WTH Are Brad's Lawyers Up To Now???? #2

[CW]

Continue posting here please and let's get back on topic please. We will not allow a member to be a "insider" nor will we allow any members to be attacked.

[ncnative]

So, what ARE BC's lawyers up to now? They are probably reading Websleuths religiously! Or maybe they are reading all those requested phone calls, writings, photos, etc. that they so badly needed Brad's friends and neighbors to send in. Mostly, I hope that the two lawyers are not going to do that goofy lawyer strut :sumo: :sumo: again, with their chin in the air, trying to be like the OJ Simpson lawyers in the 1994 trial. I was embarrassed for K&B when I saw them doing that in front of the courthouse. :cooler::cooler:

OK, then. Somebody must know something. Spill.

[Topsail Girl]

I wish I knew SOMETHING to report but I don't. Wasn't there a hearing scheduled for this week or is that next week? Not the custody hearing but a hearing over the eval?

[ncnative]

WINDCHIME: See Roy's post in #480, the first (now closed) thread on What's Brad Cooper's Lawyer's Up To Now?

See where Roy has said something about "INSIDER", in all caps, and "fraudulent"? Then I used the word "insider" in my post after that, QUOTING Roy's use of the word INSIDER.
*I* did not CALL ANYONE "INSIDER". I was QUOTING Roy's use of that word. (My post is #484, where you edited, then "scolded" me for what...using Roy's word:"insider" in quotes??) IN FACT, I have not played into this name-calling silliness in the first place, if you'll read my posts.

After that, you edited my use of the quotes of "insider" and left a message at the foot of my post, as if to accuse me of calling someone "insider". I feel that you have missed the fact that I was QUOTING Roy. NOT calling someone a "name". Please, realize this. I feel singled out unfairly for something that I did not do. Thank you.

[SleuthyGal]

Wasn't there a hearing scheduled for this week or is that next week? Not the custody hearing but a hearing over the eval?

Hi Topsail! According to what Star12 posted a few days ago, a hearing was supposedly scheduled for 9/22 on the issue of the psych eval. Perhaps that's all being kept private as an agreement between the parties as the custody issue proceeds forward. Not sure how that works and when the media can be barred from such proceedings but I assume it can be done since it's a private/civil matter.

[Topsail Girl]

Thanks SG - I'll contact my source in the media and see what I can find out - if anything.

[fran]

Bet Brad's attorney didn't get the response he'd hoped for from the Chief. Nah...., he wanted some sort of statement about what he'd posted on his website or clue as to WHAT LE has against his client...... LOL, just got the comment, “Cary citizens know that if there is ever any chance that they are at risk, the Cary Police Department informs them and protects them," she said. Oops! ;)

Maybe someone should tell Brad's attorney that it's not REALLY believed Brad picked-up 'bleach' at 4:20 a.m. the morning Nancy was murdered, but 'DETERGENT.' :waitasec:Wonder if he's asked his client why he bought two bottles of 'DETERGENT' that morning? :confused:

IMO, it was most likely an after-thought after he picked up the milk,.....realized there were cameras and he was probably filmed at the earlier 4 o'clock hour visit and he is trying to confuse and deceive. :crazy: Nope, ain't gonna work. Not with this Websleuther. :detective:

oh, yeah,........I ALSO do NOT believe for a NY minute that the Green Machine drink was for the 'children.' IMO, Brad needed LOTS of energy cuz he had a lot of cleanin' to do! :bang: Come on, you don't think we believe you cleaned BEFORE Nancy came home? :doh:


Oh, one more thing, as this isn't a court of law,..... I don't need to believe Brad is innocent until proven guilty. I'm not worried about being called for the jury as I live thousands of miles away. Nah, IMHO, he did it!:mad:

All JMHO,
fran

[reddress58]

Bet Brad's attorney didn't get the response he'd hoped for from the Chief. Nah...., he wanted some sort of statement about what he'd posted on his website or clue as to WHAT LE has against his client...... LOL, just got the comment, “Cary citizens know that if there is ever any chance that they are at risk, the Cary Police Department informs them and protects them," she said. Oops! ;)

Maybe someone should tell Brad's attorney that it's not REALLY believed Brad picked-up 'bleach' at 4:20 a.m. the morning Nancy was murdered, but 'DETERGENT.' :waitasec:Wonder if he's asked his client why he bought two bottles of 'DETERGENT' that morning? :confused:

IMO, it was most likely an after-thought after he picked up the milk,.....realized there were cameras and he was probably filmed at the earlier 4 o'clock hour visit and he is trying to confuse and deceive. :crazy: Nope, ain't gonna work. Not with this Websleuther. :detective:

oh, yeah,........I ALSO do NOT believe for a NY minute that the Green Machine drink was for the 'children.' IMO, Brad needed LOTS of energy cuz he had a lot of cleanin' to do! :bang: Come on, you don't think we believe you cleaned BEFORE Nancy came home? :doh:


Oh, one more thing, as this isn't a court of law,..... I don't need to believe Brad is innocent until proven guilty. I'm not worried about being called for the jury as I live thousands of miles away. Nah, IMHO, he did it!:mad:

All JMHO,
fran
I, too, do not believe the Green Machine drink was for Bella. I gather that it is an adult beverage, and I can't think of a single child that age who would drink healthy, green slime. Also, why buy just one little serving? I would think 100% apple juice or Juicy Juice would qualify as a juice for children. Does anybody know if there is caffeine in Green Machine? For one who has been up all night and with a whole lot of cleanin' ahead, a little shot of java may be needed at such an early hour.

[SleuthyGal]

I, too, do not believe the Green Machine drink was for Bella. I gather that it is an adult beverage, and I can't think of a single child that age who would drink healthy, green slime. Also, why buy just one little serving? I would think 100% apple juice or Juicy Juice would qualify as a juice for children. Does anybody know if there is caffeine in Green Machine? For one who has been up all night and with a whole lot of cleanin' ahead, a little shot of java may be needed at such an early hour.

FYI M23K verified (though not on the board) that the size purchased was the 32oz size which is 4 servings of 8oz. It costs $4.99 at HT. There is no added caffeine in these juice products. Here is the list of ingredients in Green Machine by Naked Juice:

Apple and pear juice blend, pineapple juice, mango puree, kiwifruit puree, banana puree with powdered spirulina, chorella, brocolli, green tea extract, spinach, barley grass, wheat grass, blue green algae, exchinacea, purpurea extract, odorless garlic.

I've had it on many occasions. It is very thick so I have tended to dilute it down with some O.J. to make it less viscous. While not impossible for a child to like it, I would be surprised if one did simply because it is very green, very thick, and most young kids dislike green stuff. But then again, who knows...

[CyberPro]

Here is the list of ingredients in Green Machine by Naked Juice:

Apple and pear juice blend, pineapple juice, mango puree, kiwifruit puree, banana puree with powdered spirulina, chorella, brocolli, green tea extract, spinach, barley grass, wheat grass, blue green algae, exchinacea, purpurea extract, odorless garlic.



:yuck::puke::puke:

No Thanks! I cannot believe a kid would like that, somehow fruit and brocolli do not go together in my book, much less when mixed with something called powdered spirulina... you can have my share!

CyberPro

[Star12]

"Because muscles love protein..."
http://www.nakedjuice.com/#Homepage

I offer no other explanation for that.

Except to say that my 2 year old granddaughter loves the stuff.
But then she is a very good eater, and eats everything.

[jilly]

"Because muscles love protein..."
http://www.nakedjuice.com/#Homepage

I offer no other explanation for that.

Except to say that my 2 year old granddaughter loves the stuff.
But then she is a very good eater, and eats everything.

What a neat website! Thanks for that! I think I will try some. Sure is a lot of sugar in them though!

[jumpstreet]

"Because muscles love protein..."
http://www.nakedjuice.com/#Homepage

I offer no other explanation for that.

Except to say that my 2 year old granddaughter loves the stuff.
But then she is a very good eater, and eats everything.

How can an adult... much less any kid... resist a product which has the moniker "superfood"? I mean... "food" is good... but ... SUPERFOOD... even better. Toss in that "naked" part, and... wow... that deal is sealed baby... bottom's up! :D

[SleuthyGal]

:yuck::puke::puke:

No Thanks! I cannot believe a kid would like that, somehow fruit and brocolli do not go together in my book, much less when mixed with something called powdered spirulina... you can have my share!

CyberPro

LOL CP! Excellent smilie use. Sure I'll take your share! It is a bit of an acquired taste for sure. And straight-up it can be a bit much. I prefer it cut with something else and I've also mixed it with protein powder, some OJ and some ice. It's a lovely pea green smoothie...doesn't that sound sooo appetizing? But it is healthy. :crazy:

[SleuthyGal]

How can an adult... much less any kid... resist a product which has the moniker "superfood"? I mean... "food" is good... but ... SUPERFOOD... even better. Toss in that "naked" part, and... wow... that deal is sealed baby... bottom's up! :D Those additional ingredients (spirulina, echinachea etc) are known as 'superfoods' because of their nutrient and immune boosting properties. And it's a great marketing gimmick too! I don't drink that stuff all the time cause I only like it once in awhile and fruit juices ARE high in sugar.

[shack]

Bet Brad's attorney didn't get the response he'd hoped for from the Chief. Nah...., he wanted some sort of statement about what he'd posted on his website or clue as to WHAT LE has against his client...... LOL, just got the comment, “Cary citizens know that if there is ever any chance that they are at risk, the Cary Police Department informs them and protects them," she said. Oops! ;)

Maybe someone should tell Brad's attorney that it's not REALLY believed Brad picked-up 'bleach' at 4:20 a.m. the morning Nancy was murdered, but 'DETERGENT.' :waitasec:Wonder if he's asked his client why he bought two bottles of 'DETERGENT' that morning? :confused:

IMO, it was most likely an after-thought after he picked up the milk,.....realized there were cameras and he was probably filmed at the earlier 4 o'clock hour visit and he is trying to confuse and deceive. :crazy: Nope, ain't gonna work. Not with this Websleuther. :detective:

oh, yeah,........I ALSO do NOT believe for a NY minute that the Green Machine drink was for the 'children.' IMO, Brad needed LOTS of energy cuz he had a lot of cleanin' to do! :bang: Come on, you don't think we believe you cleaned BEFORE Nancy came home? :doh:


Oh, one more thing, as this isn't a court of law,..... I don't need to believe Brad is innocent until proven guilty. I'm not worried about being called for the jury as I live thousands of miles away. Nah, IMHO, he did it!:mad:

All JMHO,
fran

I don't know how anyone can draw any conclusions without a cause and time of death. Wonder where that autopsy report is?

[jumpstreet]

I don't know how anyone can draw any conclusions without a cause and time of death. Wonder where that autopsy report is?

Believe it or not, I think it's been suggested, that, along with the final forensic results, the final ME report can take anywhere from at least 3 months (which we'll be crossing in a couple of weeks here), to 9 months or more.

My opinion: most if not all forensics analysis is complete, and ME report is done (but ME is sitting on it for now). Neither yields enough for indictment.

[raisincharlie]

I don't know how anyone can draw any conclusions without a cause and time of death. Wonder where that autopsy report is?

I don't see how cause of death allows for any conclusion about who committed this murder - and we do know it was murder as the manner of death has been defined by LE to be homicide. The autopsy report itself, the public portion, will not contain a time of death. It is highly likely the exact time of death could not be determined. What we do know about that is that in police briefings, Chief Bazemore confirmed that there were no confirmed sightings of Nancy on July 12th, other than Brad saying he saw her that morning before 7 am.

[SleuthyGal]

I think it's been suggested, that, along with the final forensic results, the final ME report can take anywhere from at least 3 months (which we'll be crossing in a couple of weeks here), to 9 months or more.

The ME/autopsy report (which is completely separate from any forensics testing done in the case) can take up to 90 days to complete. In some cases, it could potentially take longer, but that would be for a complicated case involving drugs/poisons, etc. Nancy's autopsy report may or may not be released to the public immediately upon its completion. If for some reason the report is 'sealed' by a judge and is not immediately released to the public then it will eventually be released when that seal is lifted (just like what happened with the SWs).

The forensic testing, done by different agencies/organizations, and not connected to the Medical Examiner's office, can take longer to process simply because some DNA tests do take longer than others, and of course depending on any backup in any of the lab(s) used. You keep saying that all testing is likely completed, but we don't know that yet; nothing has been verified or announced as to the status of any testing. And there could be other evidence being tested that is not DNA evidence. (For example: in the Michelle Young murder case a great amount of time has been spent on researching the two different shoe prints--more than 6 months spent finding the right print/mfg and verifying/matching. And most people didn't know about these bloody shoe prints until the SWs were released recently.)

[jumpstreet]

(For example: in the Michelle Young murder case a great amount of time has been spent on researching the two different shoe prints--more than 6 months spent finding the right print/mfg and verifying/matching. And most people didn't know about these bloody shoe prints until the SWs were released recently.)

Thanks SG. Regarding the MY case... do you think the original collected forensics in the MY case have been completed yet... or is LE/DA still waiting on those initial results to come back also?

[jumpstreet]

The ME/autopsy report (which is completely separate from any forensics testing done in the case) can take up to 90 days to complete. In some cases, it could potentially take longer, but that would be for a complicated case involving drugs/poisons, etc. Nancy's autopsy report may or may not be released to the public immediately upon its completion. If for some reason the report is 'sealed' by a judge and is not immediately released to the public then it will eventually be released when that seal is lifted (just like what happened with the SWs).


Thanks again SG. Sounds like, since the 90 day mark is just around the corner (week after next I think...), then it's reasonable to think the ME report in NC case might be either published... or released then sealed... in the very near term. Agree?

FWIW, my "guess" is that the ME report is in fact done, but the ME is sitting on it, perhaps at request of DA, for the time being, so the judge doesn't have to seal it, and then have to deal with those pesky lawyers from capital broadcasting. Sounds like the ME can sit on it for at least the "usual and customary" 90 days before folks may start asking questions regarding what's the hold-up.

Also my "guess" that the forensics are complete (realize they are unrelated to the ME report) is indeed just that, a "guess" too! (Hopefully I've always qualified it "mho" only when stating as much...)

[raisincharlie]

Thanks SG. Regarding the MY case... do you think the original collected forensics in the MY case have been completed yet... or is LE/DA still waiting on those initial results to come back also?

The DA has Michelle's case - as per usual doing due dilligence of the evidence. Once that is done the DA will either tell LE he wants more evidence or will proceed. No need for LE to turn over the case to the DA if all the forensic work is not complete.

[jumpstreet]

The DA has Michelle's case - as per usual doing due dilligence of the evidence. Once that is done the DA will either tell LE he wants more evidence or will proceed. No need for LE to turn over the case to the DA if all the forensic work is not complete.

Cool - thanks Raisin - good to know. So LE isn't actively working the MY case (at least they're not waiting on any initial forensic results), and this is based on knowing that the DA has the case. Is that right?

[raisincharlie]

Cool - thanks Raisin - good to know. So LE isn't actively working the MY case (at least they're not waiting on any initial forensic results), and this is based on knowing that the DA has the case. Is that right?

I seriously doubt that LE would submit, or the DA would accept, a case which did not include all data collected, analyzed, and completed. What would be the point ? There is no point. LE does not stop working a case because it has been submitted to the DA. The process continues for LE, they do not stop looking for more evidence. It will be two years on November 3, I have little doubt that all initial forensics are back. It has been 7 months since the last series of warrants were served, I have little doubt that anything that may have required testing collected under the February warrants has already been completed and submitted as well.

[jumpstreet]

I seriously doubt that LE would submit, or the DA would accept, a case which did not include all data collected, analyzed, and completed. What would be the point ? There is no point. LE does not stop working a case because it has been submitted to the DA. The process continues for LE, they do not stop looking for more evidence. It will be two years on November 3, I have little doubt that all initial forensics are back. It has been 7 months since the last series of warrants were served, I have little doubt that anything that may have required testing collected under the February warrants has already been completed and submitted as well.

Thanks RC... just learning here. Just wasn't sure what "the DA has the MY case" meant exactly (not following that case as closely). Is it an official "announced milestone" between DA and LE typically, with certain implications? Or, is is just your opinion that the ball is likely primarily in the DA's court in the MY case, based on the amount of time since the crime occurred, and the most recent SW's...

[fran]

I don't know how anyone can draw any conclusions without a cause and time of death. Wonder where that autopsy report is?

LE said it was a 'homicide.' I don't need a COD to come to MY conclusion and OPINION. This isn't rocket science.

IMHO, Brad killed Nancy. He either beat her to death or strangled her. The end is the same.

IMHO, ALL evidence that I know about, points to NO ONE else but Brad.

:mad:

fran

[Topsail Girl]

Thanks RC... just learning here. Just wasn't sure what "the DA has the MY case" meant exactly (not following that case as closely). Is it an official "announced milestone" between DA and LE typically, with certain implications? Or, is is just your opinion that the ball is likely primarily in the DA's court in the MY case, based on the amount of time since the crime occurred, and the most recent SW's...

Jumpstreet I'm not RC but I can tell you from my personal conversation with Detective Spivey and Detective Blackwell, the DA does have Michelle's case. That being said though, does not in any way indicate that the detectives are done investigating. They still are whole heartedly investigating this case.

[raisincharlie]

Thanks RC... just learning here. Just wasn't sure what "the DA has the MY case" meant exactly (not following that case as closely). Is it an official "announced milestone" between DA and LE typically, with certain implications? Or, is is just your opinion that the ball is likely primarily in the DA's court in the MY case, based on the amount of time since the crime occurred, and the most recent SW's...

It is not an announced, as in a press release, milestone. I know in the MY case because I know.

[Shadow722]

LE said it was a 'homicide.' I don't need a COD to come to MY conclusion and OPINION. This isn't rocket science.

IMHO, Brad killed Nancy. He either beat her to death or strangled her. The end is the same.

IMHO, ALL evidence that I know about, points to NO ONE else but Brad.

:mad:

fran

Fran,

If the COD is blunt force trauma or strangulation, then yes, all arrows point to Brad alone. But what if the COD is for example: Stuck by motor vehicle and body dumped; or she was shot; or she was stabbed; or well you get the point; yes, LE said it was homicide, but what kind is still to be released.

COD is important, and it will point to Brad or maybe not. Until the COD is released, painting Brad as the suspect is fun and speculative, nothing wrong with that. But speculation without a firm foundation (ie: COD) is just that, speculation not evidence. Nothing wrong with your conclusion or opinion, but without COD, it is a trifle premature, IMHO.

That said, all the available evidence released at this point does favor Brad as the perp, and I will not be surprised if he is arrested and if so found guilty. And if guilty he should burn.

Please note I am not challenging your conclusions or opinion, you may indeed be right, but until you know COD, you also may well be wrong.

Shadow

[jumpstreet]

It is not an announced, as in a press release, milestone. I know in the MY case because I know.

Sounds good - thanks RC and TG! It makes sense to me now, and given this, I agree it seems reasonable to think the (initial) forensics in that case are no doubt complete.

Side bar: If you happen to find out a similar milestone has occurred in the NC case, feel free to relay that too :)

Thanks again!

[SleuthyGal]

Thanks again SG. Sounds like, since the 90 day mark is just around the corner (week after next I think...), then it's reasonable to think the ME report in NC case might be either published... or released then sealed... in the very near term. Agree?

I have no idea. However, you can call the ME's office and request info and ask if this has been completed yet. And, you can even go to that office when the report is complete/released and request to look at the report, with an explanation and once their permission has been granted.

[Topsail Girl]

O/T - if anyone is following the missing woman Kelly Morris - some search warrants have been released and it looks as if hubby and daddy might be in cahoots somewhat. I posted a link in her thread.

[jumpstreet]

However, you can call the ME's office and request info and ask if this has been completed yet. And, you can even go to that office when the report is complete/released and request to look at the report, with an explanation and once their permission has been granted.

Looks like the autopsy in the Wynn case has been release now (posted on WRAL here (http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3609177/)).

Not that the turnaround time on the Wynn case means anything to the NC case necessarily (all autopsy and related paperwork aren't necessarily the "same"), but the Wynn crime occurred over 110 days ago, and about 5 weeks prior to NC.

[ So will wait at least another month or 2 before ringing the ME's phone on the NC results... :) ]

[raisincharlie]

Looks like the autopsy in the Wynn case has been release now (posted on WRAL here (http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3609177/)).

Not that the turnaround time on the Wynn case means anything to the NC case necessarily (all autopsy and related paperwork aren't necessarily the "same"), but the Wynn crime occurred over 110 days ago, and about 5 weeks prior to NC.

[ So will wait at least another month or 2 before ringing the ME's phone on the NC results... :) ]

June 8th - 3.5 months. Looks to me the ME's office has been extremely busy there in Chapel Hill. Seems to be quite a run on murder over the summer. Just about 7 weeks up since Nancy was murdered, may be a while before we hear anything. But as you can see from the link you posted, not much will be learned other than COD. Not sure that really means much actually, we already know she was murdered.

ETA - if I hear I will say.

[SleuthyGal]

I think some folks believe, even though the CPD said it wasn't 'random,' that she may have been hit by a car, or shot, or stabbed or something that would leave a lot of blood evidence or show something more random, despite what the authorities have said thus far. And there may be some who still believe it's a heart attack or stroke or something due to natural causes, again despite what was announced, and they will not believe anything they're told until they see the written autopsy report for themselves.

If we learn COD was strangulation or BFT (blunt force trauma) or some combo, as you said earlier, does that really assuage any doubts? BTW for those who don't know this, both BFT and strangulation can be 'bloodless' crimes. (cf. JonBenet Ramsey who had an 8.5" BFT/skull fracture in which the bleeding from the injury was internal and not apparent until autopsy, in addition to the visible strangulation/garrote.)

[jumpstreet]

I think some folks believe, even though the CPD said it wasn't 'random,' that she may have been hit by a car, or shot, or stabbed or something that would leave a lot of blood evidence or show something more random, despite what the authorities have said thus far

Are these COD's necessarily incompatible with the statement that it 'wasn't random'? [Ref Theory B (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2465948&postcount=171)]. If not, and the ME's report lists these as COD, then it's certainly 'of interest' information, and, while it wouldn't prove anything, might serve paint some doubts on the 'conventional theory' (BC did it in the house).


If we learn COD was strangulation or BFT (blunt force trauma) or some combo, as you said earlier, does that really assuage any doubts? BTW for those who don't know this, both BFT and strangulation can be 'bloodless'

It also wouldn't prove anything either way - you're right. Just curious though - is a bloodless BFT more common, or less common than a bloody one?

Regardless, it still seems to me that COD would be an 'of value' datapoint to have given the vast amount of things we don't know about the case. It could very well be significant... or insignificant... but until we find out what it is, we won't know.

Are you thinking that regardless of what COD is, there's zero chance it will change any of your current opinions of the case? [ Fair if so... just asking... ]

[raisincharlie]

I think some folks believe, even though the CPD said it wasn't 'random,' that she may have been hit by a car, or shot, or stabbed or something that would leave a lot of blood evidence or show something more random, despite what the authorities have said thus far. And there may be some who still believe it's a heart attack or stroke or something due to natural causes, again despite what was announced, and they will not believe anything they're told until they see the written autopsy report for themselves.

If we learn COD was strangulation or BFT (blunt force trauma) or some combo, as you said earlier, does that really assuage any doubts? BTW for those who don't know this, both BFT and strangulation can be 'bloodless' crimes. (cf. JonBenet Ramsey who had an 8.5" BFT/skull fracture in which the bleeding from the injury was internal and not apparent until autopsy, in addition to the visible strangulation/garrote.)

Brad boy sure did a lot of cleaning, enough to think this crime was either bloody or some bodily fluid was present upon completion of the murder. After all, he admits in his amended affidavit that he had cleaned the house the week before so Nancy wouldn't come home to a mess (right). The removal of the rug indicates to me there was some forensic reason to do so.

I don't see how COD will relieve any suspicion or create anymore. It might however generate a more emotional response. I don't see how COD has anything to do with random versus non-random unless we are talking serial killer, which in Nancy's case, we are not.

[SleuthyGal]

Jump, with your interest in and lots of questions about the medical examiner's office, how autopsies are done, how quickly they get done, how they determine COD/manner of death and why they show certain things but not other things, etc, etc, I encourage you to find your local coroner/medical examiner and have a discussion with him/her. We're all just armchair amateurs/observers here and can only make certain assumptions based on our (limited) knowledge.

You show a real passion/interest in the pathology stuff...I think you should definitely talk to a M.E. where you can ask all these questions and more and actually get answers rather than one of our opinions.

[jumpstreet]

I don't see how COD will relieve any suspicion or create anymore.

Hmmm...I guess for me, if COD ends up being strangulation (with likely little change of associated forensics), it certainly would not reduce my odds of Theory A. OTOH, if gunshot, or multiple gunshots, it probably would somewhat. [ Wouldn't eliminate it of course, but just based on what I know... it would reduce it's likelihood somewhat, in my view ]

So, you're saying, regardless of COD, you can't imagine a scenario, where it would change view at all of the likely root cause? [ Fine if so... just asking ]

[SleuthyGal]

Brad boy sure did a lot of cleaning, enough to think this crime was either bloody or some bodily fluid was present upon completion of the murder. After all, he admits in his amended affidavit that he had cleaned the house the week before so Nancy wouldn't come home to a mess (right). The removal of the rug indicates to me there was some forensic reason to do so.

Very true and good point! Of course there are others who don't find it odd at all that he spent 4+ hrs cleaning that morning and are unable (or unwilling) to correlate it with the possibility of a crime scene cleanup. I've always wondered why the house had to be scrubbed clean five days after Brad said he cleaned it and then Nancy came home to a 'mess' and cleaned it. Do your houses become pigstys in five days, necessitating scrubbing of floors, etc? Other than some dust, mine does not. Cluttered, sometimes yes. Dirty all over in 5 days? No.

[jumpstreet]

We're all just armchair amateurs/observers here and can only make certain assumptions based on our (limited) knowledge.

You show a real passion/interest in the pathology stuff...I think you should definitely talk to a M.E. where you can ask all these questions and more and actually get answers rather than one of our opinions.

Thanks SG, and good suggestions. Don't sell yourself (or others on the board) too short though! I think there's definitely a good knowledge base here, and I continue to appreciate all the insights and sharing.

But yeah, you're right, one has to take posts on WS for what they are... posts/opinions/etc on a web forum... no more, and no less, and I definitely do. :)

Good tip about trying to look into "looking over the shoulder" of the local ME sometime... that would no doubt be a trip.

[jumpstreet]

Of course there are others who don't find it odd at all that he spent 4+ hrs cleaning that morning and are unable (or unwilling) to correlate it with the possibility of a crime scene cleanup.

On the surface, I find it very odd, and suspicious for sure. I just wonder if he may have able to do a good enough job to leave only forensics that would have "been there anyway" (since she lived there), leaving LE with basically nothing but a "suspicious, but not necessarily guilt-proving" cleaning binge.

[raisincharlie]

Hmmm...I guess for me, if COD ends up being strangulation (with likely little change of associated forensics), it certainly would not reduce my odds of Theory A. OTOH, if gunshot, or multiple gunshots, it probably would somewhat. [ Wouldn't eliminate it of course, but just based on what I know... it would reduce it's likelihood somewhat, in my view ]

So, you're saying, regardless of COD, you can't imagine a scenario, where it would change view at all of the likely root cause? [ Fine if so... just asking ]

If you are asking if COD, regardless of what it is would make me suspect someone other than Brad - no, COD would not reduce my suspicion of Brad.

[SleuthyGal]

For me if COD was gunshot wound or vehicular homicide then yes, that would give me pause. BFT or strangulation or asphyxiation or some combo of the above? No it doesn't change things, IMHO.

[raisincharlie]

On the surface, I find it very odd, and suspicious for sure. I just wonder if he may have able to do a good enough job to leave only forensics that would have "been there anyway" (since she lived there), leaving LE with basically nothing but a "suspicious, but not necessarily guilt-proving" cleaning binge.

I think the likelyhood of hair, if it turns out to be Nancy's, on the left front spoiler and in the right front wheel well of the 325 would be very hard to discount as anything other than being suspicious. Inside the boot of the car I could buy as possibly being meaningless. If luminol showed a blood stain the size of a nickel I could probably buy that as well, however I would not buy luminol revealing a spatter pattern or a large area of blood, even if it was Nancy's. The presence of evidence or lack of evidence must be put in perspective, not just bought as is. Relativity reigns.

[jumpstreet]

For me if COD was gunshot wound or vehicular homicide then yes, that would give me pause. BFT or strangulation or asphyxiation or some combo of the above? No it doesn't change things, IMHO.

Likewise pretty much. That's why I think it would at least be of value to have it. May change nothing, but... OTOH, has the potential to change everything (or, as you say, at least give some of us pause...). Of course, even gunshot or vehicular homicide wouldn't exonerate him... but it might put a wrinkle in the mix for sure.

Oh well, seems we've still got some time to wait on that (at least another month, if the Wynn results are any indication of the recent turnaround times...)

[jumpstreet]

I think the likelyhood of hair, if it turns out to be Nancy's, on the left front spoiler and in the right front wheel well of the 325 would be very hard to discount as anything other than being suspicious. Inside the boot of the car I could buy as possibly being meaningless. If luminol showed a blood stain the size of a nickel I could probably buy that as well, however I would not buy luminol revealing a spatter pattern or a large area of blood, even if it was Nancy's. The presence of evidence or lack of evidence must be put in perspective, not just bought as is. Relativity reigns.

Yeah, agree on all fronts. If the forensics were to (hypothetically) confirm hair under the wheel well that is hers, AND/OR there is indication of blood splatter in the house, where that blood is hers, then do you suppose this, along with the other CE, would normally be enough to at least bounce off of a GJ?

[SleuthyGal]

Oh well, seems we've still got some time to wait on that (at least another month, if the Wynn results are any indication of the recent turnaround times...)

I'm thinking you need to make a pilgrimage to the ME's office in Chapel Hill and refuse to leave or vacate the premises until the chief M.E. talks to you personally, shows you the full written autopsy plus his notes, explains each part of his procedure, and then promises to mark the autopsy as 'complete' and ready for release. That would encourage him, don't ya think? :crazy:

[SleuthyGal]

RC, you raise(in) excellent points. :wink: It's not just the results of the autopsy, it's results from various tests that were run (or are being run) on items of evidence seized as well as any findings from computer drives. It's the totality of the evidence that will allow a case to proceed forward by the DA (or not).

[raisincharlie]

Yeah, agree on all fronts. If the forensics were to (hypothetically) confirm hair under the wheel well that is hers, AND/OR there is indication of blood splatter in the house, where that blood is hers, then do you suppose this, along with the other CE, would normally be enough to at least bounce off of a GJ?

Surely you have heard the old saying that a GJ could indict a ham sandwich ? The only truth is, no DA in their right mind would seek an indictment on that alone, they would need more before considering sending it to a GJ. But, the above may indeed be all that is necessary for a GJ.

[jumpstreet]

I'm thinking you need to make a pilgrimage to the ME's office in Chapel Hill and refuse to leave or vacate the premises until the chief M.E. talks to you personally, shows you the full written autopsy plus his notes, explains each part of his procedure, and then promises to mark the autopsy as 'complete' and ready for release. That would encourage him, don't ya think? :crazy:

Hee hee... yeah, what's the worst that could happen... other than my to date unblemished reputation as a rationale websleuther might get a bit tainted... but hey... that would be a small price to pay. :) :crosseyed: :)

[SleuthyGal]

Surely you have heard the old saying that a GJ could indict a ham sandwich ? And if that ham sandwich had melted brie on it? I proclaim it not only probable but GUILTY of whatever crime it's charged with, including, but not limited to, it's fabulous taste and outrageous calorie count! Yeah the DA is the real stopgap here, not the GJ.

[SleuthyGal]

Hee hee... yeah, what's the worst that could happen... other than my to date unblemished reputation as a rationale websleuther might get a bit tainted... but hey... that would be a small price to pay. :) :crosseyed: :) We'd never have to know you went and they'd never have to know you post on this board.

[raisincharlie]

We'd never have to know you went and they'd never have to know you post on this board.

When LE contacts Jump to find out why a review of the autopsy was done, I suspect Jump will tell it all ! :eek:

Teasing :)

[jumpstreet]

We'd never have to know you went and they'd never have to know you post on this board.

Good point(s). I'm on it! :)

Actually, RC is probably right... I'd no doubt sing like a canary at the first sign of pressure. :)

[SleuthyGal]

June 8th - 3.5 months. Looks to me the ME's office has been extremely busy there in Chapel Hill. Seems to be quite a run on murder over the summer. Indeed it has! But they have to autopsy not only homicides but any unexplained death and suicides. So even someone who suddenly collapsed and died while walking down the street would also get an autopsy, even if a heart attack was suspected. Lots of people die every day. Have you seen the numbers in places like the LA Coroner's office? Thousands per year!

[SleuthyGal]

When LE contacts Jump to find out why a review of the autopsy was done, I suspect Jump will tell it all ! :eek:

Teasing :)

"Concerned citizen, reviewing the M.E.'s work, practices, performing an audit, and just plain tired of waiting for the darn results." Yeah, they'll have no problem with it! :bang:

[raisincharlie]

Indeed it has! But they have to autopsy not only homicides but any unexplained death and suicides. So even someone who suddenly collapsed and died while walking down the street would also get an autopsy, even if a heart attack was suspected. Lots of people die every day. Have you seen the numbers in places like the LA Coroner's office? Thousands per year!

I have to say I was very concerned to see Dr. Clarke's name on the Wynn autopsy. They should keep him off of murder cases, seeing as how he can't seem to cooperate and perform the tests LE has written down but makes his own determination as to if they should be done.

[raisincharlie]

"Concerned citizen, reviewing the M.E.'s work, practices, performing an audit, and just plain tired of waiting for the darn results." Yeah, they'll have no problem with it! :bang:

They wouldn't let Jump in until the autopsy was released anyhow - unless Jump is a med student...

[raisincharlie]

"Concerned citizen, reviewing the M.E.'s work, practices, performing an audit, and just plain tired of waiting for the darn results." Yeah, they'll have no problem with it! :bang:


Has anything been heard about the hearing on Monday (22 Sept) about Brad having a mental evaluation ? I must have missed it.

[jumpstreet]

Has anything been heard about the hearing on Monday (22 Sept) about Brad having a mental evaluation ? I must have missed it.

I've seen no news on that front RC. Others were asking about it too (on the NC thread proper). Is it possible this type of hearing (and the associated results) could be done without the public/media being made aware of the results? If not, perhaps the hearing has been rescheduled, or perhaps the plaintiffs withdrew the motion?

[raisincharlie]

I've seen no news on that front RC. Others were asking about it too (on the NC thread proper). Is it possible this type of hearing (and the associated results) could be done without the public/media being made aware of the results? If not, perhaps the hearing has been rescheduled, or perhaps the plaintiffs withdrew the motion?

Dunno - guess it could have been a closed hearing. I have a feeling the plaintiffs are not about to withdraw the motion unless asked to do so by LE and the DA. LE and the DA are only going to ask such a thing if there is a potential to harm the criminal case. Strange we heard nothing about it.

[SleuthyGal]

Has anything been heard about the hearing on Monday (22 Sept) about Brad having a mental evaluation ? I must have missed it. Not that I'm aware of.

[SleuthyGal]

They wouldn't let Jump in until the autopsy was released anyhow - unless Jump is a med student... I'm thinking Jump can be pretty persuasive--dare I suggest it wouldn't surprise me if Jump acquired a white coat and stethoscope?

[raisincharlie]

Not that I'm aware of.


Either the judge kept everyone out or it didn't happen. Hmmmm. Who was suppose to be following Brad that day ? :crazy:

[SleuthyGal]

Either the judge kept everyone out or it didn't happen. Hmmmm. Who was suppose to be following Brad that day ? :crazy:

< looks around >
ermm...
Not I, no siree!

[raisincharlie]

< looks around >
ermm...
Not I, no siree!

ROFL - Nut :crazy:

[fran]

If you are asking if COD, regardless of what it is would make me suspect someone other than Brad - no, COD would not reduce my suspicion of Brad.

I agree!

fran

[CyberPro]

For me if COD was gunshot wound or vehicular homicide then yes, that would give me pause. BFT or strangulation or asphyxiation or some combo of the above? No it doesn't change things, IMHO.

SG,

Playin' a bit of catch-up here. I cannot really see the vehicular aspect would change anything for me, especially if the hair in the wheel wells turns out to match NC's hair. Gunshots would be a different story.

Since NC was discovered in a cul-de-sac, it would be difficult to explain how she was hit with enough force to kill her, if the impact happened there. The car would have to be going slowly, since there was a limited amount of road. I could conjure up a scenario of someone unknown (ie NOT BC) accidentally hitting her hard enough to cause death, then loading her and dumping her, but I have to stretch the limits of my imagination to make that really work. Sure, it is POSSIBLE, just not very PLAUSIBLE.

CyberPro

[jmflu]

Are you thinking that regardless of what COD is, there's zero chance it will change any of your current opinions of the case? [ Fair if so... just asking... ]

Absolutely. It was murder, and despite HOW he murdered her, I am convinced it was BC.

[SleuthyGal]

SG,

Playin' a bit of catch-up here. I cannot really see the vehicular aspect would change anything for me, especially if the hair in the wheel wells turns out to match NC's hair. Gunshots would be a different story.

Since NC was discovered in a cul-de-sac, it would be difficult to explain how she was hit with enough force to kill her, if the impact happened there. The car would have to be going slowly, since there was a limited amount of road. I could conjure up a scenario of someone unknown (ie NOT BC) accidentally hitting her hard enough to cause death, then loading her and dumping her, but I have to stretch the limits of my imagination to make that really work. Sure, it is POSSIBLE, just not very PLAUSIBLE.

CyberPro

Hey CP,

The reason I said those other methods might give me pause is because I would expect there to be some additional evidence since I think there would be more forensics potentially available in those kinds of scenarios. It doesn't mean I would say a particular perp did or didn't do it, but I'd want to see how LE was able to tie it all together.

[Anderson]

Either the judge kept everyone out or it didn't happen. Hmmmm. Who was suppose to be following Brad that day ? :crazy:

:laugh: This smilie should really be pointed up.

But seriously, would the media have access to basic information, such as whether or not the hearing took place? I have been wondering about this.

[Topsail Girl]

Has anything been heard about the hearing on Monday (22 Sept) about Brad having a mental evaluation ? I must have missed it.

RC and all,

Here is the email from my source - I've left the name out on purpose.

Kim-it is set for Monday and there will be some procedural stuff, but the judge says her civil docket is so heavy it is unlikely the motions will be heard. They will instead be moved to the date of the next custody hearing-October 13. We will of course be there Monday just in case.

[Anderson]

RC and all,

Here is the email from my source - I've left the name out on purpose.

Kim-it is set for Monday and there will be some procedural stuff, but the judge says her civil docket is so heavy it is unlikely the motions will be heard. They will instead be moved to the date of the next custody hearing-October 13. We will of course be there Monday just in case.


Great work TOPS!!:)

[SleuthyGal]

You rock, Topsail! Thanks for following up!

[raisincharlie]

Thanks Topsail ! Looks like the approach of 1000 pages of paperwork was sound on the part of K & B. You know what they say, if you can't dazzle em with brilliance, baffle them with bs. Works all the time.

Appreciate the information very much. So BC is not off the hook for a mental eval but it will be included with the custody hearing. Seems to me there is a foregone conclusion in one of those two items if one thinks about it. His mental stability is paramount to being an acceptable parent but yet the custody issue to supposedly decide that is also to be used to decide if a mental evaluation should be required. Catch 22.

Interesting.

[SleuthyGal]

A bit baffled on that and what is supposed to happen/be decided then on 10/13. Or is the psych eval. no longer a sticking point?

[garner_nc]

Here is the docket information: #7 down the page

http://www1.aoc.state.nc.us/www/data/WAKE/civil/OCTOBER.13.2008/D._DEBRA_S__SASSER.8B.9_00.TRIALS.txt


Monday, October 13, 2008 JUDGE: SASSER

08-CVD-012310 RENTZ,DONNA,A STUBBS,ALICE C.
RENTZ,GARRY,D ET AL STUBBS,ALICE C.
STUBBS,ALICE C.
-VS-
COOPER,BRADLEY SANDLIN,DEBORAH
PRATHER,LYNN ANN

ISSUES: CUSTODY
REVEAL AUTOPSY INFORMATI
DISQUALIFY COUNSEL
PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION
VACATE/MODIFY JUDGMENT OR ORDER
CUSTODY
EXEMPT FROM CUST/VISIT MEDIATION
ATTORNEY FEES
DISMISS (INVOLUNTARY)
STRIKE
SANCTIONS

Temporary custody hearing on custody/visitation. Added 092208 Defs Motion
to Dismiss & Motion to Strike.
Total estimated time @ 2 hours.
(rescheduled per order signed 073008)

[raisincharlie]

Lot to cover in 2 hours. Good luck Judge Sasser.

Thanks Garner NC for the link. :) Looks to me this was signed 7/30 so not at all sure how the hearing for the 22 of September even got scheduled. Hmmmmm.

[jmflu]

Here is the docket information: #7 down the page

http://www1.aoc.state.nc.us/www/data/WAKE/civil/OCTOBER.13.2008/D._DEBRA_S__SASSER.8B.9_00.TRIALS.txt


Monday, October 13, 2008 JUDGE: SASSER

08-CVD-012310 RENTZ,DONNA,A STUBBS,ALICE C.
RENTZ,GARRY,D ET AL STUBBS,ALICE C.
STUBBS,ALICE C.
-VS-
COOPER,BRADLEY SANDLIN,DEBORAH
PRATHER,LYNN ANN

ISSUES: CUSTODY
REVEAL AUTOPSY INFORMATI
DISQUALIFY COUNSEL
PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION
VACATE/MODIFY JUDGMENT OR ORDER
CUSTODY
EXEMPT FROM CUST/VISIT MEDIATION
ATTORNEY FEES
DISMISS (INVOLUNTARY)
STRIKE
SANCTIONS

Temporary custody hearing on custody/visitation. Added 092208 Defs Motion
to Dismiss & Motion to Strike.
Total estimated time @ 2 hours.
(rescheduled per order signed 073008)

It always impresses me when a newbie steps out of the shadows to give us all some great information! Thanks so much!!

[garner_nc]

Your Welcome...Just trying to help

[jumpstreet]

Here is the docket information: #7 down the page

http://www1.aoc.state.nc.us/www/data/WAKE/civil/OCTOBER.13.2008/D._DEBRA_S__SASSER.8B.9_00.TRIALS.txt

Cool link - thanks, and welcome!

Here's (http://www1.aoc.state.nc.us/www/data/WAKE/civil/SEPTEMBER.29.2008/D._DEBRA_S__SASSER.9B.9_00.TRIALS.txt)the one for the hearing on psych exam for this coming Monday (Sep 29th).

{Though, as TG posted, sounds like the word on that one is that it's unlikely to be heard, and will just be pushed to the 13th with all the other stuff set for the 13th }

I would think, they psych exam motion needs to be heard and ruled on first, regardless. If the judge agrees to it, then seems they'll need the results of that before a final ruling on custody can be made (so custody piece will presumably have to be continued). If the judge doesn't agree to it (on the 13th, or prior), then they can proceed to hear viewpoints on the various other motions (including defense's motion to dismiss the whole thing altogether).

Thanks again Garner, and TG...

[jumpstreet]

Lot to cover in 2 hours. Good luck Judge Sasser.

Thanks Garner NC for the link. :) Looks to me this was signed 7/30 so not at all sure how the hearing for the 22 of September even got scheduled. Hmmmmm.

I wasn't sure I recalled that the 22nd Sep psych exam date was 'firm'? I was trying to recall where I read it. Regardless, it could have been errant information in a news article from way back when, and it's always been set for the 26th anyway?

[Topsail Girl]

I wasn't sure I recalled that the 22nd Sep psych exam date was 'firm'? I was trying to recall where I read it. Regardless, it could have been errant information in a news article from way back when, and it's always been set for the 26th anyway?

The 26th is today LOL :crazy: I was sure I heard the week of the 22nd but it must have changed to the 29th. I had contacted 2 of my "contacts" and both said the same about the 29th and the delay till Oct so I didn't bother to post the second round of info.

Like Garner, I'm just trying to help when I can since I luvs all of yas :)

[raisincharlie]

The 26th is today LOL :crazy: I was sure I heard the week of the 22nd but it must have changed to the 29th. I had contacted 2 of my "contacts" and both said the same about the 29th and the delay till Oct so I didn't bother to post the second round of info.

Like Garner, I'm just trying to help when I can since I luvs all of yas :)

Topsail, if one can believe the N & O - the motion was due to be heard on Monday the 22nd:

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

Last month, attorneys for Nancy Cooper's family had asked a judge to demand a psychological evaluation of her husband, but withdrew the request as they negotiated a temporary agreement over custody of the couple's daughters. They are now asking that a judge hear a new request for a psychological evaluation on Sept. 22.



Note the article is dated 12 August, 2008

[Topsail Girl]

Topsail, if one can believe the N & O - the motion was due to be heard on Monday the 22nd:

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

Last month, attorneys for Nancy Cooper's family had asked a judge to demand a psychological evaluation of her husband, but withdrew the request as they negotiated a temporary agreement over custody of the couple's daughters. They are now asking that a judge hear a new request for a psychological evaluation on Sept. 22.



Note the article is dated 12 August, 2008

Thanks RC. You have just confirmed to me that at least this day I am NOT losing my mind!!!! LOL :blowkiss:

Also wanted to tell you that I read up on Rowan - I can't bring myself to keep up with those type cases. I can't recall which thread we were discussing it in but I wanted to tell you that I do agree with your statements regarding the body disposal, etc.

[raisincharlie]

Thanks RC. You have just confirmed to me that at least this day I am NOT losing my mind!!!! LOL :blowkiss:

Also wanted to tell you that I read up on Rowan - I can't bring myself to keep up with those type cases. I can't recall which thread we were discussing it in but I wanted to tell you that I do agree with your statements regarding the body disposal, etc.

Topsail - I normally do not follow such cases as Rowan's either because of the strong emotional overload. However, Rowan disappeared less than 50 mile from us, we helped search for this little one and I can't even begin to explain the scars this evil deed has left on my soul. I will see it through.

Kelly Morris

[jumpstreet]

The 26th is today LOL :crazy:

Typo on my part - sorry to add confusion to the already confused situation. Edited my post to read 29th now. [ Either N&O didn't have it exactly right to begin with, or since Aug 12th, it got pushed out 1 week... probably the latter] Anyway TGIF. :)

[Topsail Girl]

Typo on my part - sorry to add confusion to the already confused situation. Edited my post to read 29th now. [ Either N&O didn't have it exactly right to begin with, or since Aug 12th, it got pushed out 1 week... probably the latter] Anyway TGIF. :)


Aww no harm no foul We all make typo's. Specially me right now. My right arm is in a sling so I'm typing the hunt n peck way. Glad to have you along.

RC I didn't realize Rowan was that close. Now I understand. I don't know if Kelly will ever be found at this rate but I'm gonna try to help.

[jilly]

Lot to cover in 2 hours. Good luck Judge Sasser.

LOL - this took me back a few years when I was a Court Clerk. The lawyers give the time estimates and 9 times out of 10 they will under estimate. Mainly so they can get before a judge within a decent time frame. Once they're in, they're in 'cause no Judge is going to say 'you're over your estimate so please go home".
If they're 'realistic' shall we say :crazy:about how long the matter will take and say 4 hrs then they'll be waiting longer to get before a Judge because of the backlog.

Anyways...it was pretty frustrating and so I agree - "Lot to cover in 2 hours.":)

[ncnative]

Dang, Topsail! Just when I was about to run across the back woods to A.L's house to ask her...

(I would never make it because there's a creek with lots of snakes, and I can't run anyway!).:chicken:

[SleuthyGal]

Well K&B have been busy adding to their pages...looky what they've added about the necklace (http://www.kurtzandblum.com/CM/Investigation/Suspicious-Necklace.asp) and shoes (http://www.kurtzandblum.com/CM/Investigation/Missing-Shoes.asp).

[per_curiam]

First of all, K&B's typist needs to learn proper punctuation.

K&B's need for posting this garbage is tacky tacky tacky. It is along the lines of kids running back and forth saying, "Neener neener neener. Ha ha I told you so."

The fact that K&B needs to do this silly unnecessary crap for the public to view makes them look ridiculous. If they were a bit more professional they would not resort to this. They obviously like to slam HP and JA Young (detective).

Why did Brad go to K&B in the first place? Did he not do his research to find the best lawyers? He probably didn't think he'd be found out.

[SleuthyGal]

Did he not do his research to find the best lawyers?

1. T/S was already hired (and previously as well by his wife for the divorce)
2. His check 'bounced' at the next lawyer's firm

From K&B website: "Hannah Pritchard swore under oath during the custody proceeding that Nancy never took it off under any circumstance."

As for HP's statement on the stand...she said SHE never personally saw Nancy not wearing her necklace, and she saw Nancy nearly every day. She couldn't say for sure that Nancy never ever took it off, only that every time she saw her, she was wearing it, and to her knowledge Nancy never took it off.

But the main question is: was Nancy wearing her diamond necklace at the BBQ Fri. 7/11? Was she wearing it when she left to go home around midnight? There is no statement from Brad that Nancy took a shower between 12:30am and 7am. What Nancy was wearing in some photograph a couple weeks or 3 before isn't as important as whether she had that necklace on her last night alive.

[ncsu95]

Well K&B have been busy adding to their pages...looky what they've added about the necklace (http://www.kurtzandblum.com/CM/Investigation/Suspicious-Necklace.asp) and shoes (http://www.kurtzandblum.com/CM/Investigation/Missing-Shoes.asp).

As I said, 1 photo of her not wearing the necklace makes the whole necklace issue a "non issue". Well there is one from 3 weeks before she was killed.

[ncsu95]

And their comments about the shoes is the same thing I said...He said Saucony and would know the brand of shoes. The ones in the garage were asics.

[SleuthyGal]

I'm sure the DA's case is not based on the necklace and those shoes. Considering they didn't seize either of those items until after Brad was in jail, and they indicted before they had that evidence, this may be some 'icing' on the prosecution case. Unless they find 2 left shoes discarded outside somewhere, the shoes may strongly hint at Brad grabbing a non-matching 'pair,' but it won't necessarily be proved. And if they found the 2 left shoes somewhere in the house...well...I don't know what that means exactly since neither was discarded.

[SleuthyGal]

NCSU, I understand why you're doing it (giving Brad the benefit of the doubt), though I think believing every statement he makes as if it's the truth/gospel, instead of just putting a big ? over it, makes it more challenging to look at the evidence objectively. How can you believe everything Brad says? I can see questioning what he says but the guy has lied--how do you know which statements are truth and which are lies?

[ncsu95]

I'm sure the DA's case is not based on the necklace and those shoes. Considering they didn't seize either of those items until after Brad was in jail, and they indicted before they had that evidence, this may be some 'icing' on the prosecution case. Unless they find 2 left shoes discarded outside somewhere, the shoes may strongly hint at Brad grabbing a non-matching 'pair,' but it won't necessarily be proved. And if they found the 2 left shoes somewhere in the house...well...I don't know what that means exactly since neither was discarded.

I agree that this isn't there whole case. My point is that I believe this removes the necklace as an issue. All it took was 1 photo of her not wearing it, which they have not shown. I agree with your point about the shoes...we don't know if they have found them or not. But he did say she was wearing Saucony running shoes, and he would know the difference between Saucony and Asics.

[SleuthyGal]

I believe this removes the necklace as an issue.

Not totally. Was she wearing it at the BBQ? If yes, did she take it off upon arriving home? You can't say one way or the other for sure, so it stays in limbo.

[Maja]

I agree that this isn't there whole case. My point is that I believe this removes the necklace as an issue. All it took was 1 photo of her not wearing it, which they have not shown. I agree with your point about the shoes...we don't know if they have found them or not. But he did say she was wearing Saucony running shoes, and he would know the difference between Saucony and Asics.

How would he know what shoes she was wearing? He was upstairs with Katie and didn't see her leave...according to BC.

[momto3kids]

If NC wore it to the BBQ and it happened to be found broken by LE, it will not help BC no matter what K&B show to the jury. If the scratch on her neck is caused by jewelry, oh well, it looks even worse. How about if it is broken, where the break is will also tell a story!

Did anyone else notice this line (below in blue) by K&B?
If BC wasn't talking to the LE he wouldn't have let them back in the house.
Is there another SW that has been over looked?:confused:
This fits the Aug 13th date put on the last SW.

Young finds significance in a pair of missing shoes from another room, of another brand, of the wrong size, a month later, in a house that was partially packed for a move.

[raisincharlie]

If NC wore it to the BBQ and it happened to be found broken by LE, it will not help BC no matter what K&B show to the jury. If the scratch on her neck is caused by jewelry, oh well, it looks even worse. How about if it is broken, where the break is will also tell a story!

Did anyone else notice this line (below in blue) by K&B?
If BC wasn't talking to the LE he wouldn't have let them back in the house.
Is there another SW that has been over looked?:confused:
This fits the Aug 13th date put on the last SW.

Young finds significance in a pair of missing shoes from another room, of another brand, of the wrong size, a month later, in a house that was partially packed for a move.


Cracks me up - in his deposition Brad stated he hadn't given any thought to moving or not. Now his lawyer contradicts him by letting out that the house was partially packed as in for a move in 'August. :crazy:

[RaleighNC]

I agree with NCSU95 - the "never taking it off" is not a fact. However, if she had worn it at the party and it's now broken, that's big. The party is just the type of event that it WOULD have been worn.

The brand of sneakers isn't that big of a deal to me - but the fact that they were 2 of the same foot, is.

Why make a big deal about shoes? I think this is one of those things where it points to someone that is lying providing "too much" information. Liars weave intricate stories thinking that it's more believable that way.

the right answer to the shoe question (i.e. what shoes was she wearing? or what shoes are missing?) is "How the heck do I know - she's a chick - she has like 400 pair." Simple, believable.

If he got rid of what he thought was a "pair" in order to show that a "pair" was missing and therefore that she left to go on her run - well - that slip up is likely to cost him.

Anyone think that missing clothes / shoes may have been recovered? Or that someone saw Brad or his vehicle dumping something out / placing something in a dumpster somewhere????

[garner_nc]

Cracks me up - in his deposition Brad stated he hadn't given any thought to moving or not. Now his lawyer contradicts him by letting out that the house was partially packed as in for a move in 'August. :crazy:

He was talking about moving back to Canada whenever NC moved so he could see the kids. NC had been packing and I'm sure stuff is still in boxes. Remember the whole paint story where he would not buy paint until she made up her mind as to what colors to paint the interior.

Before the custody case and arrest, he was saying that he did not know if he would move or not, now that there is really no reason to since NC is dead. I think AS was trying to see if he would move the children from Cary now that NC is dead thus removing them from their friends.

[Star12]

First of all, K&B's typist needs to learn proper punctuation.

K&B's need for posting this garbage is tacky tacky tacky. It is along the lines of kids running back and forth saying, "Neener neener neener. Ha ha I told you so."

The fact that K&B needs to do this silly unnecessary crap for the public to view makes them look ridiculous. If they were a bit more professional they would not resort to this. They obviously like to slam HP and JA Young (detective).

Why did Brad go to K&B in the first place? Did he not do his research to find the best lawyers? He probably didn't think he'd be found out.

He tried. But his check bounced. But that was for custody. Don't think they do criminal.

[raisincharlie]

He was talking about moving back to Canada whenever NC moved so he could see the kids. NC had been packing and I'm sure stuff is still in boxes. Remember the whole paint story where he would not buy paint until she made up her mind as to what colors to paint the interior.

Before the custody case and arrest, he was saying that he did not know if he would move or not, now that there is really no reason to since NC is dead. I think AS was trying to see if he would move the children from Cary now that NC is dead thus removing them from their friends.

I remember the stories, but I also remember what he said in his deposition about moving out of the house - it still cracks me up.

[Star12]

I don't get the whole shoe thing anyway. She had NO shoes when she was found.

And I wouldn't lay a whole lot of creedance on that non-necklace photo, either. Remember the fingernail picture we had such trouble seeing?

Why is Kurtz attempting to play out his case on his websight? Pitiful.

[raisincharlie]

I don't get the whole shoe thing anyway. She had NO shoes when she was found.

And I wouldn't lay a whole lot of creedance on that non-necklace photo, either. Remember the fingernail picture we had such trouble seeing?

Why is Kurtz attempting to play out his case on his websight? Pitiful.

Think back on MH's claim that LE tried to coerce him. Take a second look at golo - seems K & B is playing to the crowd. I don't really find this unusual for a defense lawyer - just think Geragos and his brown van.

[Star12]

Think back on MH's claim that LE tried to coerce him. Take a second look at golo - seems K & B is playing to the crowd. I don't really find this unusual for a defense lawyer - just think Geragos and his brown van.

Oh yeah. golo. mmmm, I tend to not read trash....

Then again, it might have been a squirrel.......

[momto3kids]

I remember quite awhile back, RC & I, as well as others :confused: (don't remember who else) spoke about dumpsters.

One we discussed was @ LTF. The reason was because BC told he had gone there looking for NC. Let's hope the LE checked out LTF and HT dumpsters since he did name those 2 places he had gone to before the LE arrived.

[raisincharlie]

Oh yeah. golo. mmmm, I tend to not read trash....

Then again, it might have been a squirrel.......

I don't read it either - JMFLU has kept me well away with just her descriptions of it :crazy:

You know there are white squirrels in Brevard ? A JY trained squirrel maybe :crazy:

[raisincharlie]

I remember quite awhile back, RC & I, as well as others :confused: (don't remember who else) spoke about dumpsters.

One we discussed was @ LTF. The reason was because BC told he had gone there looking for NC. Let's hope the LE checked out LTF and HT dumpsters since he did name those 2 places he had gone to before the LE arrived.

Also possibly at Cary's condo complex but I think the possibilities are pretty slim unless all of those dumpsters would have been serviced after the 15th and LE went diving right away. Not sure by that time they would have had a real clue of what to look for in those dumpsters.

[ncsu95]

Not totally. Was she wearing it at the BBQ? If yes, did she take it off upon arriving home? You can't say one way or the other for sure, so it stays in limbo.

There would be absolutely no way of knowing if she took it off when she got home. The stance was that she NEVER took it off...so if there is a legit picture of her not wearing it, then you can't say she NEVER took it off...so the fact that it was in the house is basically a non issue since we don't know if she took it off or not.

[ncsu95]

How would he know what shoes she was wearing? He was upstairs with Katie and didn't see her leave...according to BC.

He said he noticed they were missing from the garage.

[ncsu95]

If NC wore it to the BBQ and it happened to be found broken by LE, it will not help BC no matter what K&B show to the jury. If the scratch on her neck is caused by jewelry, oh well, it looks even worse. How about if it is broken, where the break is will also tell a story!

Did anyone else notice this line (below in blue) by K&B?
If BC wasn't talking to the LE he wouldn't have let them back in the house.
Is there another SW that has been over looked?:confused:
This fits the Aug 13th date put on the last SW.

Young finds significance in a pair of missing shoes from another room, of another brand, of the wrong size, a month later, in a house that was partially packed for a move.

If it is broken, that is true. But there is no evidence that it is or was broken.

[ncsu95]

Cracks me up - in his deposition Brad stated he hadn't given any thought to moving or not. Now his lawyer contradicts him by letting out that the house was partially packed as in for a move in 'August. :crazy:

They were preparing the house for a move. I don't think that is in dispute. Now when that would take place hasn't been established.

[garner_nc]

He said he noticed they were missing from the garage.

I thought he said they were missing from the shoe rack in the laundry room where all their running gear was.

[per_curiam]

Dumpsters could have held one of NC's mops.

K&B will probably put out a new message on their site saying that all dumpsters were personally searched by them and their trained white pet squirrel. No mop was found with BC's fingerprints. Makes for entertainment and making them look desperately stupid.

[ncsu95]

He was talking about moving back to Canada whenever NC moved so he could see the kids. NC had been packing and I'm sure stuff is still in boxes. Remember the whole paint story where he would not buy paint until she made up her mind as to what colors to paint the interior.

Before the custody case and arrest, he was saying that he did not know if he would move or not, now that there is really no reason to since NC is dead. I think AS was trying to see if he would move the children from Cary now that NC is dead thus removing them from their friends.


My guess is they packed up stuff to make the house less cluttered to prepare to show it. That was why they were painting, etc. That could have been done in the spring when the plan was for her to leave. Just my opinion, I don't really know.

[momto3kids]

Cracks me up - in his deposition Brad stated he hadn't given any thought to moving or not. Now his lawyer contradicts him by letting out that the house was partially packed as in for a move in 'August. :crazy:


IMO, his own attorneys did him more harm than good during the custody hearing, showing he had MOTIVE for murder. They don't know when to :ziplip:

I guess they are getting tangled in his web of lies also :eek:

[raisincharlie]

My guess is they packed up stuff to make the house less cluttered to prepare to show it. That was why they were painting, etc. That could have been done in the spring when the plan was for her to leave. Just my opinion, I don't really know.

It was being done in March according to affidavits from various people. Nancy and the children were to leave in April.

[momto3kids]

If it is broken, that is true. But there is no evidence that it is or was broken.
I agree.
I'm saying just think if it is found broken and where the break is located. If the scratch on her neck, which we haven't seen, appears to have been caused by jewelry? This will be hard evidence to get beyond no matter what the defense says.

Also, if she wore it at the BBQ.

[SleuthyGal]

Cracks me up - in his deposition Brad stated he hadn't given any thought to moving or not. Now his lawyer contradicts him by letting out that the house was partially packed as in for a move in 'August. :crazy:

Nancy had been packing up the house those last few weeks/months.

[jmflu]

I don't read it either - JMFLU has kept me well away with just her descriptions of it :crazy:

You know there are white squirrels in Brevard ? A JY trained squirrel maybe :crazy:

I wouldn't get started reading it, either. I have been in the Riviera Maya for a week and because they heard nothing from me at arrest time and during subsequent stories, one person thinks I am Krista Lister, because SHE apparently was out of town. Creative minds do abound. :confused:

[raisincharlie]

Nancy had been packing up the house those last few weeks/months.

And how do we know this if I can ask ?

[raisincharlie]

I wouldn't get started reading it, either. I have been in the Riviera Maya for a week and because they heard nothing from me at arrest time and during subsequent stories, one person thinks I am Krista Lister, because SHE apparently was out of town. Creative minds do abound. :confused:

ROFL :clap:

[SleuthyGal]

And how do we know this if I can ask ?

Her friends' affys were talking about packing up the house...she did some things, but not the whole house. Unless she unpacked boxes afterwards, I'm assuming some boxes were still packed. However I don't believe 2 left shoes got into boxes and the rights were left out.

[raisincharlie]

Her friends' affys were talking about packing up the house...she did some things, but not the whole house. Unless she unpacked boxes afterwards, I'm assuming some boxes were still packed. However I don't believe 2 left shoes got into boxes and the rights were left out.

I agree the affys say this but believe that was related to March and April because Nancy and the children were due to leave in April. I don't recall them saying anything about doing such after April when it became clear that Nancy and the children were not allowed to leave.

All these boxes and stuff must have been put somewhere else because Brad says he didn't have to move anything while he was on his cleaning binge except for the table in the kitchen area.

[momto3kids]

Unless the boxes were put in the attic, there weren't any I could see in their garage. Just plenty of misc items, and many many kids toys.

[ncsu95]

I thought he said they were missing from the shoe rack in the laundry room where all their running gear was.

You are probably right. I just remember him saying they were missing.

[ncsu95]

I agree.
I'm saying just think if it is found broken and where the break is located. If the scratch on her neck, which we haven't seen, appears to have been caused by jewelry? This will be hard evidence to get beyond no matter what the defense says.

Also, if she wore it at the BBQ.

I agree that if the necklace is broken, that would be pretty damning evidence. Her wearing it at the BBQ would not be if it is shown that she didn't ALWAYS have it on, and NEVER took it off. 1 valid recent picture of her without it means you can't say for certain that she was wearing it when she went to sleep. That's why I said using superlatives like ALWAYS and NEVER are usually pretty easy to disprove.

[ncsu95]

I agree the affys say this but believe that was related to March and April because Nancy and the children were due to leave in April. I don't recall them saying anything about doing such after April when it became clear that Nancy and the children were not allowed to leave.

All these boxes and stuff must have been put somewhere else because Brad says he didn't have to move anything while he was on his cleaning binge except for the table in the kitchen area.

I doubt they would be left in living areas. When I was packing up the last time I moved, one empty bedroom became the dump place for packed boxes.

[fran]

I see K&B have a new page about the 'mussed clothes.' :slap:

http://www.kurtzandblum.com/CM/Investigation/Mussed-Clothing.asp

fran

PS..........hmmmmmm..........there's only ONE problem with the 'mussed clothes' Brad was wearing that morning. LE didn't list as having located them...................interesting,.......fran

[jmflu]

[QUOTE=fran;2896245]I see K&B have a new page about the 'mussed clothes.' :slap:

http://www.kurtzandblum.com/CM/Investigation/Mussed-Clothing.asp

fran


This is just the most bizarre thing... Who are they playing to?? It's almost like they have their own little message board... something comes out in the press, or people talk about it here on WS, and their retort ends up on their website... I've never seen anything like this! It is just so... unprofessional and even immature, imo!

[raisincharlie]

I see K&B have a new page about the 'mussed clothes.' :slap:

http://www.kurtzandblum.com/CM/Investigation/Mussed-Clothing.asp

fran

PS..........hmmmmmm..........there's only ONE problem with the 'mussed clothes' Brad was wearing that morning. LE didn't list as having located them...................interesting,.......fran


On this Fran - I would have thought they would have been looking for those clothes on 16 July actually. Everyone and their brother knew Brad made some trips to HT on the 12th well before the warrant of the 16th. I would be surprised if LE was unaware of those video tapes prior to the 16th of July. That warrant led to the collection of very few clothes and certainly nothing ressembling what Brad was seen in. I must say this is puzzling to me.

[RaleighNC]

tee hee - we got a mention out of K&B.... and one of the reasons to seal the custody order.

What power we wield.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3884038/

[jmflu]

So those who just knew there was some damning evidence in that custody order... K&B just proved you RIGHT!!!

They all but say their client will be seen as guilty as hell if we get a look at it!

[raisincharlie]

tee hee - we got a mention out of K&B.... and one of the reasons to seal the custody order.

What power we wield.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3884038/


At least we get a good look at what their motion for change of venue will be. Except perhaps there is no internet on Mars.:crazy:

[jmflu]

RC check PM

[SleuthyGal]

I didn't notice any mention of C.O.V. ??

[raisincharlie]

I didn't notice any mention of C.O.V. ??

I'm just saying they will use this same argument for a change of venue motion - won't have to type up another - just delete a few things :crazy:

[SleuthyGal]

ahhh okay.

Boilerplate. Should save their client an hour of billing, no?

<still worried about the financial sitch>

[CentralAlberta]

http://www.kurtzandblum.com/CM/Investigation/Mussed-Clothing.asp

K&B are suggesting LE should have seized the clothes in JUNE. Don't they know when their client supposedly murdered his wife. Maybe a different attorney would have been better investment of taxpayers money.

[Star12]

http://www.kurtzandblum.com/CM/Investigation/Mussed-Clothing.asp

K&B are suggesting LE should have seized the clothes in JUNE. Don't they know when their client supposedly murdered his wife. Maybe a different attorney would have been better investment of taxpayers money.

Oh geeze, I can't breathe!

Maybe if they had taken the clothing in June, Nancy would be just fine, because BC wouldn't go ot nekkid, would he?

[raisincharlie]

Oh geeze, I can't breathe!

Maybe if they had taken the clothing in June, Nancy would be just fine, because BC wouldn't go ot nekkid, would he?

They are already whinning about this website - you all start pointing out that June is not July and two missing left shoes is not a pair and so on and so on, and you are really gonna give them a heart attack worrying about the fairness afforded to their client who is sitting in :behindbar while they talk to the press about motions made to keep things secret...:crazy:

[SleuthyGal]

http://www.kurtzandblum.com/CM/Investigation/Mussed-Clothing.asp

K&B are suggesting LE should have seized the clothes in JUNE. Don't they know when their client supposedly murdered his wife. Maybe a different attorney would have been better investment of taxpayers money.

Great find Central!

JUNE...yeah if only the CPD were psychic and could have prevented this whole mess in the first place.

[RaleighNC]

Great find Central!

JUNE...yeah if only the CPD were psychic and could have prevented this whole mess in the first place.

Or - maybe that's how long he'd been PLANNING it...... Freudian slip? :bang:

They certainly have a lot of questions and accusations about CPD - but still wouldn't go there with their client and chat? Maybe they could have asked Detective Daniels some of the things they post on their website in person.

I think it's a murderers' clique.

[SleuthyGal]

They are already whinning about this website - you all start pointing out that June is not July and two missing left shoes is not a pair and so on and so on, and you are really gonna give them a heart attack worrying about the fairness afforded to their client who is sitting in :behindbar while they talk to the press about motions made to keep things secret...:crazy:

Oh the agita of da feet. You sleuthers are sooooo nitpicky.

http://i37.tinypic.com/30xhnco.jpg

[Star12]

They are already whinning about this website - you all start pointing out that June is not July and two missing left shoes is not a pair and so on and so on, and you are really gonna give them a heart attack worrying about the fairness afforded to their client who is sitting in :behindbar while they talk to the press about motions made to keep things secret...:crazy:

:iamashamed0005:
:censored:
:lipssealed:
:runaway:

[raisincharlie]

Oh the agita of da feet. You sleuthers are sooooo nitpicky.

http://i37.tinypic.com/30xhnco.jpg

Persons suffering from AR are a defense lawyers worst nightmare...:Banane37:

:kilroy: :floorlaugh:

[Star12]

Oh the agita of da feet. You sleuthers are sooooo nitpicky.

http://i37.tinypic.com/30xhnco.jpg

What *I* want to know, SG, is why you would buy TWO pair of those?

[SleuthyGal]

Cause it was "Buy one get one free!"

Such a deal! :wink:

[SleuthyGal]

Persons suffering from AR are a defense lawyers worst nightmare...:Banane37:

:kilroy: :floorlaugh:

What is AR?

[Star12]

Cause it was "Buy one get one free!"

Such a deal! :wink:

:::walks away, shaking head, wondering which of us needs to take the medication:::

[Star12]

What is AR?

anal retentive

[CyberPro]

What is AR?

SG,

The "R" is for retentive... I'll leave it up to you to figure out the "A" :waitasec::)

CyberPro

[SleuthyGal]

:behind:retentive.

got it! Danke!

[raisincharlie]

:behind:retentive.

got it! Danke!


Thanks everyone for answering. I was skeerd to type that in a answer to SG.

On a serious note SG - you were in the courtroom listening to the witnesses, why the heck do Brad's lawyers have their shorts in such a wad ?

[SleuthyGal]

I think it's possible some of the commentary here is cutting a little too close to the bone. This is an intelligent board--not full of just idle gossip, but a place where people are examining and dissecting every piece of information that is released. There's no attorney nuancing the direction of discussion here as there would be in a courtroom. Plus the defense attorneys can't very well spend their days posting rebuttals here, though perhaps there have been times they would have liked to do just that. And, this board gets a lot of traffic. So those things must feel threatening.

As for the hearing itself, I saw nothing there that would wad anyone's panties, including witness testimony. It was as expected. As I said before, the hearing was really a tiny snippet of the full custody case--if you didn't read all the affys and rebuttal affys and watch the depo, you'd simply have merely scratched the surface and probably be a bit confused.

[AmarilloByAM]

All the info the K&B firm posts on their website regarding this case is weird weird weird!!! I mean really weird. They have to be laughing their behinds off over at TS everytime they take a peek at the latest K&B web update.

[raisincharlie]

I think it's possible some of the commentary here is cutting a little too close to the bone. This is an intelligent board--not full of just idle gossip, but a place where people are examining and dissecting every piece of information that is released. There's no attorney nuancing the direction of discussion here as there would be in a courtroom. Plus the defense attorneys can't very well spend their days posting rebuttals here, though perhaps there have been times they would have liked to do just that. And, this board gets a lot of traffic. So those things must feel threatening.

As for the hearing itself, I saw nothing there that would wad anyone's panties, including witness testimony. It was as expected. As I said before, the hearing was really a tiny snippet of the full custody case--if you didn't read all the affys and rebuttal affys and watch the depo, you'd simply have merely scratched the surface and probably be a bit confused.

Kinda what I thought. Seems to me that perhaps the agreement after the ruling, hashed out by the attorney's may be more the issue than the hearing and even the affidavits. Going ot be kind of hard to do visitation and web cam chats now for sure. Guess the biggest fear for them is the judge not avoiding the elephant and how it would look if she did not ignore it. Obviously, she cannot ignore it with the indictment handed down.

[SleuthyGal]

Seems to me that perhaps the agreement after the ruling, hashed out by the attorney's may be more the issue than the hearing and even the affidavits. Going ot be kind of hard to do visitation and web cam chats now for sure. Guess the biggest fear for them is the judge not avoiding the elephant and how it would look if she did not ignore it. Obviously, she cannot ignore it with the indictment handed down.

Perhaps what occurred out of the courtroom, as you suggest, is more explosive. I saw nothing that would surprise anyone nor prejudice a potential jury pool. It's not like it's a big secret that Brad's been indicted and is now being held in jail. And neither is it a secret that the kids are with the Lister's in Canada. There are a significant number of people in the community that don't like this turn of events and think Brad is being railroaded, as much as there are folks who feel relief.

And of course the custody arrangement is still temporary and will remain so. Whether Judge Sasser saw an elephant in the room or not is a bit moot since the DA moved forward and got an indictment; again, no mystery there either. So what has them concerned has got to be something we just don't know about. Or else, they're testing the judge on this motion...I don't know.

[mahmoo]

anal retentive


http://i33.tinypic.com/9h30c8.jpg

[Star12]

http://i33.tinypic.com/9h30c8.jpg


Mahmoo, I LOVE that. It's certainly aprapos.

And I don't get around much, who is that guy on the floor and what is he looking for?

[jumpstreet]

this is an intelligent board...

:) ......

[SleuthyGal]

LOL Mahmoo! Love the Tshirt.

[CyberPro]

Mahmoo, I LOVE that. It's certainly aprapos.

And I don't get around much, who is that guy on the floor and what is he looking for?

Star,

Check out the Turkey Lamp, and think Thanksgiving... also note the oven mitt on the guys hand....

That should be enough clues for a Sleuth!

CyberPro

[Star12]

Star,

Check out the Turkey Lamp, and think Thanksgiving... also note the oven mitt on the guys hand....

That should be enough clues for a Sleuth!

CyberPro

oh, duh. where's the pointy hat... ::slinking off to the corner::

How funny!

[fran]

tee hee - we got a mention out of K&B.... and one of the reasons to seal the custody order.

What power we wield.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3884038/

LOL, I've been mulling this latest request over and I think I understand now why they've mentioned Websleuths. LOL, but it's ohhhh too late!:waitasec:

Me thinks K&B put their foot in their mouth with their 'mussed clothes' page. LOL, they didn't realize that LE hadn't confiscated those and NOW it MAY be part of the 'evidence' of the crime by Mr. Cooper. The jury MAY want to know where those clothes are Mr. Cooper was wearing that morning Nancy was murdered.:behindbar

That's providing LE did NOT confiscate them in any of the search warrants. PERHAPS old Brad threw them out?:loser:

IF K&B have been reading here all along, as they've so indicated, I guess they musta' breezed over my post that explained how Mark Geragos stuck his foot in his mouth during the Peterson trial, which worked AGAINST his client BIG TIME, re. the timeline. :bang:The pros even mentioned it in his closing. :rolleyes:

Just like K&B, in his quest to embarrass the DA, like K&B are attemting to embarrass LE for not confiscating BC's clothes three months prior, they have now emphacized this clothing, which SHOULD be available. IF the clothes are in fact GONE! Believe me! ALL the jurors will want to know WHY?!:p

It's not going to be ONE thing that convicts Brad of this crime but the BIG PICTURE. K&B may have provided the 'hook' that a few of the future potential jurors will grab onto to convince them that Brad Cooper did in fact murder his wife in cold blood.:mad:

Just my opinion, of course,;)
fran

[jmflu]

Fran, I really enjoy your posts.