cooperation, etc. in the Cooper case. Then it sounded like they were trying to suggest that things were coming toward a big finale. Does anyone know what was said?

On the way home from physical therapy today I noticed that Brad Cooper's backyard floodlight stays on all the time. It's been on for ages now. I suppose no one is living there. Don't know. Although I have seen his car parked in the drive last week.

[Topsail Girl]

His mother was there last week because she slammed the door in Amanda Lamb's face when Amanda went to the door and identified herself. This was the same afternoon Ed and Amanda told us about the other search warrants for Cisco and the mystery one.

Neither Ed nor Amanda saw Brad though

[FullDisclosure]

Chief Bazemore is confident:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1174638.html

"While I will not comment on the specifics of our work, I will say that I am very pleased with the progress we're making and am very proud of the tireless and professional effort that is underway."

NCNative,

The link that RC provided to the N&O story has the same info--maybe that'll help answer your question. :)

[momto3kids]

http://www.newsobserver.com/2864/story/1174638.html

This is the only thing I found

[momto3kids]

On WRAL TV news at noon today, I heard the tail end of something like, Cary PD chief thanks everyone for their help/cooperation, etc. in the Cooper case. Then it sounded like they were trying to suggest that things were coming toward a big finale. Does anyone know what was said?

On the way home from physical therapy today I noticed that Brad Cooper's backyard floodlight stays on all the time. It's been on for ages now. I suppose no one is living there. Don't know. Although I have seen his car parked in the drive last week.

I have also noticed the spotlights on in the back of his home. I also noticed how he pulled all the blinds and 3 of the windows upstairs he has the top half open to be able to look out. The bottom half of the window are shut tight.

I have seen BC at home outside not too long ago in his garage.

[ncsu95]

I agree he's certainly made all the wrong moves for an innocent man. The fact that he stopped showing up for press conferences immediately following the discovery of the body and failing to attend even one memorial, prayer vigil, etc. speaks volumes. I don't care how private you are, you attend the memorial service of your dead wife and mother of your children. They weren't so estranged that he couldn't go to the party the night before she disappeared so in my mind, if he could attend the last party with her, he could attend her funeral.


Are you serious? This was already a media circus. Him showing up for the memorial or any of the other public events would have magnified it exponentially. It would have taken away from celebrating her and put all the focus on him. And I'm guessing more than a few people would have blasted his "arrogance" for showing up.

[raisincharlie]

Are you serious? This was already a media circus. Him showing up for the memorial or any of the other public events would have magnified it exponentially. It would have taken away from celebrating her and put all the focus on him. And I'm guessing more than a few people would have blasted his "arrogance" for showing up.

I would agree with you on this one.

[FullDisclosure]

Are you serious? This was already a media circus. Him showing up for the memorial or any of the other public events would have magnified it exponentially. It would have taken away from celebrating her and put all the focus on him. And I'm guessing more than a few people would have blasted his "arrogance" for showing up.

I totally agree. He was damned if he did and damned if he didn't.

[raisincharlie]

Renewed motion for a psych evaluation - hearing in September

http://www.newsobserver.com/2864/story/1174638.html

Before then, Nancy Cooper's family wants a judge to order that Bradley Cooper be evaluated by a therapist and that those records be considered in the custody case. They have asked that a hearing be set for September 22.

[Topsail Girl]

While I do agree that he was damned if he did and damned if he didn't, there are cases where one was thought guilty of murder and went to the funeral and memorials in spite of the stares and media frenzy. They went because they were innocent, they knew they were innocent and this was their family member and they went to show their love and respect regardless of what the media or anyone else thought.

[FullDisclosure]

While I do agree that he was damned if he did and damned if he didn't, there are cases where one was thought guilty of murder and went to the funeral and memorials in spite of the stares and media frenzy. They went because they were innocent, they knew they were innocent and this was their family member and they went to show their love and respect regardless of what the media or anyone else thought.

I understand that choice to go and show love and respect regardless of what others thought. I also understand the choice to not go out of respect and love if you believe it will cause too much disruption. I think that would be a very tough call.

[Topsail Girl]

I understand that choice to go and show love and respect regardless of what others thought. I also understand the choice to not go out of respect and love if you believe it will cause too much disruption. I think that would be a very tough call.

Absolutely it would be a tough call. I know that for myself - If I know I didn't kill my child/spouse/etc. I would go and show love and respect come hell or high water and nothing would stop me. In the end all the dropped jaws and media frenzy would be for nothing because I'm innocent. Everybody is different and everyne handles things differently. His attending or not attending doesn't make a hill of beans to me - either way I still think he's the murderer.

[Roy23]

I gotta go with Topsail Girl on the Memorial issue. I see no circumstance where an innocent man doesn't go to this. This bothers me more than anything that NC's friends have said and what Brad's actions have been. As a matter of fact, this is the only thing that makes me lean on him most likely being guilty other than the statistics in general.

Why should he care what anybody thinks?

[d99gr81]

Yes, but I understand that he can, I think you call it minimize them, so they're more difficult to detect and may even be written over or something like that.

I'm not a techy, so I'm sure these seem simple to one who's job it is to work with these things. So pardon if it makes no sense.

JMHO
fran

Theres no minimize. Its a very complex box that logs everything that happens... there is no way to hide it. Even if something is deleted thats logged too... So the log notes the call was made and if that is deleted then it also notes the deletion of the call but not the log entry of the call. So now theres a call log entry and a delete call entry in the log... now 2 notes in log. so deleting just brings more attention.

[wirehair]

Could it be possible that c might have been b's alibi. He might have called c and said "n said she was going running with you this morning" She might have thought about it for many days and decided she didn't want to be party to something that wasn't suppose to take place....therefore the very short aff. that just stated one fact. Maybe there are other facts that one wouldn't want to get into. Just throwing that out there. It's a pretty wild idea, but with b's history, you never know.

[Topsail Girl]

I gotta go with Topsail Girl on the Memorial issue. I see no circumstance where an innocent man doesn't go to this. This bothers me more than anything that NC's friends have said and what Brad's actions have been. As a matter of fact, this is the only thing that makes me lean on him most likely being guilty other than the statistics in general.

Why should he care what anybody thinks?

Hell even guilty men attend their wife's memorial - ala Scott Peterson...

[Topsail Girl]

I gotta go with Topsail Girl on the Memorial issue. I see no circumstance where an innocent man doesn't go to this. This bothers me more than anything that NC's friends have said and what Brad's actions have been. As a matter of fact, this is the only thing that makes me lean on him most likely being guilty other than the statistics in general.

Why should he care what anybody thinks?

Absolutely. He was thinking of her friends and her family.......:boohoo:

[FullDisclosure]

I gotta go with Topsail Girl on the Memorial issue. I see no circumstance where an innocent man doesn't go to this. This bothers me more than anything that NC's friends have said and what Brad's actions have been. As a matter of fact, this is the only thing that makes me lean on him most likely being guilty other than the statistics in general.

Why should he care what anybody thinks?

I see what you're saying. I really do. Another way to look at it, though, is that if he WERE guilty he'd want to go just to look innocent. So, IMO, if he were basing his decision on "what people think" he would have gone, because it DOES look bad not to go! (We definitely agree on that point!!) So I view not going as more a sign of respect to maintain the integrity of the service for Nancy and not detract with all the hoopla.

Maybe I just need coffee...:crazy:

[fran]

While I do agree that he was damned if he did and damned if he didn't, there are cases where one was thought guilty of murder and went to the funeral and memorials in spite of the stares and media frenzy. They went because they were innocent, they knew they were innocent and this was their family member and they went to show their love and respect regardless of what the media or anyone else thought.

I agree Topsail. IF it were me, I WOULD have attended.

I recall one husband who refused to go to any further news conferences because he didn't like the attention put on him. Like asking him to explain himself. He didn't want to explain himself because he was and is GUITY!:eek:

Course, BEFORE he was arrested, when it suited him, this same husband arranged his own news meetings. Little did he know that it didn't matter that he controlled the questions asked and answered. When he got in front of the camera, he looked even more guilty. ;)

Just sayin,
fran

[d99gr81]

Not running? I thought one of her friends at the party DID say she was going to run the next morning. A short run (3 - 5 miles) would not be out of the question for someone who wanted to keep up with training for a half; some is better than none. I also recall JA saying that some of their route was off the beaten path. If that is so, and she did run, that raises some questions.

Honestly JA stinks to high heaven if you ask me.

[Topsail Girl]

I see what you're saying. I really do. Another way to look at it, though, is that if he WERE guilty he'd want to go just to look innocent. So, IMO, if he were basing his decision on "what people think" he would have gone, because it DOES look bad not to go! (We definitely agree on that point!!) So I view not going as more a sign of respect to maintain the integrity of the service for Nancy and not detract with all the hoopla.

Maybe I just need coffee...:crazy:

No not at all. I understand your point too. That's why it is a discussion board. If we don't agree so be it - I'll bet there are more things we DO agree on than we don't agree on. :blowkiss:

[fran]

Theres no minimize. Its a very complex box that logs everything that happens... there is no way to hide it. Even if something is deleted thats logged too... So the log notes the call was made and if that is deleted then it also notes the deletion of the call but not the log entry of the call. So now theres a call log entry and a delete call entry in the log... now 2 notes in log. so deleting just brings more attention.

Thanks for the information. I appreciat it.

What you said actually makes sense to me. Believe it or not! ;)

fran

[Topsail Girl]

Honestly JA stinks to high heaven if you ask me.

What makes you think that?

[d99gr81]

Because through the affidavits it appears that Nancy had a long personal conversation with Clea the night before she disappeared, I tend to believe Nancy did have plans to run that morning. Maybe a short run, but plans to do so just the same.

Guess Brad's fatal mistake here was he inserted Carey's name and it wasn't necessary to make it sound believeable.

See, this is what these guys do, (well, IF he did this crime:rolleyes:), they give out too much information. IMO, they think it makes their story sound truthful as to the events, when in fact, too much information, down to minute by minute accounts, makes the explanation sound scripted.

JMHO
fran


see your opinion is fine but they way you speak is stereotypical.

[d99gr81]

Thanks for the information. I appreciat it.

What you said actually makes sense to me. Believe it or not! ;)

fran

oh no! lol I got through :) I kid hun.

[carolinalady]

What makes you think that?

I can tell you some of why I find her statements "odd":

To me, her statement about that she would KNOW if Nancy & Carey had plans to run made me think of her as being a tad bit jealous.

Also, in her whole statement about Nancy feeling uncomfortable around the Morwicks (I think it was 6d of her affidavit). It totally goes against the statement I read on the HOW board (prior to account deletion) stating that Nancy was Clea & Mike's best friend. That post said they had lots of common interests and what not.

Again, it made me feel like she was jealous, like there was no way the Morwicks could be better friends w/ Nancy than JA.

Now, I do think Jessica sounded panicked in her 911 call and so some of what I find strange in her call (the rambling and not listening to the questions) can certainly be chalked up to that.

So, those are a couple of examples of why JA makes me go...hmmmm.

[fran]

Hell even guilty men attend their wife's memorial - ala Scott Peterson...

Oh, you mean the candle light vigil on New Years Eve?

The one where he made his infamous call to Amber and said he was in Paris while 1/2 of Modesto was at the same gathering mourning and honoring his 'lost wife?':waitasec:

:behindbarYeah, he really was a dufus.:eek:

I kinda' think we're going to find a few resemlences between Scott and Brad when all the evidence is revealed. You know, all those little details going on behind the scene that we're not aware of yet? Like, how MUCH of his affidavits were lies and will be PROVEN through records?:bang:

People think there's no way he would have lied on those affidavits because they can be checked for accuracy.

eehhhhh......YES indeedy they sure can. The problem is, Brad wasn't thinking of LE checking into his statements. Kinda' like the 4:20 a.m. visit to the store to buy detergent. He said it was AFTER daylight.:rolleyes:

Like they say, 'a picture is worth a 1000 words!' :woohoo:

;)
fran

[Topsail Girl]

see your opinion is fine but they way you speak is stereotypical.


I'm not trying to speak for Fran here but any regular poster on a crime board speaks stereotypical because we're experienced in this kind of stuff. we can almost guess how most of the cases are gonna play out from just a bit of info in the first week to 10 days. Sometimes it doesn'tt ake that long.

It's a talent learned from experience.

[carolinalady]

SNIP
Like, how MUCH of his affidavits were lies and will be PROVEN through records?:bang:

People think there's no way he would have lied on those affidavits because they can be checked for accuracy.

Fran, I haven't seen anyone say there's no way he would have lied. I know some have questions why would he lie. Others, like myself, have said IF he lied, he certainly has given lots to the plantiffs & LE for their cases.

[Topsail Girl]

Bingo Fran. The infamous call to Amber from Paris on New Years Eve. The littl chit had no idea little miss Amber was setting his butt up for death row.

[fran]

see your opinion is fine but they way you speak is stereotypical.

Well, you do know this is a stereotypical crime for a stereotypical reason, allegedly by the stereotypical USUAL NOT suspect? ;)

JMHO
fran

[momto3kids]

I was raised with the motto, 'actions speak louder than words,' and BC actions have spoken volumes with this entire situation. This was his children's mother, the woman he states he loved, a marriage he wanted to work on....but he is concerned what the public thinks?

He is the one who declined all but one press conference. He didn't attend the private memorial at Bella's pre-school, which I believe the press was off at a distance.

He is not a POI or suspect even today, so why hide and mourn?
I would think if he was uncomfortable thinking the media would be in his face, he could have requested assistance with the CPD.

The most this man has done is tie a white ribbon around his mailbox, that is if he even did it.

Where is the wreath from him at the site NC was found? This was per se her last resting place besides an urn....why hasn't he gone to the site to put something, just something there?

[fran]

I can tell you some of why I find her statements "odd":

To me, her statement about that she would KNOW if Nancy & Carey had plans to run made me think of her as being a tad bit jealous.

Also, in her whole statement about Nancy feeling uncomfortable around the Morwicks (I think it was 6d of her affidavit). It totally goes against the statement I read on the HOW board (prior to account deletion) stating that Nancy was Clea & Mike's best friend. That post said they had lots of common interests and what not.

Again, it made me feel like she was jealous, like there was no way the Morwicks could be better friends w/ Nancy than JA.

Now, I do think Jessica sounded panicked in her 911 call and so some of what I find strange in her call (the rambling and not listening to the questions) can certainly be chalked up to that.

So, those are a couple of examples of why JA makes me go...hmmmm.


IIRC, that late night 10:30 p.m. phone call on Nancy's cell phone was JA verifying the next mornings paint date, time. I don't think that's odd what JA said about Nancy not running with Carey that day. We only got one or two sentences about it in the 911 tape.

We have since found out that JA, Nancy and Carey were all in training together for the big race. They all had a schedule and normally told each other when they planned to run, and most likely if it was a lone run or with a partner. Nancy MAY HAVE told JA she was doing a 'short run,' solo before painting. That may be the simple explanation of JA's words to that morning's running plans to the 911 operator.

As far as to the Morwicks. Brad had been spending a great deal of time near the end, with the Morwicks, WITHOUT Nancy. From what I gathered, Nancy felt uncomfortable with them, of late, because she didn't know exactly what type of stuff Brad was telling them behind her back.

IF I recall, it was to the Morwick's Brad made that demanding phone call where he demanded Nancy to bring the girls to their house for dinner. Apparently Nancy had other plans, but changed them and took the girls to their house. Brad made her wait an hour until he arrived. Nancy waited OUTSIDE until his arrival.

ALSO, the last time Nancy was at dinner at their house with Brad and the girls. She claimed a headache and left in the middle of dinner.

Sounds like Nancy was undecided of the Morwicks loyalty towards her.

JMHO
fran

[Roy23]

"eehhhhh......YES indeedy they sure can. The problem is, Brad wasn't thinking of LE checking into his statements. Kinda' like the 4:20 a.m. visit to the store to buy detergent. He said it was AFTER daylight. "


Fran,

What proof do you have of this? You seem to speak in facts about all the lies that you know Brad told. I didn't know that anyone had proof that Brad was buying detergent at 4:20 am. I would like to see the link of this news.

[d99gr81]

Well, you do know this is a stereotypical crime for a stereotypical reason, allegedly by the stereotypical USUAL NOT suspect? ;)

JMHO
fran

Thing is, if he is proven innocent... and the way you come across... Leave you looking very angry and silly is all.

[fran]

I was raised with the motto, 'actions speak louder than words,' and BC actions have spoken volumes with this entire situation. This was his children's mother, the woman he states he loved, a marriage he wanted to work on....but he is concerned what the public thinks?

He is the one who declined all but one press conference. He didn't attend the private memorial at Bella's pre-school, which I believe the press was off at a distance.

He is not a POI or suspect even today, so why hide and mourn?
I would think if he was uncomfortable thinking the media would be in his face, he could have requested assistance with the CPD.

The most this man has done is tie a white ribbon around his mailbox, that is if he even did it.

Where is the wreath from him at the site NC was found? This was per se her last resting place besides an urn....why hasn't he gone to the site to put something, just something there?

Very good points momto3

Where is his grieving?:confused:

From what I can see, he's ONLY concerned with APPEARING or PROVING he's innocencent.:waitasec:

IF he's really innocent, there SHOULD be NOTHING to prove.:confused:

He ACTS like a guilty man.:behindbar

JMHO
fran

[carolinalady]

IIRC, that late night 10:30 p.m. phone call on Nancy's cell phone was JA verifying the next mornings paint date, time. I don't think that's odd what JA said about Nancy not running with Carey that day. We only got one or two sentences about it in the 911 tape.

We have since found out that JA, Nancy and Carey were all in training together for the big race. They all had a schedule and normally told each other when they planned to run, and most likely if it was a lone run or with a partner. Nancy MAY HAVE told JA she was doing a 'short run,' solo before painting. That may be the simple explanation of JA's words to that morning's running plans to the 911 operator.

As far as to the Morwicks. Brad had been spending a great deal of time near the end, with the Morwicks, WITHOUT Nancy. From what I gathered, Nancy felt uncomfortable with them, of late, because she didn't know exactly what type of stuff Brad was telling them behind her back.

IF I recall, it was to the Morwick's Brad made that demanding phone call where he demanded Nancy to bring the girls to their house for dinner. Apparently Nancy had other plans, but changed them and took the girls to their house. Brad made her wait an hour until he arrived. Nancy waited OUTSIDE until his arrival.

ALSO, the last time Nancy was at dinner at their house with Brad and the girls. She claimed a headache and left in the middle of dinner.

Sounds like Nancy was undecided of the Morwicks loyalty towards her.

JMHO
fran

Did you read the HOW board posts?

And, you posted the following:
Because through the affidavits it appears that Nancy had a long personal conversation with Clea the night before she disappeared, I tend to believe Nancy did have plans to run that morning. Maybe a short run, but plans to do so just the same.

So, why would she have a long personal conversation w/ Clea the night before if she was so undecided about their loyalty?

[momto3kids]

Very good points momto3

Where is his grieving?:confused:

From what I can see, he's ONLY concerned with APPEARING or PROVING he's innocencent.:waitasec:

IF he's really innocent, there SHOULD be NOTHING to prove.:confused:

He ACTS like a guilty man.:behindbar

JMHO
fran

He didn't attend any services because he was pouting...plain and simple. IMO The LE stepped in and took his children from him the night of the 16th, the gp's had moved to get this done thru the courts and he was mad. He felt he was tricked...he all but said this in his affidavit.

He had finally lost control of the situations around him and was to put it mildly a little upset. :mad:
What better way to show everyone he didn't give a darn then to now show his face in public at the services.

Remember at this point NO affidavits were done by NC's friends so he had no idea what they would be stating. Now unless he knew how they felt about him, but it appears he brought this on himself also.

[d99gr81]

IIRC, that late night 10:30 p.m. phone call on Nancy's cell phone was JA verifying the next mornings paint date, time. I don't think that's odd what JA said about Nancy not running with Carey that day. We only got one or two sentences about it in the 911 tape.

We have since found out that JA, Nancy and Carey were all in training together for the big race. They all had a schedule and normally told each other when they planned to run, and most likely if it was a lone run or with a partner. Nancy MAY HAVE told JA she was doing a 'short run,' solo before painting. That may be the simple explanation of JA's words to that morning's running plans to the 911 operator.

As far as to the Morwicks. Brad had been spending a great deal of time near the end, with the Morwicks, WITHOUT Nancy. From what I gathered, Nancy felt uncomfortable with them, of late, because she didn't know exactly what type of stuff Brad was telling them behind her back.

IF I recall, it was to the Morwick's Brad made that demanding phone call where he demanded Nancy to bring the girls to their house for dinner. Apparently Nancy had other plans, but changed them and took the girls to their house. Brad made her wait an hour until he arrived. Nancy waited OUTSIDE until his arrival.

ALSO, the last time Nancy was at dinner at their house with Brad and the girls. She claimed a headache and left in the middle of dinner.

Sounds like Nancy was undecided of the Morwicks loyalty towards her.

JMHO
fran

Meaning they might not have been sympathetic to her embellishments?

[d99gr81]

Did you read the HOW board posts?

And, you posted the following:


So, why would she have a long personal conversation w/ Clea the night before if she was so undecided about their loyalty?

Very good point

[d99gr81]

He didn't attend any services because he was pouting...plain and simple. IMO The LE stepped in and took his children from him the night of the 16th, the gp's had moved to get this done thru the courts and he was mad. He felt he was tricked...he all but said this in his affidavit.

He had finally lost control of the situations around him and was to put it mildly a little upset. :mad:
What better way to show everyone he didn't give a darn then to now show his face in public at the services.

Remember at this point NO affidavits were done by NC's friends so he had no idea what they would be stating. Now unless he knew how they felt about him, but it appears he brought this on himself also.

So he is guilty for not going and not caring?...and he is guilty for caring and defending the affidavits for his kids? Sorry you have him hung out to dry no matter what he does.

[carolinalady]

So he is guilty for not going and not caring?...and he is guilty for caring and defending the affidavits for his kids? Sorry you have him hung out to dry no matter what he does.

The other thing about these services is, weren't the children supposed to be there? Maybe, just maybe, he was also thinking about how hard of a time the girls might have if they saw him. The last time they saw him involved them being physically removed from his care by LE.

I know most of you won't buy it as a possible reason, but there is a chance this could be the reason.

[carolinalady]

One more thing about questioning the Morwicks' loyalty. Why in the world would she have a beach trip planned w/ them if she questioned their loyalty? And Clea's affidavit stated they talked daily and saw each other several times a week (IIRC).

[FullDisclosure]

The other thing about these services is, weren't the children supposed to be there? Maybe, just maybe, he was also thinking about how hard of a time the girls might have if they saw him. The last time they saw him involved them being physically removed from his care by LE.

I know most of you won't buy it as a possible reason, but there is a chance this could be the reason.

Excellent point. Hadn't thought of that.

[FullDisclosure]

One more thing about questioning the Morwicks' loyalty. Why in the world would she have a beach trip planned w/ them if she questioned their loyalty? And Clea's affidavit stated they talked daily and saw each other several times a week (IIRC).

And the whole business card design? Was that Mike, or am I remembering incorrectly?

[carolinalady]

And the whole business card design? Was that Mike, or am I remembering incorrectly?

Yes, it was Mike.

[Roy23]

Excellent point. Hadn't thought of that.

I thought he agreed for them to be in their care for a while.

[carolinalady]

I thought he agreed for them to be in their care for a while.

Not until 7/25 just prior to the scheduled temporary custody hearing.

The Ex Parte emergency custody hearing took place 7/16. BC already had plans to meet Nancy's family for dinner so they could see the girls. Instead of her family showing up, the police did. According to reports/affidavits the girls were extremely upset and were clinging to him.

The local and Canadian memorials were all before the scheduled temporary hearing.

[FullDisclosure]

I thought he agreed for them to be in their care for a while.

The other thing about these services is, weren't the children supposed to be there? Maybe, just maybe, he was also thinking about how hard of a time the girls might have if they saw him. The last time they saw him involved them being physically removed from his care by LE.

I know most of you won't buy it as a possible reason, but there is a chance this could be the reason.

Roy, I was agreeing that perhaps he was thinking about how hard it might be on the girls.

[fran]

Thing is, if he is proven innocent... and the way you come across... Leave you looking very angry and silly is all.

IF you think I WANT him to be guilty, you're sadly mistaken. This crime has already caused a family to loose a mother to two small children. IF he's guilty, they will basically be orphans.

Whether he's guilty or innocent and IF or NOT he's convicted, there are no winners here. Nancy will always be gone forever.

I don't think it will leave me angry or looking silly. I would be happy he wasn't the perp and I would ALSO profoundly apologize to him. Heck, I'd even write a hard copy letter of apology if I thought he'd read it.

Silly, never! Just using deductions. I really don't believe I'll be needing to write that apology anyway. I understand the investigation is moving along nicely. I'm sure there will be an arrest soon. Oh, it may be a few weeks, but that's just because they need to wait for other agencies, etc.

JMHO
fran

[fran]

Did you read the HOW board posts?

And, you posted the following:


So, why would she have a long personal conversation w/ Clea the night before if she was so undecided about their loyalty?

I believe it's called two sides to the story.

fran

[fran]

Meaning they might not have been sympathetic to her embellishments?

Or, PERHAPS it isn't Nancy who USED to embellish but Brad.

After all, I don't think he'd ever admit he was making close to 1/2 mil this year and wouldn't even give his wife enough money for gas and food and clothes for the children.

Nah.........it was all Nancy's fault, in the WORLD, ACCORDING TO BRAD.:rolleyes:

JMHO
fran

[fran]

One more thing about questioning the Morwicks' loyalty. Why in the world would she have a beach trip planned w/ them if she questioned their loyalty? And Clea's affidavit stated they talked daily and saw each other several times a week (IIRC).

Yes, and she also may have known anything she told them, would get back to Brad.

Like the husband giving affidavits to both sides of the custody situation. ;)

Just sayin'
fran

[fran]

And the whole business card design? Was that Mike, or am I remembering incorrectly?

Yeah, and Brad cut off Nancy's credit so she couldn't do her side business.

Of course now to hear the grieving husband, it was to curtail Nancy's wild spending.

I believe IF there is a court case, Nancy's attempt to earn a living and Brad cutting off her credit cards and Nancy filing for legal separation are all going to be totally entiwined together.

JMHO
fran

[carolinalady]

Another poster, many threads ago, stated that IF this family was in serious debt, that many schools of thought are to put all accounts in 1 name and operate on a cash budget.

Also, it is easy to accumulate debt even if you make a lot of money. Making a decent income doesn't preclude that. If your spending outpaces your earnings you are going to be in debt.

[FullDisclosure]

Yeah, and Brad cut off Nancy's credit so she couldn't do her side business.

Of course now to hear the grieving husband, it was to curtail Nancy's wild spending.

I believe IF there is a court case, Nancy's attempt to earn a living and Brad cutting off her credit cards and Nancy filing for legal separation are all going to be totally entiwined together.

JMHO
fran

Fran, how did we get here? We were talking about Mike designing Nancy's business cards and how a "less than loyal" friend probably wouldn't do that.

I believe all the other threads were devoted to Brad being a meanie, but this was another subject, until now...:rolleyes:

[Roy23]

Not until 7/25 just prior to the scheduled temporary custody hearing.

The Ex Parte emergency custody hearing took place 7/16. BC already had plans to meet Nancy's family for dinner so they could see the girls. Instead of her family showing up, the police did. According to reports/affidavits the girls were extremely upset and were clinging to him.

The local and Canadian memorials were all before the scheduled temporary hearing.


I see. I am certain that was why Brad did not attend the memorial. I still think he should have been there with his girls if he was allowed. They will miss their Dad whether they see him or not.

[chauncey7381]

Hmmmm. Just checking in, don't have time to follow the daily chit chat during the week.

I see the N&O reports today the family still wants a psych evaluation, personally, I think they should submit to one as well.

Far as Mr. Cooper and his absentia at the Memorials sponsored by the Loch"smear" crowd, and the Canadians. Ummm, I wouldn't attend either. Are you kidding, these folks are accusing him of murder, why should he go there and even look at those folks. C'mon, what does Mr. Cooper owe me? Nothing! He owes the Loch "smear" folks nothing. I wouldn't have attended them either. He had his own PRIVATE service.

Oh and Chief Bazemore's comments about her confidence, etc., quip about solving this case reminds me of many CEOs progress reports on quarterly conference calls.

Off to the pool and gym....

Tick tock.

[Roy23]

Yeah, and Brad cut off Nancy's credit so she couldn't do her side business.

Of course now to hear the grieving husband, it was to curtail Nancy's wild spending.

I believe IF there is a court case, Nancy's attempt to earn a living and Brad cutting off her credit cards and Nancy filing for legal separation are all going to be totally entiwined together.

JMHO
fran


Fran,

Do you know the difference between facts and heresay? Seriously. Still waiting on the 4:20 am Harris Teeter link.

[Roy23]

Another poster, many threads ago, stated that IF this family was in serious debt, that many schools of thought are to put all accounts in 1 name and operate on a cash budget.

Also, it is easy to accumulate debt even if you make a lot of money. Making a decent income doesn't preclude that. If your spending outpaces your earnings you are going to be in debt.


I have heard of that before. I also heard that keeping credit card debt can be a very bad thing.

[FullDisclosure]

Fran,

Do you know the difference between facts and heresay? Seriously. Still waiting on the 4:20 am Harris Teeter link.

Hey Roy, I'll get you that link! Oh, wait....there ISN'T one!! :rolleyes:

Seriously, thanks for reminding us again about facts vs. hearsay. It can't be stressed enough here. IMHO, of course. :crazy:

[fran]

Another poster, many threads ago, stated that IF this family was in serious debt, that many schools of thought are to put all accounts in 1 name and operate on a cash budget.

Also, it is easy to accumulate debt even if you make a lot of money. Making a decent income doesn't preclude that. If your spending outpaces your earnings you are going to be in debt.

See the thing is, many people are assuming that Brad is telling the TRUTH, that their precarious financial condition was all because of Nancy. Nancy was the spender. Nancy was the 'embellisher,' which by the way is another word for liar. Nancy wanted to break up their home. Brad gave Nancy plenty of money for food and what not, she just didn't know how to manage HIS money. Nancy continued running in preparation for a marathon or whatever, but yet he, Brad had decided to curtail his practice or whatever, to work on the family.:boohoo:

I dunno, I guess I just don't understand how a woman could have Mr. Perfect who even earned a fantastic living, and by all of Brad's accounts he never did anything except to work day and night to support his family and save his marriage. Yet, Nancy still wanted to leave him?:confused:

Course, I guess it COULD be that Brad is the :liar: and behind closed doors he could be a monster!:eek:

We can't ask Nancy because she's dead. So I guess we'll just have to go by Brad's word for it. NOT!!!!!!:rolleyes:

JMHO
fran

PS......ah yes, I seem to remember affidavits by Nancy's friends that Brad held the purse strings and controlled the money. Looking from the outside in, looks like Nancy was right! Course, I can't discuss it with her because she's dead........:(

[raisincharlie]

Hey Roy, I'll get you that link! Oh, wait....there ISN'T one!! :rolleyes:

Seriously, thanks for reminding us again about facts vs. hearsay. It can't be stressed enough here. IMHO, of course. :crazy:

Now this is funny - after two and a half pages of hearsey and interpretation of what it means if someone goes or doesn't go to memorial services, who trusts who, who might be jealous, and who might be uncomfortable - very funny indeed.

[fran]

Fran,

Do you know the difference between facts and heresay? Seriously. Still waiting on the 4:20 am Harris Teeter link.

Ah, the old you don't have a link so it's not true scenario.:rolleyes:

Ok, fine.

But I'm sure Brad knows about it!;)

Just sayin'
fran

[MoonFlwr]

I see what you're saying. I really do. Another way to look at it, though, is that if he WERE guilty he'd want to go just to look innocent. So, IMO, if he were basing his decision on "what people think" he would have gone, because it DOES look bad not to go! (We definitely agree on that point!!) So I view not going as more a sign of respect to maintain the integrity of the service for Nancy and not detract with all the hoopla.

Maybe I just need coffee...:crazy:

Yeah, I veer more towards this side of the issue, too!

[Roy23]

Now this is funny - after two and a half pages of hearsey and interpretation of what it means if someone goes or doesn't go to memorial services, who trusts who, who might be jealous, and who might be uncomfortable - very funny indeed.


RC,

I think the point is that most of us are using phrases that express an opinion. Fran's are very far from that.

[FullDisclosure]

Now this is funny - after two and a half pages of hearsey and interpretation of what it means if someone goes or doesn't go to memorial services, who trusts who, who might be jealous, and who might be uncomfortable - very funny indeed.

If you read my posts, you see words/phrases such as "perhaps" or "another way to look at it might be.." and the like. Yes, there is an attempt to interpret/understand a person's actions, which is very different from heresay of taking things as fact (like he bought bleach or detergent or whatever at 4:00 or 4:20) and running with them--and then tacking on IMHO at the end.

IMHO. :crazy:

[MoonFlwr]

Where is the wreath from him at the site NC was found? This was per se her last resting place besides an urn....why hasn't he gone to the site to put something, just something there?

Hang on...do we know with 100% certainty that he has put nothing there?
There were dead flowers and fresher ones there when the WS PI's ;) went to where Nancy's body was found.

Is it just assumed it could not possibly have been Brad placing one of the bunches of flowers there?

[Roy23]

See the thing is, many people are assuming that Brad is telling the TRUTH, that their precarious financial condition was all because of Nancy. Nancy was the spender. Nancy was the 'embellisher,' which by the way is another word for liar. Nancy wanted to break up their home. Brad gave Nancy plenty of money for food and what not, she just didn't know how to manage HIS money. Nancy continued running in preparation for a marathon or whatever, but yet he, Brad had decided to curtail his practice or whatever, to work on the family.:boohoo:

I dunno, I guess I just don't understand how a woman could have Mr. Perfect who even earned a fantastic living, and by all of Brad's accounts he never did anything except to work day and night to support his family and save his marriage. Yet, Nancy still wanted to leave him?:confused:

Course, I guess it COULD be that Brad is the :liar: and behind closed doors he could be a monster!:eek:

We can't ask Nancy because she's dead. So I guess we'll just have to go by Brad's word for it. NOT!!!!!!:rolleyes:

JMHO
fran

PS......ah yes, I seem to remember affidavits by Nancy's friends that Brad held the purse strings and controlled the money. Looking from the outside in, looks like Nancy was right! Course, I can't discuss it with her because she's dead........:(


Fran,

I don't think this is the case at all. You should try to use phrases such as:

I think
In my opinion

I think that a lot of statements contradict Nancy as a helpless person that is totally controlled by Brad. That does not mean I believe Brad is innocent or not a liar. He is a scumbag cheater at minimum. I am quite certain if you polled everybody and the choices are were Brad innocent or guilty that almost all will say guilty.

Every piece of hearsay out there, you speak them as facts. And for now we don't know a COD, a time, where she was killed or anything.

[Star12]

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67337&page=8

here's the first link to the detergent story.

[ncsu95]

Very good points momto3

Where is his grieving?:confused:

From what I can see, he's ONLY concerned with APPEARING or PROVING he's innocencent.:waitasec:

IF he's really innocent, there SHOULD be NOTHING to prove.:confused:

He ACTS like a guilty man.:behindbar

JMHO
fran


Huh? What on earth has BC done to give any appearances of anything? He participated in 1 press conference and has made no public statements outside of that. He submitted affidavits for the custody hearing. Do you think his lawyers might have had something to do with that? He chose not to participate in any of the public events, and I don't blame him for that. According to law enforcement, he has fully cooperated with the investigation. So outside the statistical probability that he is the killer (since most husbands are in this situation), what on earth has he done to act guilty? Jason Young acted guilty. BC has not acted guilty. He very well might be guilty....but there has been no evidence disclosed yet that proves he is guilty of anything.

[fran]

RC,

I think the point is that most of us are using phrases that express an opinion. Fran's are very far from that.

This is an OPINION board. That's what I'm doing, giving my OPINION.

I think Brad killed his wife. I've given REASONS that go towards the reason of reached that OPINION.

JMHO = Just My Humble Opinion.

Simple as that.

JMHO
fran

PS....Like I said, I don't have a link to the 'detergent' purchase at 4:20. IF you don't want to consider it