Autopsy [Archive] - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Just the Fax

09-29-2008, 06:04 PM

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/09/29/3638836/CooperAutopsy.pdf

According to the autopsy report, her body was decomposed because of the elements, and she was clothed only in what the report refers to as a black, gray and red "halter top."

There were no obvious signs of sexual assault, the medical examiner reported, and there were no drugs other than caffeine in her system.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 06:13 PM

So SG - how long does it take the digestive system to break down onion ?

Just the Fax

09-29-2008, 06:19 PM

No signs of sexual assault, yet the killer strangled her and removed all clothing / shoes except a halter top before dumping her body in the back of a construction site ?

Yea right.
Guilty as sin

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 06:20 PM

So SG - how long does it take the digestive system to break down onion ?

...and for how long does caffeine stay in the bloodstream? Would caffeine from coffee/soda the night before still be present... or, would it require her to have had something more recent (ie, in the morning).

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 06:21 PM

Only 'food' found in stomach contents was one small piece of onion and some reddish fluid (perhaps wine?). It wasn't blood because they would have said so.

reddress58

09-29-2008, 06:24 PM

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/09/29/3638836/CooperAutopsy.pdf

According to the autopsy report, her body was decomposed because of the elements, and she was clothed only in what the report refers to as a black, gray and red "halter top."

There were no obvious signs of sexual assault, the medical examiner reported, and there were no drugs other than caffeine in her system.
Why would Brad say on day one that she had on a t-shirt? I don't think one goes running in a halter top. Not me, anyway.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 06:24 PM

...and for how long does caffeine stay in the bloodstream? Would caffeine from coffee/soda the night before still be present... or, would it require her to have had something more recent (ie, in the morning).

The half life of caffine in a healthy human is approximately 4 hours, however in women taking oral contraceptives this can be increased to 5 to 10 hours for the half life.

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 06:24 PM

No signs of sexual assault, yet the killer strangled her and removed all clothing except a halter top before dumping her body in the back of a construction site ?

Yea right.
Guilty as sin

I thought I read it to say no obvious trauma, but that there was significant decomposition (perhaps masking what would otherwise be there), as well as an assault kit was still used [presumably standard practice though] (and CCBI has those results).

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 06:27 PM

The half life of caffine in a healthy human is approximately 4 hours, however in women taking oral contraceptives this can be increased to 5 to 10 hours for the half life.

Thanks! Does this imply (unless she was taking oral contraceptives), that she either had something caffeinated right before (supposedly) going to sleep on Friday... OR... she had something caffeinated before going for for the Saturday AM "run"?

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 06:28 PM

Why would Brad say on day one that she had on a t-shirt? I don't think one goes running in a halter top. Not me, anyway.

The description (in the report itself) sounds more like a "sports-bra" to me. ME used the qualifier "athletic" in their description.

Just the Fax

09-29-2008, 06:29 PM

I thought I read it to say no obvious trauma, but that there was significant decomposition (perhaps masking what would otherwise be there), as well as an assault kit was still used [presumably standard practice though] (and CCBI has those results).
Yes, you are correct
The rape kit was turned over to the SBI in July.
There was so much decomposition and maggot infestation in the genital area nothing would be obvious.

reddress58

09-29-2008, 06:30 PM

The description (in the report itself) sounds more like a "sports-bra" to me. ME used the qualifier "athletic" in their description.
Thanks. I need to go read it.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 06:31 PM

Thanks! Does this imply (unless she was taking oral contraceptives), that she either had something caffeinated right before (supposedly) going to sleep on Friday... OR... she had something caffeinated before going for for the Saturday AM "run"?

Dunno - I'm sure LE will be talking to friends to find out when she ate and drank at the party as well as when. The amount of caffine may or may not be telling dependent on both concentration and last known intake. We don't know that.

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 06:37 PM

Dunno - I'm sure LE will be talking to friends to find out when she ate and drank at the party as well as when.

Right... I wonder if this the first time LE would have seen the report details also? Hopefully LE has already interviewed folks from the party and asked for observations (what they saw her eating, drinking, etc). They can cross reference (now) I guess with the ME report details.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 06:39 PM

Right... I wonder if this the first time LE would have seen the report details also? Hopefully LE has already interviewed folks from the party and asked for observations (what they saw her eating, drinking, etc). They can cross reference (now) I guess with the ME report details.

Did you note who was present during the autopsy ? LE had a representative there - they would have known on the 15th of July what the stomach contents were if any were detected.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 06:43 PM

I'm interested in a correlation of this onion fragment in her stomach to whatever that 'green/brown vegetable matter' is that was found on/in the BMW 325i. If there is 'onion' in that green/brown matter then it can be linked to NC's stomach contents.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 06:48 PM

Also, a 1.3" mark across the front of her neck does not look like strangulation using hands or a cord. I'm thinking pillow over the face plus something was used against the front of her throat to either take her down or exert enough force -- enough to create a vertical fracture of her hyoid bone.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 06:52 PM

Pink toenail polish was noted in the autopsy. However, whether any toenail or portion of a toenail was missing was not mentioned. (remember CPD found what they described as a 'pink nail' and took it into evidence.).

ETA: "Some caked clay like dirt is present along the medial surface of the left upper leg, knee and lower leg." I wonder if this is indicative of dragging to her final spot?

reddress58

09-29-2008, 06:53 PM

Also, a 1.3" mark across the front of her neck does not look like strangulation using hands or a cord. I'm thinking pillow over the face plus something was used against the front of her throat to either take her down or exert enough force -- enough to create a vertical fracture of her hyoid bone.
I wish we knew more about the WIDTH of the mark. Could it be a thumb? Or something thinner? Was it a scratch or a bruise? Not enough info.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 06:58 PM

I know. It's described as a 'faint linear mark.' The hand drawing just shows a thin line.

ncnative

09-29-2008, 07:07 PM

There is caffeine in solid foods as well (chocolate, for one).

"Halter top" can be how someone who isn't well versed on describing women's clothing would describe some of the jogging attire that women wear. Nancy is pictured in one of those tops in one pic where she was hugging Bella. Sometimes they look like jogging bras, with criss-crossed straps, and some come down on the midriff farther than a regular bra.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 07:09 PM

So SG - how long does it take the digestive system to break down onion ?

You're assuming what she ate didn't come back up in the form of 'green/brown vegetable matter.'

Otherwise, I have no idea how onion is broken down, to what degree, and how long it takes to go through the digestive system. Nor do we know how much onion she ate or what else she ate with it (or what it was in).

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 07:10 PM

There is caffeine in solid foods as well (chocolate, for one).

"Halter top" can be how someone who isn't well versed on describing women's clothing would describe some of the jogging attire that women wear. Nancy is pictured in one of those tops in one pic where she was hugging Bella. Sometimes they look like jogging bras, with criss-crossed straps, and some come down on the midriff farther than a regular bra.

Would a female be in a somewhat vulnerable position (hands in the air over head) while trying to put one of those on ? I would think so. Hmmmm.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 07:12 PM

Would a female be in a somewhat vulnerable position (hands in the air over head) while trying to put one of those on ? I would think so. Hmmmm.

Could be, yes. Also she could have been wearing it underneath whatever she wore to the party the night before (which we don't know about at this point).

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 07:13 PM

You're assuming what she ate didn't come back up in the form of 'green/brown vegetable matter.'

Otherwise, I have no idea how onion is broken down, to what degree, and how long it takes to go through the digestive system. Nor do we know how much onion she ate or what else she ate with it (or what it was in).

Why would if come back up as green/brown vegetable matter if the contents of her stomach were identified as being red ? My take on that is it was outdoor vegetation and it had nothing to do with food.

Meats take infiinitely longer to digest than onion and softer foods. Thus my question about here being a vegetarian. The absence of food identifiable as meat in her stomach contents could be due to a number of things but I wonder.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 07:14 PM

Could be, yes. Also she could have been wearing it underneath whatever she wore to the party the night before (which we don't know about at this point).

Under a green dress ?

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 07:17 PM

Autopsy wording: "The stomach contains a small amount of reddish fluid and one fragment of what may be onion."

I have no idea what this reddish fluid is since they didn't say. Also we don't know what this green/brown vegetable matter found in conjunction with the BMW sedan is comprised of either. Some speculate that she vomited. I originally thought vegetation as in grass/leaves. But who knows...??

reddress58

09-29-2008, 07:19 PM

Under a green dress ?
Brad reported she was wearing a t-shirt, shorts and blue running shoes when she left for her jog. (in his first report. He later retracted this statement saying he didn't see her leave the house. But I doubt she left in just a jog bra) I wonder if the shoes they took in the SW were Nancy's? If not, then he had shoes to dispose of before/after dumping her body. Wonder if any dumpsters were checked? Maybe one near the car wash?

ETA: Jog bras can be quite difficult to put on. Quite a bit of physical gyrations are usually necessary. :-)

Just the Fax

09-29-2008, 07:21 PM

If she was snatched off the road, abducted and raped, WTH happened to her socks and shoes ? It looks like he didn't take the time to dress her body in anything other than the halter top.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 07:25 PM

If she was snatched off the road, abducted and raped, WTH happened to her socks and shoes ? It looks like he didn't take the time to dress her body in anything other than the halter top.

Yep! Abductors/rapists don't concern themselves with (removing) socks and shoes. Also, if she had been abducted she would have been wearing a top and shorts and socks/shoes. Those items should have been located somewhere not too far from her body, right? Along with said socks & shoes?

Just the Fax

09-29-2008, 07:26 PM

Alcohol (ethanol) was 60 mg / dl

Whatever that means ?

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 07:27 PM

Jog bras can be quite difficult to put on. Quite a bit of physical gyrations are usually necessary. :-)

Could this perhaps be a reason said jog bra was not pulled down over her breasts but were instead thought of as 'pulled up?' Perhaps whoever put her in that jog bra was unable to get it any further down.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 07:28 PM

Alcohol (ethanol) was 60 mg / dl

Whatever that means ?

They said it could be from (the result of) decomposition...

Just the Fax

09-29-2008, 07:28 PM

Yep! Abductors/rapists don't concern themselves with (removing) socks and shoes. Also, if she had been abducted she would have been wearing a top and shorts and socks/shoes. Those items should have been located somewhere not too far from her body, right? Along with said socks & shoes?

I could maybe understand it if she was wearing fishnets and heels :blushing:

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 07:29 PM

Yep! Abductors/rapists don't concern themselves with (removing) socks and shoes. Also, if she had been abducted she would have been wearing a top and shorts and socks/shoes. Those items should have been located somewhere not too far from her body, right? Along with said socks & shoes?

Maybe the autopsy itself (and information at discovery site) played a large part in CPD's assessment that it wasn't "random".

Things from discovery at least (the clothing, and manner of death) don't seem consistent with random. Doesn't categorically eliminate Theory B (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2465948&postcount=171) (someone that knew her other than BC) but to me, certainly Theory C (random crime) seems all but eliminated now. Theory A of course is still on the table too. :)

reddress58

09-29-2008, 07:31 PM

Could this perhaps be a reason said jog bra was not pulled down over her breasts but were instead thought of as 'pulled up?' Perhaps whoever put her in that jog bra was unable to get it any further down.
Possibly. Another thought: in the ME's opinion, there was no sexual trauma, meaning he did not suspect rape. Why in the h___ would she be arbitraily picked off the side of the road by some unknown person while running and only strangled? This is major ding on the hinky meter.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 07:31 PM

Alcohol (ethanol) was 60 mg / dl

Whatever that means ?

Decomposition byproduct. Can be used to assist in calculation of TOD.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 07:33 PM

Possibly. Another thought: in the ME's opinion, there was no sexual trauma, meaning he did not suspect rape. Why in the h___ would she be arbitraily picked off the side of the road by some unknown person while running and only strangled? This is major ding on the hinky meter.

Bingo !

I was thinking perhaps Nancy herself was attempting to put on her jogging bra - as in getting ready to go jog, and someone did not approve at that point. her hands may as well have been tied if one thinks about it.

reddress58

09-29-2008, 07:35 PM

Bingo !

I was thinking perhaps Nancy herself was attempting to put on her jogging bra - as in getting ready to go jog, and someone did not approve at that point. her hands may as well have been tied if one thinks about it.
Very possible. Putting on one of those leaves one quite vulnerable.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 07:37 PM

Very possible. Putting on one of those leaves one quite vulnerable.

Perhaps she was just getting into or out of the shower - after all LE noted cleaning products in the bathroom according to their affidavit of probable cause.

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 07:37 PM

Bingo !

I was thinking perhaps Nancy herself was attempting to put on her jogging bra - as in getting ready to go jog, and someone did not approve at that point. her hands may as well have been tied if one thinks about it.

I wonder if one wanted it to "look like" it was random, would it make sense to leave her this way? (Bra pulled up over head, no shorts, shoes). The no shoes part especially is weird to me.

reddress58

09-29-2008, 07:37 PM

Bingo !

I was thinking perhaps Nancy herself was attempting to put on her jogging bra - as in getting ready to go jog, and someone did not approve at that point. her hands may as well have been tied if one thinks about it.
However, I still don't believe she planned to run. I think she was going to paint. Not sure if she'd wear running attire to paint in. Jessica would know that.

Just the Fax

09-29-2008, 07:38 PM

Bingo !

I was thinking perhaps Nancy herself was attempting to put on her jogging bra - as in getting ready to go jog, and someone did not approve at that point. her hands may as well have been tied if one thinks about it.

I would ask what time her usual 'early am' Saturday jogs were.
If she often left around 6 am, that very well could be the case.
....assuming he 1st went to the HT at 6:15 am after dumping the body.

reddress58

09-29-2008, 07:39 PM

I wonder if one wanted it to "look like" it was random, would it make sense to leave her this way? (Bra pulled up over head, no shorts, shoes). The no shoes part especially is weird to me.
He could very well have been in the process of "dressing" her when he got the call from Jessica. Maybe he didn't have time to add the rest of her running attire and felt pressure to dispose of her ASAP.

ETA: This is assuming she was killed around 7 like RC suspects.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 07:39 PM

I wonder if one wanted it to "look like" it was random, would it make sense to leave her this way? (Bra pulled up over head, no shorts, shoes). The no shoes part especially is weird to me.

This is not in line with a random crime - in terms of sense. Why would anyone take her running clothes, shoes and socks (if she were wearing socks) ?

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 07:39 PM

However, I still don't believe she planned to run. I think she was going to paint. Not sure if she'd wear running attire to paint in. Jessica would know that.

Fairly sure that CM (or someone) reported that at the party NC had mentioned plans for a Saturday AM run (presumably before the painting). Certainly it's possible she (NC) changed her mind about running, and also possible that CM (or whoever it was) misspoke or mis-recalled. [ But the data that we have is a statement that NC had shared with friends of plans to run Saturday AM, for what that's worth... ]

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 07:43 PM

I would ask what time her usual 'early am' Saturday jogs were.
If she often left around 6 am, that very well could be the case.
....assuming he 1st went to the HT at 6:15 am after dumping the body.

I recall reading somewhere, perhaps JA's affidavit, that the run Nancy had scheduled the day before was to start at 5:45 am - this was the run that was cancelled. Will see if I can find that reference.

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 07:45 PM

This is not in line with a random crime - in terms of sense. Why would anyone take her running clothes, shoes and socks (if she were wearing socks) ?

Agreed. (and yeah, in my mind Theory C is totally off the table now). Maybe I'm over thinking it... but why would someone who wanted to make it look like a random crime leave her this way? [ Someone crafty enough to stage mobile phone calls, and alibi trips to HT? ]

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 07:47 PM

If she had plans to paint at 8am (and if she was usually on time to such things) then any 'running' she did would likely have been before 7am. Also this was July 12th...it gets quite warm out for running as the time progresses.

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 07:47 PM

He could very well have been in the process of "dressing" her when he got the call from Jessica. Maybe he didn't have time to add the rest of her running attire and felt pressure to dispose of her ASAP.

ETA: This is assuming she was killed around 7 like RC suspects.

Killed around 7, but then moved to the discovery site after the call from Jessica (mid-morning). That one seems a stretch. Surely the girls were up by this time?

reddress58

09-29-2008, 07:48 PM

Agreed. (and yeah, in my mind Theory C is totally off the table now). Maybe I'm over thinking it... but why would someone who wanted to make it look like a random crime leave her this way? [ Someone crafty enough to stage mobile phone calls, and alibi trips to HT? ]
I doubt Brad has ever raped a women so therefore would have no idea what attire a rapped woman would be wearing after the crime.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 07:50 PM

In a random crime the perp would not care about such things like a tshirt, shorts, socks & shoes. Meaning, they wouldn't go to some trouble to hide/discard them.

Also, according to the autopsy there was no injury to her cervix--another indication of no sexual trauma.

Just the Fax

09-29-2008, 08:00 PM

I doubt Brad has ever raped a women so therefore would have no idea what attire a rapped woman would be wearing after the crime.

The 'rapist' only pushed her bra up to expose her breasts, but decided to totally remove her shorts, socks and shoes :waitasec:

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 08:01 PM

I doubt Brad has ever raped a women so therefore would have no idea what attire a rapped woman would be wearing after the crime.

You're probably right. He probably just assumed that most random killers would take the shoes. ;)

jilly

09-29-2008, 08:38 PM

That poor woman!:(

I think BC tried to dress her. Although, putting that sports bra on must have been a challenge for him if he put it over her head especially with dead weight. Those things don't have much 'give' at the bottom to get over the shoulders- I put mine on by stepping into them. Nancy was slim. He must have been interrupted or something and just got her into the vehicle.

He was obviously trying to make it look like the killer had rape in mind. Yeah, I agree...like a murderer is going to take a victim's shoes and socks. :rolleyes:

I had to look up the 'hyoid bone' - A U-shaped bone at the base of the tongue that supports the muscles of the tongue. That must have occurred because of the pressure he applied for strangulation?

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 08:50 PM

That poor woman!:(

I think BC tried to dress her. Although, putting that sports bra on must have been a challenge for him if he put it over her head especially with dead weight. Those things don't have much 'give' at the bottom to get over the shoulders- I put mine on by stepping into them. Nancy was slim. He must have been interrupted or something and just got her into the vehicle.

He was obviously trying to make it look like the killer had rape in mind. Yeah, I agree...like a murderer is going to take a victim's shoes and socks. :rolleyes:

I had to look up the 'hyoid bone' - A U-shaped bone at the base of the tongue that supports the muscles of the tongue. That must have occurred because of the pressure he applied for strangulation?

Ms. Jilly :blowkiss:

The hyoid bone often is damaged during strangulation efforts, it becomes more subject to damage with age as well. It does not take a great deal of effort to damage this skeletal component. One thing I do know - I hope they get this sucker for premeditation - it can take up to 4 minutes to kill someone this way. In four minutes one has plenty of time to make a decision to stop and seek assistance for the victim. He definitely meant to kill her.

mahmoo

09-29-2008, 08:55 PM

Autopsy states she was wearing only one glass stud earring.......will be very telling if LE found the mate to that earring in the Cooper's home. More than likely he would not have noticed she had on only one earring when disposing of her and therefore would not have known to search the room for the missing earring.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 09:27 PM

I hope they get this sucker for premeditation - it can take up to 4 minutes to kill someone this way. In four minutes one has plenty of time to make a decision to stop and seek assistance for the victim. He definitely meant to kill her.

Yes. This may well qualify as 'premeditated' even if it wasn't preplanned.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 09:28 PM

Autopsy states she was wearing only one glass stud earring.......will be very telling if LE found the mate to that earring in the Cooper's home.

Nothing was mentioned in the items seized list...

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 09:30 PM

That poor woman!:(

I think BC tried to dress her. Although, putting that sports bra on must have been a challenge for him if he put it over her head

I agree with this theory. Getting a sports bra on and over the shoulders is a LOT of work even when you're alive and trying to put one on. I think he got it as far down as he could and gave up (rather than the opposite of pulling it up to stage it).

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 09:32 PM

Autopsy states she was wearing only one glass stud earring.......will be very telling if LE found the mate to that earring in the Cooper's home. More than likely he would not have noticed she had on only one earring when disposing of her and therefore would not have known to search the room for the missing earring.

Maybe with any luck, they found out what car wash he took the 325 i to to vacuum out the "spilled gas" and found the mate in the vacuum cannister.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 09:41 PM

Maybe with any luck, they found out what car wash he took the 325 i to to vacuum out the "spilled gas" and found the mate in the vacuum cannister.

I was hoping the earring mate would be found stuck to the trunk mat or somehow in one of the pillows they removed or something. A vacuum at a car wash is so unbelievably elusive. But stranger things have happened.

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 09:55 PM

Maybe with any luck, they found out what car wash he took the 325 i to to vacuum out the "spilled gas" and found the mate in the vacuum cannister.

Would there have been a warrant for this - or not necessarily? (ie, if car wash owner agrees, then no warrant is necessary perhaps?)

ncsu95

09-29-2008, 09:58 PM

Based on the information that has been released so far...I would say it is unlikely that he will ever be charged. This one will be hard to prove.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 10:01 PM

Based on the information that has been released so far...I would say it is unlikely that he will ever be charged. This one will be hard to prove. Why do you think that? They've released so little at this point.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 10:02 PM

Would there have been a warrant for this - or not necessarily? (ie, if car wash owner agrees, then no warrant is necessary perhaps?)

Not necessarily, the search warrant. Why would the owner refuse to let LE look, he has no dog in the fight or breach of confidentiality.

momto3kids

09-29-2008, 10:11 PM

I just pulled out my daughters book"BODIES of EVIDENCE" by Brian Innes, chapter is 'Breath of Life.' Here are a few sentences I found interesting and of some help.

If the strangler has kept the pressure up for some time, the characteristic congestion and petechiae will be seen in the face of the victim. If, on the other hand death takes place within a few seconds, they do not appear.

Congestion, cyanosis and petechiae will develop if the pressure is maintained for more than 15 seconds. A strip of soft fabric is likely to leave a relatively faint and undefined mark; a broad cloth, such as a scarf or towel, can leave one or more narrow marks. If the killer has attacked from behind, the mark will be only across the front of the throat.

jilly

09-29-2008, 10:15 PM

Ms. Jilly :blowkiss:

The hyoid bone often is damaged during strangulation efforts, it becomes more subject to damage with age as well. It does not take a great deal of effort to damage this skeletal component. One thing I do know - I hope they get this sucker for premeditation - it can take up to 4 minutes to kill someone this way. In four minutes one has plenty of time to make a decision to stop and seek assistance for the victim. He definitely meant to kill her.

Hey RC! :blowkiss: Thanks for the additional info on it not taking much effort to fracture that bone.
I agree premed for sure.

The AR says"....she died of external causes, homicidal violence, most likely asphyxia by strangulation."
What does external causes mean? And, with them saying this, is there a possibility she was alive at the time she was left?

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 10:17 PM

external cause = someone else did it (i.e. not self-inflicted)

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 10:19 PM

Hey RC! :blowkiss: Thanks for the additional info on it not taking much effort to fracture that bone.
I agree premed for sure.

The AR says"....she died of external causes, homicidal violence, most likely asphyxia by strangulation."
What does external causes mean? And, with them saying this, is there a possibility she was alive at the time she was left/

I'm thinking that is a way of saying the death was definitely not natural and the cause was the application of some force to her body under a violent circumstance. These things to me are hard to determine from these reports as there will be an analysis of the bone in an effort to determine the angle of the pressure and the force. All the report says is that it happened. The notes will tell if they believe it was a frontal assault or if it was applied from behind - too many things unknown.

momto3kids

09-29-2008, 10:20 PM

I agree with this theory. Getting a sports bra on and over the shoulders is a LOT of work even when you're alive and trying to put one on. I think he got it as far down as he could and gave up (rather than the opposite of pulling it up to stage it).
She was in a black, gray & red athletic bra and supposedly had on a white t-shirt when she went jogging....:waitasec: BC should have put a white or light colored bra on NC since he stated she had a white t-shirt on.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 10:23 PM

She was in a black, gray & red athletic bra and supposedly had on a white t-shirt when she went jogging....:waitasec: BC should have put a white or light colored bra on NC since he stated she had a white t-shirt on. Doesn't seem like he put any tshirt on her (let alone shorts, socks or shoes). :rolleyes:

ETA: but don't forget he said he 'assumed' what she was wearing since he didn't actually see her leave to go 'jogging.'

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 10:26 PM

She was in a black, gray & red athletic bra and supposedly had on a white t-shirt when she went jogging....:waitasec: BC should have put a white or light colored bra on NC since he stated she had a white t-shirt on.

One thing about this - K & B must be going nuts trying to get LE to tell them if there were any other items of clothing found in the area where Nancy was found that were turned in for analysis. They must be wondering the same thing we are - WTH - no clothing except a sports bra ? No shoes, no socks, no shorts, nothing else, no signs of sexual assualt, no id, no money, nothing worth stealing except maybe one earring...hmmmmm.

Bet they are none to happy with this development. :dance:

Wonder if Nancy had stopped wearing her wedding ring or if the killer has it. No watch, considering she was suppose to be somewhere at 8 am and in photos of her running she appears to have some timing device on her wrist.

jilly

09-29-2008, 10:33 PM

I was hoping the earring mate would be found stuck to the trunk mat or somehow in one of the pillows they removed or something. A vacuum at a car wash is so unbelievably elusive. But stranger things have happened.

I've already forgotten:bang: but when exactly did LE do a search in the house?
I would guess that she lost that earring when she was struggling with him in which case there's a good chance that BC found it before LE. STILL, it was a stud. They're hard to find at the best of times when you lose one. Even if you lose the backing the stud can hang on for awhile.

momto3kids

09-29-2008, 10:33 PM

Doesn't seem like he put any tshirt on her (let alone shorts, socks or shoes). :rolleyes:

ETA: but don't forget he said he 'assumed' what she was wearing since he didn't actually see her leave to go 'jogging.'

The LE affidavit states BC said in fact he saw her in a white t-shirt. What I am saying if she had left home with a white t'shirt on would she be wearing this black bra? Just points to what most of us know...she never went jogging or she would have had a white or light colored bra on.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 10:36 PM

I've already forgotten:bang: but when exactly did LE do a search in the house?

7/15 at night crime scene tape went up and 7/16 all day search I think.

jmflu

09-29-2008, 10:36 PM

I am wondering if the way she was found (without shoes and socks, etc.) led LE to be so suspicious of Brad that that was the impetus for them to give custody to the Rentzs. Could they see the obvious lie he told that she went jogging?

momto3kids

09-29-2008, 10:37 PM

I don't know if this has already been posted...

Also in light of the autopsy report Cooper's family released a statement. "Today's news marks a point that is particularly poignant and painful but necessary to further the evidentiary process leading to a conviction of the person or persons responsible for Nancy's murder."

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6421441

Also WTVD came on just now about NC case and said see what the family has to say about the release of the autopsy. I don't know if they are going to be on camera or not...

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 10:40 PM

The LE affidavit states BC said in fact he saw her in a white t-shirt. What I am saying if she had left home with a white t'shirt on would she be wearing this black bra? Just points to what most of us know...she never went jogging or she would have had a white or light colored bra on.

good point! This was a woman who was trying to start a fashion consulting business...she would not have paired a black running bra w/a white Tshirt.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 10:41 PM

I am wondering if the way she was found (without shoes and socks, etc.) led LE to be so suspicious of Brad that that was the impetus for them to give custody to the Rentzs. Could they see the obvious lie he told that she went jogging?

JMO - on the 14th, Chief Bazemore was saying this was not a random crime - LE already knew something. Finding the body and what was present and what was not, as well as the ruling of homicide - definitely shows Nancy never left the house under her own power to go running. The absence of clothing says she didn't go running, the single stud earring says she wasn't snatched for a robbery, and the lack of a sexual assault indicates there was no intent on the part of the killer to do so. Could be all of these things were relayed to Judge Sasser.

jilly

09-29-2008, 10:43 PM

external cause = someone else did it (i.e. not self-inflicted)

I'm thinking that is a way of saying the death was definitely not natural and the cause was the application of some force to her body under a violent circumstance. These things to me are hard to determine from these reports as there will be an analysis of the bone in an effort to determine the angle of the pressure and the force. All the report says is that it happened. The notes will tell if they believe it was a frontal assault or if it was applied from behind - too many things unknown.

Thanks to both of you! I got it!:)

RC I don't know about you, but I feel a lot more confident with this AR than I did with Michelle's. No mention of Dr Clarke anywhere either! Looks like Butts approved it or whatever.

Anderson

09-29-2008, 10:46 PM

I am wondering if the way she was found (without shoes and socks, etc.) led LE to be so suspicious of Brad that that was the impetus for them to give custody to the Rentzs. Could they see the obvious lie he told that she went jogging?

Yes, and LE had already noticed that her keys and cell phone were left behind on that first day, when Brad had an unexpected visit from them. . . . So when she is found in that state, their suspicions must have been deeply aroused.

Like everyone else, I am wondering what happened to the shoes and socks. It seems likely that there never were any on her feet that fateful morning. Poor Nancy.

jilly

09-29-2008, 10:46 PM

7/15 at night crime scene tape went up and 7/16 all day search I think.

Thanks SG!

jmflu

09-29-2008, 10:47 PM

JMO - on the 14th, Chief Bazemore was saying this was not a random crime - LE already knew something. Finding the body and what was present and what was not, as well as the ruling of homicide - definitely shows Nancy never left the house under her own power to go running. The absence of clothing says she didn't go running, the single stud earring says she wasn't snatched for a robbery, and the lack of a sexual assault indicates there was no intent on the part of the killer to do so. Could be all of these things were relayed to Judge Sasser.

Can the defense come up with something crazy like, instead of going jogging, maybe she went to her secret lover's home, and perhaps she was getting undressed and they got in an arguement and was killed then?

Oh, well, maybe not, since she would have taken her keys with her, right?

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 10:47 PM

Thanks to both of you! I got it!:)

RC I don't know about you, but I feel a lot more confident with this AR than I did with Michelle's. No mention of Dr Clarke anywhere either! Looks like Butts approved it or whatever.

Yes - no Dr. Clarke - that's a good thing !

Despite no observable evidence of a sexual assault, the ME did go ahead and conduct the routine tests to prove it. I saw Clarke's name on another recently poste autopsy however - the Wynn case. He's still around.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 10:48 PM

Can the defense come up with something crazy like, instead of going jogging, maybe she went to her secret lover's home, and perhaps she was getting undressed and they got in an arguement and was killed then?

I'm sure they will try something crazy but K & B has to know by now that Brad's cooperation has been, shall we say slanted ? But as you say - all her normal stuff was a t home - stuff normally with her.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 10:50 PM

I am wondering if the way she was found (without shoes and socks, etc.) led LE to be so suspicious of Brad that that was the impetus for them to give custody to the Rentzs. Could they see the obvious lie he told that she went jogging?

Different jurisdiction/judge handles custody orders; LE makes no determination regarding custody.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 10:53 PM

Where are her running shoes?

did they get dumped? left in the house?

jmflu

09-29-2008, 10:54 PM

Different jurisdiction/judge handles custody orders; LE makes no determination regarding custody.

Ok, so could LE have advised said judge and said judge ruled because of that?

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 10:54 PM

Can the defense come up with something crazy like, instead of going jogging, maybe she went to her secret lover's home, and perhaps she was getting undressed and they got in an arguement and was killed then?

Based on what we currently know (still not much) the defense could easily describe such a scenario. It's of course our old friend Theory B (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2465948&postcount=171) (someone she knew, besides BC did it), and it certainly hasn't been categorically eliminated by todays information. [ Certainly Theory C is pretty much off the table, and for the most part was prior to today anyway. ].

Lots of "Theory B" variants could be described by the defense I'm sure. The one you outline is an example. Another example I posted a few weeks ago: She's downstairs, someone she "knows" arrives at the house (an (ahem) "unexpected" visitor). She hurriedly gets in the car with them (they aren't supposed to be at the house...), doesn't grab the usual things, and they drive off, they talk, things degenerate, the visitor then tries to stage her like she was found.

The lack of (known) warrants for any other person/premises really seems to remove support for Theory B at this point (though if LE has "nothing" to go on, they have no basis for a warrant either).

Full clarification: I'm not saying Theory B is what happened, I'm just saying, based on information we learned about today (and the other (little) information we know), it still seems to be 'on the table' at least to some extent, and certainly from a defense attorney's perspective.

jmflu

09-29-2008, 10:54 PM

Where are her running shoes?

did they get dumped? left in the house?

Did SW say the described shoes were taken at all?

jmflu

09-29-2008, 10:57 PM

Another example I posted a few weeks ago: She's downstairs, someone she knows arrives at the house (an (ahem) "unexpected" visitor). She gets in the car with them, and they drive off, they talk, things degenerate.

Wouldn't explain why no shoes or socks, though...

momto3kids

09-29-2008, 10:57 PM

Where are her running shoes?

did they get dumped? left in the house?
Having 2.5 hours before he returned home for the LE he could have gone to Fayetteville and back..A local dump or even LTF.
We sure know he didnt go to JJ or Western Wake looking for her.:mad:

Anderson

09-29-2008, 10:57 PM

Where are her running shoes?

did they get dumped? left in the house?

Could that be why shoes were listed as items that were taken from the house in the search warrant?

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 10:57 PM

Ok, so could LE have advised said judge and said judge ruled because of that?

I don't think so. The Rentz family, with their lawyer, took this to family court on an 'emergency' basis. There would have to be more than 'we think he did it cause it looks hinky to LE and to us too' to pull custody away from the father.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 10:57 PM

Where are her running shoes?

did they get dumped? left in the house?

Since the running shoes confiscated under the search warrant weren't identified as men's or women's shoes - it could be that the blue and gray tennis shoes were Nancy's.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 10:58 PM

Could that be why shoes were listed as items that were taken from the house in the search warrant?

Yes more than one pair of shoes were seized (3 pairs in fact). However, the 'blue/gray running shoes' were not otherwise identified by size so we don't know who those belong to. The other 2 pairs were Rainbow flipflops and a pair of pumps.

jmflu

09-29-2008, 11:00 PM

'blue/gray running shoes' might have been BC's, found with mud on them!

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 11:01 PM

Based on what we currently know (still not much) the defense could easily describe such a scenario. It's of course our old friend Theory B (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2465948&postcount=171) (someone she knew, besides BC did it), and it certainly hasn't been categorically eliminated by todays information.

So Nancy left her home wearing only a jogging bra, no shorts, no socks, no shoes? Or she had them on but whoever she left with killed her for some reason and decided to remove her shorts, shoes, socks, and one earring, not rob her or commit a sexual assault, and take these clothes and dump them somewhere away from the body? For what reason?

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 11:03 PM

Having 2.5 hours before he returned home for the LE he could have gone to Fayetteville and back..A local dump or even LTF.
We sure know he didnt go to JJ or Western Wake looking for her.:mad:

He could have gone a lot of places indeed. Her body sure wasn't 'staged' very well, having been dumped sans shorts, socks or shoes.

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 11:03 PM

Wouldn't explain why no shoes or socks, though...

Right. With Theory A, I guess the assumption is BC was trying to make it "look like" an attack... If BC could think this is how one might look after an attack... so might the "visitor" perp too though. Either way, to me, is a weird explanation of no shoes. Doesn't seem reasonable (to me) to "stage" someone this way. [ So it's a good point - how she was found isn't totally consistent with Theory B, but on the other hand, as someone else posted, who knows what someone might be thinking when they dump someone. Maybe there was some evidence (of the visitor/perp) was on the shoes, or on the shorts, so they got rid of it. Agree it's a stretch though ]

I guess the most plausible explanation for how she was found is Theory A and not that BC was trying to 'stage it', but rather, that he was in a hurry, and this is all he had time to do. Is it also odd though - to be in a hurry to dispose... and yet have time to stage a phone call and a couple of trips to HT (to get naked green machine juice)?

Anderson

09-29-2008, 11:06 PM

Yes more than one pair of shoes were seized (3 pairs in fact). However, the 'blue/gray running shoes' were not otherwise identified by size so we don't know who those belong to. The other 2 pairs were Rainbow flipflops and a pair of pumps.

Just a thought

I remember that in BC's initial affidavit he mentioned that NC's family had asked for her hat(s?) and jewellry. I have always wondered if there was a hat that she would wear to go jogging or a piece of jewelry that she wore everyday, something that she had recently mentioned to Krista. But, then he would have known about that I suppose? But perhaps not. Anyway, if this was the case, then that would have further concerned NC's parents, and would have become additional information used in the investigation.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 11:07 PM

Right. With Theory A, I guess the assumption is BC was trying to make it "look like" an attack... If BC could think this is how one might look after an attack... so might the "visitor" perp too though. Either way, to me, is a weird explanation of no shoes. Doesn't seem reasonable (to me) to "stage" someone this way. [ So it's a good point - how she was found isn't totally consistent with Theory B, but on the other hand, as someone else posted, who knows what someone might be thinking when they dump someone. Maybe there was some evidence (of the visitor/perp) was on the shoes, or on the shorts, so they got rid of it. Agree it's a stretch though ]

I guess the most plausible explanation for how she was found is Theory A and not that BC was trying to 'stage it', but rather, that he was in a hurry, and this is all he had time to do. Is it also odd though - to be in a hurry to dispose... and yet have time to stage a phone call and a couple of trips to HT (to get naked green machine juice)?

BC didn't stage anything IMO - he simply disposed of her as she was murdered - he didn't try to dress her, didn't try to make it look like and attack - nothing - he just dumped her and ran. He went to the store so he could prove where he was in case anyone saw his car that morning. He went the second time to have a phone record of supposedly Nancy calling him at the store for juice. He bought detergent because he had things to clean. He's big on paper records.

jumpstreet

09-29-2008, 11:08 PM

So Nancy left her home wearing only a jogging bra, no shorts, no socks, no shoes? Or she had them on but whoever she left with killed her for some reason and decided to remove her shorts, shoes, and socks and dump them somewhere away from the body? For what reason?

Good points. I think (hope) my response above to jmflu covered it.
Again, not saying Theory B is a slam-dunk or anything, just thinking I'm not sure it's totally off the table (especially from a defense attorney's perspective - which was the original question).

With Theory A (BC did it), the thought on why she was found this way is because BC was in a hurry to move her?

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 11:13 PM

Jump, I think where you're getting stuck in these various scenarios is that you believe BC has some special knowledge or expertise (beyond his VoIP expertise) or is especially clever & cunning and you are painting your scenarios and comparing what you think such a smart/clever/careful/cunning/experienced person 'should' do in each scenario and then in addition how they 'should' react with either a guilty or innocent conscience. And I think these assumptions about BC and about what a person with such attributes would do/or how they 'should' act is tripping you up since BC has not proved to be any of these attributes you are assigning him. You'd probably do better by just following the evidence and looking at the actions of a normal person (not 'innocent' and not 'guilty') and see what fits without twisting things around and around.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 11:16 PM

I am wondering if the way she was found (without shoes and socks, etc.) led LE to be so suspicious of Brad that that was the impetus for them to give custody to the Rentzs. Could they see the obvious lie he told that she went jogging?

jmflu,

If you read the Findings of Fact made by the Judge in the Ex Parte - it clearly says testimony of and from Law Enforcement. LE told this judge something or at least responded to her questions in order for her to make some of the Findings of Fact.

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/07/17/3222032/20080717103017508.pdf

CyberPro

09-29-2008, 11:21 PM

jmflu,

If you read the Findings of Fact made by the Judge in the Ex Parte - it clearly says testimony of and from Law Enforcement. LE told this judge something or at least responded to her questions in order for her to make some of the Findings of Fact.

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/07/17/3222032/20080717103017508.pdf

RC,

I was about to post to this effect from memory. IIRC the findings stated something like: "Based upon knowledge and belief NC did not leave to go jogging..."

Knowledge and Belief sounds like they had something a bit more than a hunch.

CyberPro

jilly

09-29-2008, 11:23 PM

BC didn't stage anything IMO - he simply disposed of her as she was murdered - he didn't try to dress her, didn't try to make it look like and attack - nothing - he just dumped her and ran. He went to the store so he could prove where he was in case anyone saw his car that morning. He went the second time to have a phone record of supposedly Nancy calling him at the store for juice. He bought detergent because he had things to clean. He's big on paper records.

Hmmmm. I dunno RC. I usually agree with ya!:) I'm thinking that he stewed about everything while Nancy was still at the party that nite and then all he!! broke loose when she got home or shortly thereafter.

She normally slept in clothes didn't she? - with her car keys?

So how do you think this all went down?

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 11:24 PM

RC,

I was about to post to this effect from memory. IIRC the findings stated something like: "Based upon knowledge and belief NC did not leave to go jogging..."

Knowledge and Belief sounds like they had something a bit more than a hunch.

CyberPro

It also references testimony from LE - and yes knowledge and belief would be their perspective as well at that time.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 11:32 PM

Hmmmm. I dunno RC. I usually agree with ya!:) I'm thinking that he stewed about everything while Nancy was still at the party that nite and then all he!! broke loose when she got home or shortly thereafter.

She normally slept in clothes didn't she? - with her car keys?

So how do you think this all went down?

Quite honestly Jilly - I think she was murdered prior to 6 am - not when she came home. I do think there was a fight, at least a verbal one but I just don't think it was close to the time she returned from the party. The lack of stomach contents tends to suggest that any food consumed at the party was digested - this takes time. I also think the trips to HT was a mask to explain why his car may have been seen that morning while disposing her body. For a combination of reasons my gut just says she was murdered most likely between 5 and 6 am. The autopsy further enhances that for me - the lack of clothing in particular, and the focus of LE on the boot area of the 325 - just adds up to a later time frame for murder IMO.

SleuthyGal

09-29-2008, 11:36 PM

Something was going on at 4am in that house. Brad says both he and Nancy got up (to attend to Katie) at 4am. Why would he admit to a 4am time for being awake? They slept in separate rooms. Why would both need to get up to attend to Katie? Who got up first and then woke the other up? And why was the other parent 'needed' to help with Katie?

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 11:39 PM

Something was going on at 4am in that house. Brad says both he and Nancy got up (to attend to Katie) at 4am. Why would he admit to a 4am time for being awake?

Maybe Katie really did wake up - maybe some lights were turned on, maybe he was so paranoid about his neighbors watching him he knew he had to admit to being up incase one of those nosey neighbors or the newspaper delivery person saw the lights on. Lots of reasons to admit it.

Anderson

09-29-2008, 11:47 PM

:yes: And he didn't mention the 4am wake up in the initial affidavit. Covering his tracks, I think.

Maybe Katie really did wake up - maybe some lights were turned on, maybe he was so paranoid about his neighbors watching him he knew he had to admit to being up incase one of those nosey neighbors or the newspaper delivery person saw the lights on. Lots of reasons to admit it.

raisincharlie

09-29-2008, 11:57 PM

:yes: And he didn't mention the 4am wake up in the initial affidavit. Covering his tracks, I think.

There you go - apparently no one from the neighborhood saw the lights or noticed he was up or saw his car. Therefore - why say anything ? He obviously felt LE bought his story hook line and sinker. And I must say - Cary PD must be very slick cos it seems to me they got a lot of information from Brad before he hired himself a lawyer - good for them !

jilly

09-30-2008, 12:23 AM

Quite honestly Jilly - I think she was murdered prior to 6 am - not when she came home. I do think there was a fight, at least a verbal one but I just don't think it was close to the time she returned from the party. The lack of stomach contents tends to suggest that any food consumed at the party was digested - this takes time. I also think the trips to HT was a mask to explain why his car may have been seen that morning while disposing her body. For a combination of reasons my gut just says she was murdered most likely between 5 and 6 am. The autopsy further enhances that for me - the lack of clothing in particular, and the focus of LE on the boot area of the 325 - just adds up to a later time frame for murder IMO.

OK - I can go with that but if that's the case, since you don't believe he dressed her, how'd she end up with just a sports bra on?:confused:

raisincharlie

09-30-2008, 12:26 AM

OK - I can go with that but if that's the case, since you don't believe he dressed her, how'd she end up with just a sports bra on?:confused:

Maybe she was just getting ready to shower or she was getting out of the shower - maybe she was just getting ready to run and was changing from pj's or whatever she slept in - I dunno.

But her clothing (lack of clothing) doesn't really say to me that someone else tried to put it on her honestly.

ETA - remember LE noticed cleaning products in Nancy's bathroom on the Saturday she went missing per the probable cause affidavit.

jumpstreet

09-30-2008, 12:31 AM

Jump, I think where you're getting stuck in these various scenarios is that you believe BC has some special knowledge or expertise (beyond his VoIP expertise) or is especially clever & cunning and you are painting your scenarios and comparing what you think such a smart/clever/careful/cunning/experienced person 'should' do in each scenario and then in addition how they 'should' react with either a guilty or innocent conscience. And I think these assumptions about BC and about what a person with such attributes would do/or how they 'should' act is tripping you up since BC has not proved to be any of these attributes you are assigning him. You'd probably do better by just following the evidence and looking at the actions of a normal person (not 'innocent' and not 'guilty') and see what fits without twisting things around and around.

Yeah, good feedback SG. I am trying (best I can) to consider all the evidence (and our explanations of it). In general, I am also trying to be very careful not to 'discount all that doesn't support my theory', while 'embracing all information that does'. I think this is key to remaining objective, though it does take a little effort. I'm also to look at consider all reasonably possible scenarios (based on the evidence and associated explanations), and go from there.

This sub-thread (on Theory B) was just a response to a posted query about whether the defense could still realistically paint a picture that it was a 'stranger that NC knew, and not BC'. My response to that was 'of course', and then I did a thumbnail sketch of how such a picture might look.

Those of us who have him guilty, do have him being "calculating" enough to go to HT (twice) to stage a phone call, making purchases while the kids were at home alone, and that's our explanation of the evidence we know. And yet he's "sloppy" enough to not worry about what she was wearing (the evidence from today). Not that the above two things are incompatible, but they do seem on face value as slightly 'inconsistent' to me. That's not to say that killers always act consistently (of course they don't), but it's potentially inconsistent enough for a defense attorney to paint an alternative picture.

SleuthyGal

09-30-2008, 12:36 AM

Those of us who have him guilty, do have him being "calculating" enough to go to HT (twice) to stage a phone call, making purchases while the kids were at home alone, and that's our explanation of the evidence we know.

1. He HAD to go to the store to get detergent in order to do the laundry & cleaning at some point. Makes logical sense to do it before the kids wake up AND of course it works in case anyone saw the car that early.

2. The one thing he does know & understand in-depth is phone technology. He is very focused on proof through phone records.

raisincharlie

09-30-2008, 12:36 AM

Yeah, good feedback SG. I am trying (best I can) to consider all the evidence (and our explanations of it). In general, I am also trying to be very careful not to 'discount all that doesn't support my theory', while 'embracing all information that does'. I think this is key to remaining objective, though it does take a little effort. I'm also to look at consider all reasonably possible scenarios (based on the evidence and associated explanations), and go from there.

This sub-thread (on Theory B) was just a response to a posted query about whether the defense could still realistically paint a picture that it was a 'stranger that NC knew, and not BC'. My response to that was 'of course', and then I did a thumbnail sketch of how such a picture might look.

Those of us who have him guilty, do have him being "calculating" enough to go to HT (twice) to stage a phone call, making purchases while the kids were at home alone, and that's our explanation of the evidence we know. And yet he's "sloppy" enough to not worry about what she was wearing (the evidence from today). Not that the above two things are incompatible, but they do seem on face value as slightly 'inconsistent' to me. That's not to say that killers always act consistently (of course they don't), but it's potentially inconsistent enough for a defense attorney to paint an alternative picture.

Recall the saying -"hindsight is 20/20" ?

Any actions after the murder and disposal would be hindsight. Brad didn't think anyone would notice he was wearing different shoes on his second trip to HT either - the devil is in the details, obviously he wasn't thinking about small details.

SleuthyGal

09-30-2008, 12:38 AM

Yes, what one might think of as him being especially wily and crafty might just be dumb maneuvers because he didn't think everything through or pay attention to the level of details that others do or would.

jilly

09-30-2008, 12:43 AM

Maybe she was just getting ready to shower or she was getting out of the shower - maybe she was just getting ready to run and was changing from pj's or whatever she slept in - I dunno.

But her clothing (lack of clothing) doesn't really say to me that someone else tried to put it on her honestly.

Fair enough.:) I can't think anymore :crazy: so better say:bedtime:G'nite!:blowkiss:

SleuthyGal

09-30-2008, 12:47 AM

G'night Jilly!

I feel so sad that Nancy was left (essentially) nude, out on the side of that drainage embankment, like a piece of garbage, left to rot. What a horrible end and with no dignity.

raisincharlie

09-30-2008, 01:00 AM

I would ask what time her usual 'early am' Saturday jogs were.
If she often left around 6 am, that very well could be the case.
....assuming he 1st went to the HT at 6:15 am after dumping the body.

It was Brad himself who commented in his original affidavit that Nancy was scheduled to run the day before with Carey Clark at 5:45 am. Line 175 by the way. Maybe weekends were different but considering she had a time to be at a friends house at 8 am - a 7 am run seems unrealistic, especially since no watch was reported as being found on her body. Strange she would go at 7am IMO.

CyberPro

09-30-2008, 01:52 AM

Recall the saying -"hindsight is 20/20" ?

Any actions after the murder and disposal would be hindsight. Brad didn't think anyone would notice he was wearing different shoes on his second trip to HT either - the devil is in the details, obviously he wasn't thinking about small details.

Nope, this seems to be something of a common thread in a lot of cases. I can understand it to a degree. Just like many situations that have a lot of emotional content, time passes in a very strange way.

I am not sure what you might have experienced in your personal life, but if you are shocked about something strongly or are experiencing something else with a lot of emotion in some ways it seems that time flys by very quickly, OTOH, you might find that you have looked at your watch 3 times in the last 10 minutes. Other times, you stop for 5 minutes, but the clock says 2 hours have passed. This can happen if you receive word of the sudden death of a loved one, or perhaps the birth of a baby that you are involved with.

If BC did this, and did not have it planned out in great detail, he was shocked and working as quickly as possible to cover the tracks, get rid of the evidence and he had to get this done before the kids woke up! Wow, he would have had a busy morning! He has to figure out where to put the body, lay some false trails, clean the house... in this situation, I think the calls to him about HT were pretty inspired.

I lean strongly towards the TOD being between 1 and 2 AM, due to the amount of things he had to get done, and I think that unless it was preplanned for weeks, he probably had to take some time to get a grip and figure out what he was going to do.

Another point, the killer has to do all of these tasks under great stress and a short period of time. They think they have covered all of the bases, but LE has ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD to examine everything in minute detail. I would think it is nearly impossible to get away with killing someone close to you, since you are going to be a suspect almost automatically. This does not always apply to a stranger killing someone, most of the time they get caught because the cannot keep their mouth shut.

CyberPro

raisincharlie

09-30-2008, 09:32 AM

Nope, this seems to be something of a common thread in a lot of cases. I can understand it to a degree. Just like many situations that have a lot of emotional content, time passes in a very strange way.

I am not sure what you might have experienced in your personal life, but if you are shocked about something strongly or are experiencing something else with a lot of emotion in some ways it seems that time flys by very quickly, OTOH, you might find that you have looked at your watch 3 times in the last 10 minutes. Other times, you stop for 5 minutes, but the clock says 2 hours have passed. This can happen if you receive word of the sudden death of a loved one, or perhaps the birth of a baby that you are involved with.

If BC did this, and did not have it planned out in great detail, he was shocked and working as quickly as possible to cover the tracks, get rid of the evidence and he had to get this done before the kids woke up! Wow, he would have had a busy morning! He has to figure out where to put the body, lay some false trails, clean the house... in this situation, I think the calls to him about HT were pretty inspired.

I lean strongly towards the TOD being between 1 and 2 AM, due to the amount of things he had to get done, and I think that unless it was preplanned for weeks, he probably had to take some time to get a grip and figure out what he was going to do.

Another point, the killer has to do all of these tasks under great stress and a short period of time. They think they have covered all of the bases, but LE has ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD to examine everything in minute detail. I would think it is nearly impossible to get away with killing someone close to you, since you are going to be a suspect almost automatically. This does not always apply to a stranger killing someone, most of the time they get caught because the cannot keep their mouth shut.

CyberPro

So you think it took hours to carry a body out of the house, put it in the car and drive less than 2 miles away to dump the body ? I don't get that - not being so close to his home, not being in an area he was absorbed in on a day to day basis. Doesn't fly with me. He didn't drive any significant distance, he didn't even try to hide the body, it was clearly out in the open. Very little effort involved in this, very little time.

Since we now know COD - we now also know there would not have been a huge bloody mess to clean up, no blood spattered walls, no weapons to dispose of. He admits to cleaning the very morning she went missing. What all would he have had to clean given the COD ? What would he have cleaned with that he would have had to cart somewhere to dispose of? Not a lot really and certainly nothing that would have required disposal at a location of significant distance.

As to the invention of a phone call - given his line of work, seems this thought would have been second nature to him and not one requiring any real study to come up with. I totally disagree this took hours or any great thought afterwards. I also disagree that he would have had to taken time to get a grip - this guy is colder than frozen peas. But you are right, LE has lots of time to look and they will. Spousal murders are not always easily solved, for obvious reasons - DNA is often to be expected, which means the strongest evidence available to a DA may well be a mute point.

Given the lack of stomach contents - either Nancy ate nothing at the neighborhood party, especially no meat, or she was murdered much later than 1 am.

momto3kids

09-30-2008, 12:50 PM

I still feel NC was murdered shortly after coming home. We don't know exactly when she got home, just after midnight per BC affidavit.

The strongest most compelling to me is the red fluid, but also the other things I have noted.

The red fluid is most likely wine. If it were blood it would have been noted by the ME. Below is a link referring UP to 2 hours to complete absorption. Possible wine still in the stomach puts this within 2 hours if not sooner after her last cup of wine.

Onion takes longer to exit the stomach. Link below. Meat was obviously not noted per autopsy, so this would answer why a possible piece of onion remained. Stomach contents usual are emptied within 6 hrs. She eats ribs at sometime between 6-8pm, stomach empty between 12- 2am. This 6 hour rule has been a rule of thumb for the last 30 yrs I worked in surgery. Anyone who has ever had a procedure is told nothing to eat or drink after midnight.

Brownish green vegetable material IMO is vomit. Again, the link states vegetable take longer to exit. DD is big on vegetable dishes as she has posted. I feel it would have been stated vegetation. Unless vomit is immediate once it has been in the stomach with other contents and stomach acid it will be brownish green. At least that is all the vomit I have unfortuanetly witnessed.

Possible wine still in stomach, within 2 hours of last glass or sooner. Possible vomit of vegetables, within 6 hours of last bite. IMO she was murdered between 1-3am.

When large amounts of alcohol are consumed over a short time interval, or when a large quantity of food is eaten with the alcohol, the absorption phase may not be complete for up to two (2) hours after last consumption.
http://www.forcon.ca/learning/alcohol.html

Some foods such as celery, onion, potato, corn and tomato skins typically take longer than meat or other foods to exit the stomach.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2671189/time-of-death-atlas

Normally patients are fasted for 2 hours after clear fluids and 6 hours following a meal before they are anesthetised. This is to reduce the chance of any residual food remaining within the stomach.
http://www.nda.ox.ac.uk/wfsa/html/u04/u04_003.htm

SleuthyGal

09-30-2008, 12:59 PM

Good info, Mto3K.

Daphne69

09-30-2008, 01:00 PM

Given the lack of stomach contents - either Nancy ate nothing at the neighborhood party, especially no meat, or she was murdered much later than 1 am.

I'm just not sure if I totally buy this. I would think she wouldn't eat much if anything after returning to the party from taking the kids home. I don't see a lot of women at parties eating a lot late into the evening. Usually, it's eat a short while after arriving (or when dinner is ready) and then drinks for the rest of the evening.

I checked around and kept seeing 3-4 hours for meat to leave the stomach. So, if NC quit eating around 8 or 8:30 (totally plausible if she wasn't feeling as well as reported), then an empty stomach wouldn't conflict with TOD being 1 or 2 or 3 am.

raisincharlie

09-30-2008, 01:13 PM

I'm just not sure if I totally buy this. I would think she wouldn't eat much if anything after returning to the party from taking the kids home. I don't see a lot of women at parties eating a lot late into the evening. Usually, it's eat a short while after arriving (or when dinner is ready) and then drinks for the rest of the evening.

I checked around and kept seeing 3-4 hours for meat to leave the stomach. So, if NC quit eating around 8 or 8:30 (totally plausible if she wasn't feeling as well as reported), then an empty stomach wouldn't conflict with TOD being 1 or 2 or 3 am.

I'm not much for making assumptions about what people do - such as how late they might eat at a party, consumption of snacks, or drink. For all we know she could have got up that morning and drank tomato juice... just saying, we don't know. But what I do know is the half life of caffine and it doesn't add up for me.

RaleighNC

09-30-2008, 01:17 PM

I agree that she was murdered shortly after she arrived home. I suspect that the topics of conversation during the party would shed some light as to her frame of mind - and that information has not been made public, but I am also thinking that she gained some strength by being around her friends at the party, drinking (liquid courage) and when she came home and he was pissed - she was less likely to shrink back and not get into an argument.

I can't see Brad either sleeping and then waking up mad enough to kill her, or stewing all night long and then killing her without a TON more noted trauma and violence on the ME's report.

Is it possible that she slept in the jog type bra when she was sleeping with the girls? What if she came home and didn't want to wake them - would she go sleep in a guest room and not feel comfortable or not have access to her usual nightclothes? Perhaps she grabbed a few clean things out of the laundry and went to the guest room and that is where the fight ensued.

Many unanswered questions from the night of the party. (Obviously) but ones that address her state of mind and what she talked to her friends about, etc. are especially intriguing - esp since she had noted he was back in hate mode. Their relationship had to be a topic of conversation that night.

Daphne69

09-30-2008, 01:29 PM

I'm not trying to say that I don't think she did have anything to eat after X time. I'm just saying that an empty stomach doesn't rule out being killed earlier than 5 or 6.

As for caffeine, I think that's the same kind of guess. Just because there's caffeine doesn't mean we know when or in what form she ingested it. Could be coffee, medication, energy drink, etc. Maybe it was from the party, maybe from that morning. Believing that it was morning, makes the same assumptions about what someone would do. BTW, what is the half-life?

Bottomline for me is that I agree with RaleighNC. I find it hard to believe that BC went to sleep and then woke up with enough anger to kill her first thing. I also find it hard to believe (but, admittedly, not impossible) that he stayed up all night arguing or stewing and then killed her around 5. That's a REALLY long time to keep that kind of energy up IMHO.

Star12

09-30-2008, 02:36 PM

Just my observations, opinions, and remembrances:

1. White tee shirt - BC said Nancy called out to him asking where it was. I think he said that because he knew she wasn't wearing a shirt.

2. Earring - I have pulled more than one post out of my ear pulling shirts etc. on/off.

3. Shoes - Yeah, betcha those blue/gray shoes were Nancy's usual running shoes. LE knew she was without shoes.

4. Rest of clothing - BC found out just how difficult it was to dress a corpse since he started with the jog bra - gave it up as a bad job and decided not to do the rest of the clothing. It's hard enough to dress an unwilling child, or an infant. An adult body would be more difficult. And then he figured that it would look more like she had been attacked by a stranger if she was without significant clothing and left in an isolated location.

5. I think Nancy was killed in the bedroom. LE took bed linen with unidentified stains. The deceased no longer has control of their body, and releases fluids. This would necessitate laundry-doing. Perhaps he missed a linen. And then, perhaps vomitus in the trunk - that had to be cleaned. BC had a whole lot of cleaning to do. Just no blood.

6. Eating at the party - IIRC Nancy brought the ribs, but didn't eat them. Didn't DD post on her blog at one point that at another of her earlier dinner parties that she was serving ribs, but Mrs. C couldn't eat them, so she had to make something else for her?

7. Whose bedroom? - It was told in one affidavit that Nancy had slept in the girls room with her clothing on, and with her keys. IMHO, this was not something that she did as a habit. I think she might have done it once or twice a while back, but not recently. She did have her own bedroom, and her keys were found downstairs.

8. And what about that piece of green plastic LE put in an envelope - Murder weapon?

9. TOD - I dunno. BC says lights were on at 4 am. Maybe they fought in the dark for a while - could have happened in the dark and he turned the lights on afterwards. And certainly Katie could have awakened because of the commotion, and BC diverted her attention in his office, to keep her from awakening Bella. Or Katie didn't awaken, and BC was in the office, on his computer, looking up where and how to dispose of the body, or how to clean the evidence, or????

So far I have seen nothing to specifically exonerate BC or cause doubt as to his culpability. And the autopsy falls right in line with that thinking. It's difficult to think of a person killing another person, but I can't shake the feeling that BC should be indicted and stand trial.

momto3kids

09-30-2008, 03:01 PM

8. And what about that piece of green plastic LE put in an envelope - Murder weapon?

Star...this is the one that really has me stumped. We don't know the size of the envelope, a letter size envelope of manila envelope? We don't know if it was a strong heavy plastic as in wrapping the body for transport or hard plastic such as a lid to something.

We know she didn't have any lacerations for the hard plastic to cause her harm. What would be large enough to wrap her in that is green plastic?

I will admit I am stumped by this one.:confused:

Maybe it had a print or fluid on it that was suspicious? But it said a piece was taken. IDK

jmflu

09-30-2008, 03:05 PM

6. Eating at the party - IIRC Nancy brought the ribs, but didn't eat them. Didn't DD post on her blog at one point that at another of her earlier dinner parties that she was serving ribs, but Mrs. C couldn't eat them, so she had to make something else for her? - Star

I just read it today, and it stated that Nancy would have loved them.

raisincharlie

09-30-2008, 03:09 PM

I'm not trying to say that I don't think she did have anything to eat after X time. I'm just saying that an empty stomach doesn't rule out being killed earlier than 5 or 6.

As for caffeine, I think that's the same kind of guess. Just because there's caffeine doesn't mean we know when or in what form she ingested it. Could be coffee, medication, energy drink, etc. Maybe it was from the party, maybe from that morning. Believing that it was morning, makes the same assumptions about what someone would do. BTW, what is the half-life?

Bottomline for me is that I agree with RaleighNC. I find it hard to believe that BC went to sleep and then woke up with enough anger to kill her first thing. I also find it hard to believe (but, admittedly, not impossible) that he stayed up all night arguing or stewing and then killed her around 5. That's a REALLY long time to keep that kind of energy up IMHO.

Guess that is my point - no way do the 6 or 7 pages of this report provide any real information that us peons can readily use. I have assumed nothing - the fact is in the report, red liquids were all that were found in the stomach. This says zero about TOD in reality with the way it is presented. Caffine was found as well. I take exception to the vomit theory however with respect to the brown green vegetable matter found somewhere on the 325. It makes zero sense to me that someone could selectively upchuck solids but yet the stomach retains red liquids with no mention of brown green vegetable matter being at least minutely being present.

I don't find it hard to believe, given the info in the LE affidavits about fighting all day the day before, that Brad could have gone to sleep and woke up the next morning in a ticked mood. This is somewhat supported by the reported history of events as far back as April - he was quite capable of doing nothing even when angry and obviously, he was rather angry in April. I also don't find it hard to believe Nancy was in no mood for it and talked back about it. I don't find it hard to believe things escalated either. I have seen nothing to rule this potential out just as I have seen nothing to rule out that she was murdered earlier. However I do have a tendency to look at numerous things at one time and see a connection. The connections I see are saying to me she was murdered closer to 6 am than to midnight. There is a reason that Brad's lawyers wanted the autopsy and the ME's notes, and it wasn't obviously for Brad to say she was in her running clothes such as he described...

jmflu

09-30-2008, 03:44 PM

It's possible they stayed up all night long arguing and THEN he killed her closer to 6 am. They may have never gone to bed, but still not have her dead right after she got home.

reddress58

09-30-2008, 04:45 PM

I wonder if there was any way ME could test the amount of salt on her jog bra from evaporated sweat. If she didn't go running, very little would be on her top.

jmflu

09-30-2008, 04:59 PM

I wonder if there was any way ME could test the amount of salt on her jog bra from evaporated sweat. If she didn't go running, very little would be on her top.

Interesting thought... but if she fought him in that top, she would have perspired in it...

reddress58

09-30-2008, 05:03 PM

Interesting thought... but if she fought him in that top, she would have perspired in it...
If it were CSI Miami, they would re-enact both scenarios and measure diiferent amounts of sweat produced, and then compare. :-)

momto3kids

09-30-2008, 05:39 PM

I've been thinking about lights on in BC home. In the front corner of their property is a steet light and directly behind their home on Lochmere Drive is one. This is from GOOGLE, not my checking. From what I have seen in past pictures they don't pull their blinds downstairs closed. I am sure there was enough light to get around downstairs and maybe what rooms upstairs are not being slept in. Those 2 lights gave him the only light he needed IMO.

Watching the media in the beginning go to his front door he didn't have the glass covered until later for privacy. With no glass in the garage doors he could get around with a light on and no one would have known.

We have a street light in front of our home in our cul-de-sac across the street and I can get around with no problem upstairs and downstairs. We actually have to close our bedroom (back of house)door because the light comes in our 2 story entrance and is annoying.

4am? Dealing with Bella, dealing with the body or trying to clean up his god awful mess he made. IMO

hroark2112

09-30-2008, 06:18 PM

A few people have mentioned the phone call while he was at HT from the family residence. I'm not a technogeek by any means, and am having a hard time coming up with a way to make your home phone call your cell phone when you're not in the house. Wouldn't he need the cell phone records to show a received call from his house for his story (the NC called when he was at HT) to be viable? If there was a call from the house to the cell, wouldn't that mean that either NC was alive & calling him, or that one of the girls called daddy?

jumpstreet

09-30-2008, 06:25 PM

A few people have mentioned the phone call while he was at HT from the family residence. I'm not a technogeek by any means, and am having a hard time coming up with a way to make your home phone call your cell phone when you're not in the house. Wouldn't he need the cell phone records to show a received call from his house for his story (the NC called when he was at HT) to be viable? If there was a call from the house to the cell, wouldn't that mean that either NC was alive & calling him, or that one of the girls called daddy?

A speculated explanation on this is that something along the lines of (a), he left is mobile phone (set to auto-answer) at HT somewhere (in a bush), then went back home and called it... or (b) he set something up at home (PC or fax machine) to originate a call to his mobile over the landline at a certain time, and he answered it while at HT (or nearby).

It's either something along those lines... OR... he's telling the truth. Unfortunately, even the phone records won't be conclusive as to which... :)

hroark2112

09-30-2008, 06:29 PM

The problem with the "leaving the phone at HT" theory is that your cell phone records normally don't show missed calls (unanswered calls) because you're not charged minutes for those. You've got to physically answer the phone for the call to show on the records.

The fax machine calling at a pre-set time is more plausible, I just wouldn't have the patience to listen to that stupid beeping sound from the fax machine for very long!!

ncnative

09-30-2008, 06:36 PM

Red fluid and what appears to be onion in the stomach of someone who is decomposing on the ground in the hot July sun with insects and predatory birds, etc... A decomposing digestive system seems like it would be difficult to autopsy. How much of that stomach content is from decomposition? How does a stomach in a deceased, decomposing body "behave" on the contents? Would its contents continue to be asborbed, such as the food and drink NC had prior to her death? I don't know. Sure, I could Google. I don't feel like reading lots of technical unpleasantries. Does anyone know?

jumpstreet

09-30-2008, 06:46 PM

The problem with the "leaving the phone at HT" theory is that your cell phone records normally don't show missed calls (unanswered calls) because you're not charged minutes for those. You've got to physically answer the phone for the call to show on the records.

The fax machine calling at a pre-set time is more plausible, I just wouldn't have the patience to listen to that stupid beeping sound from the fax machine for very long!!

Note I mentioned "left phone set to auto-answer". That gets it in the phone records (it wasn't a missed call). Some phones allow you to have it auto answer as soon as it rings (or shortly thereafter).

maconrich

09-30-2008, 06:53 PM

BC didn't stage anything IMO - he simply disposed of her as she was murdered - he didn't try to dress her, didn't try to make it look like and attack - nothing - he just dumped her and ran. He went to the store so he could prove where he was in case anyone saw his car that morning. He went the second time to have a phone record of supposedly Nancy calling him at the store for juice. He bought detergent because he had things to clean. He's big on paper records.

I absolutely agree. And the first part combined with the autopsy report...well it might be best if I paraphrase Mr. R and say he's a coward. There are so many words that I'd rather use but can't put on a family friendly site.

A surprise attack while N was dressing or undressing with her hands essentially 'tied' due to putting on the top makes sense and could account for BC not having his eyes ripped out in self defense.

I could see the bathroom (mentioned in another post) as the potential crime scene, but I so hope it was bedroom instead (due to the pillow and sheet that were removed). And since this person couldn't even manage to put a t-shirt on her before dumping her, (and given the amount of time it would have taken to kill her), I tend to doubt that it was a face to face attack. But I'll brace myself just in case...

I've intentionally tried to distance myself from this case for awhile because it's hit me so hard from day one. So, I've been reading more in the Caylee thread(s). I thought that might help prepare me for things here (like the autopsy report), but despite the general lack of civility and the fact a beautiful little child was (most likely) murdered, it hasn't hardened /helped me at all. Knowing that he threw her out there, face down and wearing nothing but that top makes me physically ill (and forget about even trying to sleep because the mental images are much to strong for that).

So IMO the state can take it's time and not file charges until they have him trapped like a rat in a very, very small cage. Because this is one rat I want to see nailed. Big time.

Singlovelaugh

10-01-2008, 09:22 AM

http://wake.mync.com/site/wake/news%7CCommunity%7CSports%7CLifestyles/story/10021/autopsy-report-shows-cary-woman-strangled

An autopsy report released by medical examiners in Chapel Hill states that Nancy Cooper was strangled to death.

Police had already said the 34-year old mother of two had been murdered, but until now, they had never given a cause of death.

Is this posted somewhere else? I looked but could not find it. Released yesterday so I thought it would be here somewhere...please remove this if it doesn't belong here. Thanks!

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 09:31 AM

Hi SingLove,

There are several 'sticky' threads at the top where such things are placed. One is the media thread, and the other place is a legal documents thread. This would probably fit best in the media thread.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 02:19 PM

There were a few things I found odd about the autopsy report. It could be a result of the decomposition of the body, but it seemed to contain very little detail. I lost a family member in February of this year to an accidental overdose. I was just looking at the autopsy report and it has every mole, insect bite and location of the electrode burns marked on the body shot. Another thing I found interesting is that the gastro section indicates that the intestines were intact. No mention of inflammation consistent with Crohns disease was observed, but again, this could be do to decompisition? My father had a severe case of Crohns disease. I know that it causes fistulas or open sores to form somewhere on or near the anus in men and women, but primarily in the vaginal are for women. I wondered if Nancy had such a wound, when I read that the LE noted an unidentifiable stain on the bed linens.

It is difficult to believe that she was attacked and stangled by BC when there are no other instances of trauma related injuries noted. She was a very tall physically fit woman who I imagine would have fought her attacker tooth and nail which would have caused defense marks or wounds. A 1.3" faint mark on the neck at the location of the hyoid bone.....I don't know how that could even be the extent of the markings if it was a strangulation. But, I know little about forensics so that is not saying much!

It does not seem unreasonable that an attacker would take her shoes or shorts. Perhaps she had an opportunity to kick the crap out of her attacker and he/she knew that genetic evidence would be on them...perhaps the perv ejaculated on the shorts and again, not wanting to leave DNA behind took them with. As for the missing earring....you don't have to watch to many episodes of Law and Order SVU to note that a lot of rapist/killers take an item from their victim(s) as a trophy item.

I know, I'm still not convinced BC did it. I will take my text based verbal spanking now..........

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 02:31 PM

There were a few things I found odd about the autopsy report. It could be a result of the decomposition of the body, but it seemed to contain very little detail. I lost a family member in February of this year to an accidental overdose. I was just looking at the autopsy report and it has every mole, insect bite and location of the electrode burns marked on the body shot. Another thing I found interesting is that the gastro section indicates that the intestines were intact. No mention of inflammation consistent with Crohns disease was observed, but again, this could be do to decompisition? My father had a severe case of Crohns disease. I know that it causes fistulas or open sores to form somewhere on or near the anus in men and women, but primarily in the vaginal are for women. I wondered if Nancy had such a wound, when I read that the LE noted an unidentifiable stain on the bed linens.

It is difficult to believe that she was attacked and stangled by BC when there are no other instances of trauma related injuries noted. She was a very tall physically fit woman who I imagine would have fought her attacker tooth and nail which would have caused defense marks or wounds. A 1.3" faint mark on the neck at the location of the hyoid bone.....I don't know how that could even be the extent of the markings if it was a strangulation. But, I know little about forensics so that is not saying much!

It does not seem unreasonable that an attacker would take her shoes or shorts. Perhaps she had an opportunity to kick the crap out of her attacker and he/she knew that genetic evidence would be on them...perhaps the perv ejaculated on the shorts and again, not wanting to leave DNA behind took them with. As for the missing earring....you don't have to watch to many episodes of Law and Order SVU to note that a lot of rapist/killers take an item from their victim(s) as a trophy item.

I know, I'm still not convinced BC did it. I will take my text based verbal spanking now..........

No spanking deserved :)

Just a comment - this lack of detail with autopsies coming from Chapel Hill is consistent with every other autopsy report I have seen them publish. It seems to me that because of the FOA requirements, the report is kept necessarily short for publication and reveals as little as possible for public consumption. The real details of the autopsy are contained in the ME's notes, which are not subject to public dissemination.

One other comment, the autopsy report does reference that Nancy's toe nails were painted pink. If you review the inventory from the search warrant of the house you will note item #11 to be a pink colored object, thought to be a nail. Just something I noted that caught my attention.

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 02:31 PM

The amount of decomp + bug infestation and animal activity may have obscured some of these details.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 03:00 PM

No spanking deserved :)

Just a comment - this lack of detail with autopsies coming from Chapel Hill is consistent with every other autopsy report I have seen them publish. It seems to me that because of the FOA requirements, the report is kept necessarily short for publication and reveals as little as possible for public consumption. The real details of the autopsy are contained in the ME's notes, which are not subject to public dissemination.

One other comment, the autopsy report does reference that Nancy's toe nails were painted pink. If you review the inventory from the search warrant of the house you will note item #11 to be a pink colored object, thought to be a nail. Just something I noted that caught my attention.

Yes, I understand that this one may have been left intentionally short. My brother had the same ME and I just thought the difference in details of his report was odd.

I did note the toenail thing, but competitive runners often have the most fragile toenails or at least my husband does. He can stump his toe on the carpet and that dang toenail splits and falls off.....I don't know how he stands it....clearly, I'm not a runner :)

My brother had had Mexican food approximately 4 hours prior to his death and a margarita...there was not food content in his stomach at the time of his autopsy, but there was greenish liquid. Strange that liquid stays longer than food....

Maybe the red liquid was a redbull or one of those high energy drinks. My hubby drinks a redbull before he runs or does his workouts. Possible?

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 03:19 PM

Yes, I understand that this one may have been left intentionally short. My brother had the same ME and I just thought the difference in details of his report was odd.

I did note the toenail thing, but competitive runners often have the most fragile toenails or at least my husband does. He can stump his toe on the carpet and that dang toenail splits and falls off.....I don't know how he stands it....clearly, I'm not a runner :)

My brother had had Mexican food approximately 4 hours prior to his death and a margarita...there was not food content in his stomach at the time of his autopsy, but there was greenish liquid. Strange that liquid stays longer than food....

Maybe the red liquid was a redbull or one of those high energy drinks. My hubby drinks a redbull before he runs or does his workouts. Possible?

I'm thinking Chapel Hill has a variable protocol - one type of report for deaths due to non-criminal causes, and one for deaths due to criminal activity. I first noticed this "lack of detail" with the Michelle Young autopsy -although the wounds were definitely defined. Then again her body was found in a controled environment and within hours of her murder. Dunno but lots of them seem to be short on substance.

I'm not sure what to think about the red liquid actually. I think it is possible it could be any number of things to be honest and I certainly think it could have been an energy drink of some sort as easily as anything else. I just don't have enough brainpower to figure out what that is saying and not enough ancillary facts to even guess. Seems to me the only substance in the report is the actual cause of death, but even that is a soft decree - "asphyxia most likely due to strangulation" doesn't exactly leave me 100% convinced. :)

jmflu

10-01-2008, 03:30 PM

Seems to me the only substance in the report is the actual cause of death, but even that is a soft decree - "asphyxia most likely due to strangulation" doesn't exactly leave me 100% convinced. :)

But they were SURE it was homicide. If it is "likely due to strangulation," it is possible it is not due to strangulation. So, therefore, do we then have cause to wonder if it was even a murder?

I doubt any of us wants to go THERE.

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 03:36 PM

But they were SURE it was homicide. If it is "likely due to strangulation," it is possible it is not due to strangulation. So, therefore, do we then have cause to wonder if it was even a murder?

I doubt any of us wants to go THERE.

I have no doubt the manner of death was homicide. No need to go there for me. The condition of the hyoid bone strongly suggests strangulation but the words "most likely" are not 100% in my mind.

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 03:38 PM

Asphyxia seems to be certain, and homicide is absolutely 100% certain, but the part they are assuming is strangulation. A pillow over the face would also cause asphyxia, but there is that fractured hyoid bone to consider.

Therefore:

Manner of Death: HOMICIDE

Cause of Death: ASPHYXIATION

Means (or mechanism) of Death: likely from strangulation

jmflu

10-01-2008, 03:52 PM

Asphyxia seems to be certain, and homicide is absolutely 100% certain, but the part they are assuming is strangulation. A pillow over the face would also cause asphyxia, but there is that fractured hyoid bone to consider.

I guess I'm still confused. If they KNOW she was murdered, how can they be sure if they are not certain of the HOW part? Is asphyxia the same thing as strangulation?

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 04:02 PM

I guess I'm still confused. If they KNOW she was murdered, how can they be sure if they are not certain of the HOW part? Is asphyxia the same thing as strangulation?

Asphyxia is the cause of death. Asphyxia is the production of an oxygen deficient condition within the body. The mechanisms of asphyxia can be caused by choking (on food for instance), strangulation, suffocation, sticking a plastic bag over your head for a while and so on.

The hyoid bone being fractured suggests some type of manual force strangulation may have occurred.

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 04:03 PM

I guess I'm still confused. If they KNOW she was murdered, how can they be sure if they are not certain of the HOW part? Is asphyxia the same thing as strangulation?

No they are not the same thing.

Asphyxia is a condition of severely deficient supply of oxygen to the body that arises from being unable to breathe normally. An example of asphyxia is choking (choking would be an accident). When someone is found hanging they have died from asphyxia.

Strangulation implies pressure to the neck to achieve asphyxia which can be done via 'manual' (like with one's hands), 'ligature' and 'choke hold.'

jmflu

10-01-2008, 04:08 PM

Thank you both. So if she died of asphyxia, that means she was murdered?

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 04:10 PM

Exactly my concern. Clearly a homicide, clearly what caused her death has been determined, but the means of being only "likely" causes me angst. And again, if BC is not a POI or been named a suspect or anyone else for that matter....how can they say with a 100% degree of confidence that this was not a random act? I find that a bit disturbing.

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 04:11 PM

Thank you both. So if she died of asphyxia, that means she was murdered?

The fracture to the hyoid bone suggests that someone applied pressure to her throat, thus cutting off her means of obtaining air. This is the implication obtained from the fracture and the apprent faint mark on her neck in the area of the frontal neck.

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 04:14 PM

Exactly my concern. Clearly a homicide, clearly what caused her death has been determined, but the means of being only "likely" causes me angst. And again, if BC is not a POI or been named a suspect or anyone else for that matter....how can they say with a 100% degree of confidence that this was not a random act? I find that a bit disturbing.

The defnition of a random act is not determined by COD alone. In this case if you watch the July 14th presser somewhere about 11 minutes in, Chief Bazemore gives LE's reasons for this not being a random crime. Hope I have the right presser, I'm not inclined to sit through them all again to note ths time.

LE gave reasons - one of which was no one other than Brad saw Nancy on the morning she disappeared - no one.

jmflu

10-01-2008, 04:18 PM

The fracture to the hyoid bone suggests that someone applied pressure to her throat, thus cutting off her means of obtaining air. This is the implication obtained from the fracture and the apprent faint mark on her neck in the area of the frontal neck.

Right, I remember reading that, but if they are not 100% sure that this was the cause, what else could it be??

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 04:18 PM

Thank you both. So if she died of asphyxia, that means she was murdered? If the asphyxia was caused by someone else (which in this case it was) then yes, she was murdered. She didn't asphyxiate herself and it wasn't an accident. The fractured hyoid bone is tell-tale.

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 04:20 PM

Right, I remember reading that, but if they are not 100% sure that this was the cause, what else could it be??

Pillow over the face in combination with something up against her throat is one such possibility.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 04:22 PM

Well, I admit that I am not the queen of logic, but I don't see how the fact that thus far, BC being the last person to see her alive (allegedly), that makes the crime "not random".

jmflu

10-01-2008, 04:22 PM

The defnition of a random act is not determined by COD alone. In this case if you watch the July 14th presser somewhere about 11 minutes in, Chief Bazemore gives LE's reasons for this not being a random crime. Hope I have the right presser, I'm not inclined to sit through them all again to note ths time.

LE gave reasons - one of which was no one other than Brad saw Nancy on the morning she disappeared - no one.

Either I read this somewhere recently, or I dreamt I read it, but I remember reading something about a police officer telling someone down at the station something about the chief just telling people it was safe so as not to cause panic. Maybe it was on GOLO, but it was more of a factual "this is what happened" kind of story being related to us rather than a snarky comment that "this is probably the way it was." Does anyone remember seeing this?

jmflu

10-01-2008, 04:23 PM

Pillow over the face in combination with something up against her throat is one such possibility.

That's still strangulation, though, isn't it?

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 04:24 PM

Right, I remember reading that, but if they are not 100% sure that this was the cause, what else could it be??

Picture someone holding a person down by the neck and placing a pillow over ther face. There will be pressure to the hyoid bone and air will be cut off by the pillow - which may have killed the person first ? In this case, there was evidence of manual force as evidenced by the fracture. The advanced state of decomp and the blackening of the skin may have hid bruising to a degree it could not be seen. The strap muscles show a darkening but no hemorage - the darkening supports manual force.

jmflu

10-01-2008, 04:25 PM

Picture someone holding a person down by the neck and placing a pillow over ther face. There will be pressure to the hyoid bone and air will be cut off by the pillow - which may have killed the person first ? In this case, there was evidence of manual force as evidenced by the fracture. The advanced state of decomp and the blackening of the skin may have hid bruising to a degree it could not be seen. The strap muscles show a darkening but no hemorage - the darkening supports manual force.

Right, but that's still strangulation, isn't it?

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 04:27 PM

Well, I admit that I am not the queen of logic, but I don't see how the fact that thus far, BC being the last person to see her alive (allegedly), that makes the crime "not random".

That was one reason - watch the presser the Chief explains it - more than one reason. So no one seeing her does nothing to influence you that maybe no one saw her because she simply was not out and about combined with the other reasons the Chief gives ? The probable cause section of the search warrant for the house denoting the observations made and the condition of the house gives you no pause to think she never left her house that morning ? There are many layers, not just one.

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 04:28 PM

Either I read this somewhere recently, or I dreamt I read it, but I remember reading something about a police officer telling someone down at the station something about the chief just telling people it was safe so as not to cause panic. Maybe it was on GOLO, but it was more of a factual "this is what happened" kind of story being related to us rather than a snarky comment that "this is probably the way it was." Does anyone remember seeing this?

That was Hiller's comment - after the good cop bad cop episode.

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 04:29 PM

Right, but that's still strangulation, isn't it? Depends which action caused death first: air cut off from a pillow over the face (asphyxia via mouth & nose blocked) or the pressure on the throat (strangulation)? Sometimes it cannot be easily determined. But a pillow pressed against your face and a fractured hyoid bone--well that is a homicide (unlawful death on purpose by someone else).

And if you notice they were able to determine the hyoid bone was definitely fractured so they KNOW some kind of manual force was against her throat.

jmflu

10-01-2008, 04:38 PM

That was Hiller's comment - after the good cop bad cop episode.

Oh, thank goodness... thanks, RC!!

I remember thinking that was not a very professional thing to tell a possible suspect. And if he (the officer) didn't say it, can MH be called on it?

jmflu

10-01-2008, 04:39 PM

Depends which action caused death first: air cut off from a pillow over the face (asphyxia via mouth & nose blocked) or the pressure on the throat (strangulation)? Sometimes it cannot be easily determined. But a pillow pressed against your face and a fractured hyoid bone--well that is a homicide (unlawful death on purpose by someone else).

And if you notice they were able to determine the hyoid bone was definitely fractured so they KNOW some kind of manual force was against her throat.

Oh, ok... so she was strangled, or smothered to death, one of the two is what they are saying.

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 04:41 PM

Oh, ok... so she was strangled, or smothered to death, one of the two is what they are saying.

No. They are saying 'likely strangled.' They said nothing about smothering.

jmflu

10-01-2008, 04:47 PM

No. They are saying 'likely strangled.' They said nothing about smothering.

Oh. I thought pressing a pillow over someone's face to stop them breathing was smothering?

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 05:25 PM

That was one reason - watch the presser the Chief explains it - more than one reason. So no one seeing her does nothing to influence you that maybe no one saw her because she simply was not out and about combined with the other reasons the Chief gives ? The probable cause section of the search warrant for the house denoting the observations made and the condition of the house gives you no pause to think she never left her house that morning ? There are many layers, not just one.

Sure, it is a possibility, but there is also a possibility that someone did see her and just did not realize it was her. I see joggers in my area all the time, that does not mean if they went missing or I saw a picture of them that I would recognize them. Most days, when hubby is on travel, the only person I see at the end of each day is my mom. If I went missing and she cleaned my house while I was gone and she was the last one to see me, does that mean she killed me and cleaned up the evidence? No. It just means she was the last person who actually recognizes me who saw me last. I am sure that there are countless women who have left their husband at home, unnoticed by others, to run an errand, go running...whatever and have been the victim of a random killer. Just not a convincing argument for "he definitely did it".

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 06:25 PM

Sure, it is a possibility, but there is also a possibility that someone did see her and just did not realize it was her. I see joggers in my area all the time, that does not mean if they went missing or I saw a picture of them that I would recognize them. Most days, when hubby is on travel, the only person I see at the end of each day is my mom. If I went missing and she cleaned my house while I was gone and she was the last one to see me, does that mean she killed me and cleaned up the evidence? No. It just means she was the last person who actually recognizes me who saw me last. I am sure that there are countless women who have left their husband at home, unnoticed by others, to run an errand, go running...whatever and have been the victim of a random killer. Just not a convincing argument for "he definitely did it".

If you prefer to stick with one aspect of the definition, then true enough that it is not a convincing argument. But if you stick to only looking at one aspect, you are also fooling yourself. There are a significant number of facts in the press conferences, search warrant affidavits, and other legal docs if one cares to look.

sunflowers

10-01-2008, 06:44 PM

Either I read this somewhere recently, or I dreamt I read it, but I remember reading something about a police officer telling someone down at the station something about the chief just telling people it was safe so as not to cause panic. Maybe it was on GOLO, but it was more of a factual "this is what happened" kind of story being related to us rather than a snarky comment that "this is probably the way it was." Does anyone remember seeing this?

i believe it was in mike hiller's affadavid or comments that he made concerning his interaction with the police officers at the police station. obviously, anybody connected to brad or nancy making these remarks might have a biased perspective

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 06:59 PM

If you prefer to stick with one aspect of the definition, then true enough that it is not a convincing argument. But if you stick to only looking at one aspect, you are also fooling yourself. There are a significant number of facts in the press conferences, search warrant affidavits, and other legal docs if one cares to look.

I am not fooling myself. I have read every document posted on this site. If this thing was a clear to LE as it appears to be to you, why have they not arrested BC or even named him a POI or named suspect? What I am doing is what I think every person should do and that is presume innocense until guilt is proven.

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 07:07 PM

I am not fooling myself. I have read every document posted on this site. If this thing was a clear to LE as it appears to be to you, why have they not arrested BC or even named him a POI or named suspect? What I am doing is what I think every person should do and that is presume innocense until guilt is proven.

The documents didn't come from LE - so you have not heard the Chief's reason why she said the crime was not random.

He hasn't been named a suspect because our politically correct little world so demands it. I'm sure this case is infinitely more clear to LE than it is to me, otherwise I would have known long ago LE was dragging Brad's buddies in to find out who used Nancy's phone after she went missing to help set up an alibi.

Innocent until proven guilty is a premise required in a courtroom. This is a website for brainstorming who did it, nothing more and the premise does not apply.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 07:38 PM

The documents didn't come from LE - so you have not heard the Chief's reason why she said the crime was not random.

He hasn't been named a suspect because our politically correct little world so demands it. I'm sure this case is infinitely more clear to LE than it is to me, otherwise I would have known long ago LE was dragging Brad's buddies in to find out who used Nancy's phone after she went missing to help set up an alibi.

Innocent until proven guilty is a premise required in a courtroom. This is a website for brainstorming who did it, nothing more and the premise does not apply.

I did infact listen to the presser of July 15th. She states, "Nothing at this time leads us to believe that this is anything other than as isolated incident". I listened to it twice to make sure I did not miss the reasons that you insist she listed.

Or maybe he has not been named a suspect, because he did not do it. If I choose to apply the premise that he is innocent until proven guilt, in a courtroom, on this website or anywhere of my choosing, it is MY right to do so and not your right to tell me that it does not apply.

mahmoo

10-01-2008, 07:44 PM

Do we need to start a "Those Who Support Brad Post Here"
thread ? :rolleyes:

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 07:46 PM

Do we need to start a "Those Who Support Brad Post Here"
thread ? :rolleyes:

Or maybe just a thread for people who require more than rumor, circumstantial evidence and what if's before they condemn a potentially innocent man to jail or hell?

mahmoo

10-01-2008, 07:54 PM

Or maybe just a thread for people who require more than rumor, circumstantial evidence and what if's before they condemn a potentially innocent man to jail or hell?

I take it you believe there is possibly a random killer loose in the Cary area? Or do you believe someone she knew killed her.......just not Brad?

jumpstreet

10-01-2008, 07:57 PM

Do we need to start a "Those Who Support Brad Post Here"
thread ? :rolleyes:

Maybe a "Not Yet Fully Convinced" thread...

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 07:57 PM

I think a thread focusing on a 'BC is innocent' slant is actually a great idea. I'll go start one, then the folks who only want to discuss the autopsy can continue. Sound like a plan?

mahmoo

10-01-2008, 07:59 PM

Maybe a "Not Yet Fully Convinced" thread...

LoL..........okay jump............you start it :crazy:

mahmoo

10-01-2008, 08:00 PM

I think a thread focusing on a 'BC is innocent' slant is actually a great idea. I'll go start one, then the folks who only want to discuss the autopsy can continue. Sound like a plan?

You're good yeah :blowkiss: ............ I vote you for our next President !!

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 08:04 PM

You're good yeah :blowkiss: ............ I vote you for our next President !!

President of WHAT? And no thanky. :crazy::)

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 08:04 PM

And here it is:

"BC is innocent" or "I'm not convinced" Discussion (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72398)

jumpstreet

10-01-2008, 08:09 PM

And here it is:

"BC is innocent" or "I'm not convinced" Discussion (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72398)

Thanks Sleuthy...

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 08:09 PM

I did infact listen to the presser of July 15th. She states, "Nothing at this time leads us to believe that this is anything other than as isolated incident". I listened to it twice to make sure I did not miss the reasons that you insist she listed.

Or maybe he has not been named a suspect, because he did not do it. If I choose to apply the premise that he is innocent until proven guilt, in a courtroom, on this website or anywhere of my choosing, it is MY right to do so and not your right to tell me that it does not apply.

Listen to the 14th presser - the Chief does explain it and if you check my original post it does say the 14th and even gives you a time frame.

You may apply any premise you wish to your thoughts so I agree you have no more right to enforce yours than I do mine. However I disagree the premise applies outside of a courtroom and certainly not a standard to be applied to a board made of opinion. So we have our opinions and obviously they are very different but at least were there are facts, I prefer to use them and the fact is the Chief gave her reasons, if you choose to ignore her expertise and experience so be it. No problem.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 08:11 PM

I take it you believe there is possibly a random killer loose in the Cary area? Or do you believe someone she knew killed her.......just not Brad?

In this day and age...a random killer is not completely out of the question. Just do a search on one of those sites that shows convicted felons in you area and you will be surprised at the type of felons that live among us.

Statistically speaking, most people who are the victim of violent/fatal assaults are assaulted/killed by someone they knew. Given the recent gang activity in the Holly Springs/Fuquay area....not an impossibility....

I don't know if BC did it or didn't do it....that's my point...there is more than reasonable doubt, plausible explanations....it is not cut and dry...

I believe, because i am free to, in Karma....I would hate like the dickens for something to happen to my spouse and just because I was the last one to see him alive, have law enforcement snatch my kids away from me....be hung out to dry in the court of public opinion based on a loose statistic....for something I did not do. It happens.....everyday.....just look at the people who have sat on death row for 12 + years only to be ultimately released because latent DNA evidence proved their innocense. How many of them that did not have the benefit of DNA testing were killed based on public opinion?

I respect those who have decided that without a shadow of a doubt he did it and he must be punished by satan himself....but I have a right to my opinion as well.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 08:16 PM

Listen to the 14th presser - the Chief does explain it and if you check my original post it does say the 14th and even gives you a time frame.

You may apply any premise you wish to your thoughts so I agree you have no more right to enforce yours than I do mine. However I disagree the premise applies outside of a courtroom and certainly not a standard to be applied to a board made of opinion. So we have our opinions and obviously they are very different but at least were there are facts, I prefer to use them and the fact is the Chief gave her reasons, if you choose to ignore her expertise and experience so be it. No problem.

She announces in the presser on the 15th that the case in "now declared a homicide", so how would she have listed any reasons that it was a random act of violence on the 14th if it was not deemed a true homicide until the 15th?

If my opinion is that a person is innocent until proven guilty then it has as much right to application as your interpretation of the so called "facts".

tarheellvr

10-01-2008, 08:17 PM

I am not fooling myself. I have read every document posted on this site. If this thing was a clear to LE as it appears to be to you, why have they not arrested BC or even named him a POI or named suspect? What I am doing is what I think every person should do and that is presume innocense until guilt is proven.

He hasn't been arrested because LE is making sure they have an airtight case. They certainly don't want the DA's office to not agree to grand jury/prosecution. Just because he hasn't been arrested or named a suspect means NOTHING.

Look at Michelle Young......JY is still walking around. :furious:

Look how long it took to prosecute Ann Miller and her case had one of the most diligent, dedicated detectives Raleigh's force has ever had. :clap:
She was never declared a suspect either.

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 08:20 PM

Can we please continue just the autopsy discussion on this thread? Pretty please? There's a shiny new thread just waiting for all those good discussions and debates on the matter of BC's presumption of innocence or why he's not the perp, or what have you.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72398

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 08:23 PM

He hasn't been arrested because LE is making sure they have an airtight case. They certainly don't want the DA's office to not agree to grand jury/prosecution. Just because he hasn't been arrested or named a suspect means NOTHING.

Look at Michelle Young......JY is still walking around. :furious:

Look how long it took to prosecute Ann Miller and her case had one of the most diligent, dedicated detectives Raleigh's force has ever had. :clap:
She was never declared a suspect either.

I agree completely, at this point it means NOTHING.

mahmoo

10-01-2008, 08:25 PM

I have a right to my opinion as well.

I believe in Karma too as well as your quoted statement :blowkiss:

Now....back to the autopsy

Hope ya'll didn't discuss this already and I missed it but........the pink nail clipping collected during the search of the house and the autopsy notation of pink nail polish on the toes (none noted on the fingers).....my mind keeps wondering if one of NC's toenails got torn/ripped during a struggle and was bleeding all over the place :confused: Could be one of the reasons BC needed cleaning supplies.

Are there more notes from the autopsy that haven't been made public yet? I'm seriously hoping there was some dried blood/tissue under NC's fingernails.......wish we could read the results from the scraping. Whether she was attacked from the front or back....she would still have had the chance to grab at the fingers around her neck........hope she grabbed deep and hard.

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 08:28 PM

She announces in the presser on the 15th that the case in "now declared a homicide", so how would she have listed any reasons that it was a random act of violence on the 14th if it was not deemed a true homicide until the 15th?

If my opinion is that a person is innocent until proven guilty then it has as much right to application as your interpretation of the so called "facts".

The body was found on the 14th. And I will take LE's presentation of explanations and affidavits as fact as I respect their expertise and see no reason to believe they are doing anything other than the best they can.

So show me a fact - show me a search warrant for someone other than BC, anything that proves he is not involved.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 08:29 PM

Can we please continue just the autopsy discussion on this thread? Pretty please? There's a shiny new thread just waiting for all those good discussions and debates on the matter of BC's presumption of innocence or why he's not the perp, or what have you.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72398

Yes, and I apologize for straying.....

I did a google search for broken hyoids due to strangulation....most of what I read indicates that there is much more damage to the tissue that what is indicated in the autopsy report. Everything is listed as slight, subtle and likely....and I am still baffled by 1.3" faint mark on the neck. For a violent act, you would just expect to see more markings, more defensive wounds, especially from a woman as physically fit as NC....I don't know, it is indeed puzzling.

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 08:32 PM

most of what I read indicates that there is much more damage to the tissue that what is indicated in the autopsy report.

Did what you read say anything about the level of decomposition in those corpses? I would imagine there is a correlation between how much decomp vs. how obvious/clear the signs of strangulation might be.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 08:37 PM

The body was found on the 14th. And I will take LE's presentation of explanations and affidavits as fact as I respect their expertise and see no reason to believe they are doing anything other than the best they can.

So show me a fact - show me a search warrant for someone other than BC, anything that proves he is not involved.

You show me a fact that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he was involved.

I too believe they are doing the very best they can. I also agree as per the article, the body was discovered on the 14th and on the 15th it was declared a homicide.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 08:40 PM

Did what you read say anything about the level of decomposition in those corpses? I would imagine there is a correlation between how much decomp vs. how obvious/clear the signs of strangulation might be.

Yes, I did. The article that I read, and I will try to find it and link it, said that when advanced decomposition is an issue that the severity of the tissue damage in the area was the determining factor. I suspect that the lack of tissue damage was the reason it was deemed "likely".

mahmoo

10-01-2008, 08:43 PM

Good point SG......what I took from the autopsy was that NC had been in a fast state of decomposition and that the insects had taken quite a toll on her body as well.

I'm no expert by any means but if her body had been found much sooner more marks around her neck would have been visible.....I believe the autopsy report stated that insects had destroyed a large portion of the neck area.

The hyoid is just below and center of the jaw......it's not that easy of a bone to break. She wasn't strangled around the adams apple area.....it was just a bit higher than that.

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 08:47 PM

For me there is absolutely NO DOUBT that she was murdered. She did not asphyxiate or strangle herself. The fact that the underlying neck tissue or strap muscles aren't showing an extreme level of damage or bruising or that there aren't red fingerprints or an ear-to-ear ligature wound around her neck does not in any way lead me to believe that her death was anything but an intention to murder her.

And it does not lead me to conclude that the murder is now a 'random' one.

I believe what LE is saying and there is nothing in the autopsy that I've seen so far that conflicts with the basic facts of the case.

And IMHO she did not walk or run to that spot she was found--that was a dump site and I think we'll come to find that there is no evidence to indicate she was killed in that spot.

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 08:51 PM

As for the level of decomposition, which was fairly advanced, I believe it points to a TOD (at least in my mind) that is EARLIER on Saturday than later. Why? Because there was more decomp, more bugs, a lot of damage from the bugs (i.e. the bugs had more time to do their work), she was already bloated, skin was sloughing off. Weather of course plays a huge part here, but it's common sense that an additional 5 or 6 hours of exposure would allow more insect activity, etc.

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 09:03 PM

You show me a fact that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he was involved.

I too believe they are doing the very best they can. I also agree as per the article, the body was discovered on the 14th and on the 15th it was declared a homicide.

Too funny :crazy:

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 09:06 PM

Good point SG......what I took from the autopsy was that NC had been in a fast state of decomposition and that the insects had taken quite a toll on her body as well.

I'm no expert by any means but if her body had been found much sooner more marks around her neck would have been visible.....I believe the autopsy report stated that insects had destroyed a large portion of the neck area.

The hyoid is just below and center of the jaw......it's not that easy of a bone to break. She wasn't strangled around the adams apple area.....it was just a bit higher than that.

I think it said, I would have to read again, that the left side of her face was largely decomposed. They hyoid is not an easy bone to break, but people with Crohns disease normally take prednisone to control intestinal inflammation and long term use of prednisone thins the bones....but there is not indication or information that suggests her Crohns required steroidal treatment....but it is a possibility...

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 09:08 PM

Too funny :crazy:

What is funny about a homicide?

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 09:17 PM

I think it said, I would have to read again, that the left side of her face was largely decomposed. They hyoid is not an easy bone to break, but people with Crohns disease normally take prednisone to control intestinal inflammation and long term use of prednisone thins the bones....but there is not indication or information that suggests her Crohns required steroidal treatment....but it is a possibility...

So do you think it's a possibility her hyoid bone just happened to break on it's own or from some innocent explanation or that it thinned-out due to possible steroid treatment and again, broke, but it wasn't from a homicide? (please say 'no!')

Do you doubt the ME's assertion that Nancy's death was the result of a homicide?

momto3kids

10-01-2008, 09:23 PM

....and I am still baffled by 1.3" faint mark on the neck.

rwesafe...this is my post from 2 days ago. It has photo's in the book which I can't load, but here is a small description to maybe better explain the mark. Basically from reading this chapter the book is stating...she was attacked from behind, head jerked back with only her trachea elevated to make the mark much less in length.

I just pulled out my daughters book"BODIES of EVIDENCE" by Brian Innes, chapter is 'Breath of Life.'

Congestion, cyanosis and petechiae will develop if the pressure is maintained for more than 15 seconds. A strip of soft fabric is likely to leave a relatively faint and undefined mark; a broad cloth, such as a scarf or towel, can leave one or more narrow marks. If the killer has attacked from behind, the mark will be only across the front of the throat.

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 09:32 PM

rwesafe...this is my post from 2 days ago. It has photo's in the book which I can't load, but here is a small description to maybe better explain the mark. Basically from reading this chapter the book is stating...she was attacked from behind, head jerked back with only her trachea elevated to make the mark much less in length.

I just pulled out my daughters book"BODIES of EVIDENCE" by Brian Innes, chapter is 'Breath of Life.'

Congestion, cyanosis and petechiae will develop if the pressure is maintained for more than 15 seconds. A strip of soft fabric is likely to leave a relatively faint and undefined mark; a broad cloth, such as a scarf or towel, can leave one or more narrow marks. If the killer has attacked from behind, the mark will be only across the front of the throat.

Might be a reason why LE collected the piece of childs clothing.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 09:36 PM

So do you think it's a possibility her hyoid bone just happened to break on it's own or from some innocent explanation or that it thinned-out due to possible steroid treatment and again, broke, but it wasn't from a homicide? (please say 'no!')

Do you doubt the ME's assertion that Nancy's death was the result of a homicide?

No, as I stated before, I do believe it was a homicide.

mahmoo

10-01-2008, 09:37 PM

rwesafe...this is my post from 2 days ago. It has photo's in the book which I can't load, but here is a small description to maybe better explain the mark. Basically from reading this chapter the book is stating...she was attacked from behind, head jerked back with only her trachea elevated to make the mark much less in length.

I just pulled out my daughters book"BODIES of EVIDENCE" by Brian Innes, chapter is 'Breath of Life.'

Congestion, cyanosis and petechiae will develop if the pressure is maintained for more than 15 seconds. A strip of soft fabric is likely to leave a relatively faint and undefined mark; a broad cloth, such as a scarf or towel, can leave one or more narrow marks. If the killer has attacked from behind, the mark will be only across the front of the throat.

Yes.....to suffocate.....I don't know if a scarf strangulation could break the hyoid though......I believe it is a pliable bone....not easy to break.....a scarf could cut off oxygen but i'm not sure about breaking a bone.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 09:41 PM

rwesafe...this is my post from 2 days ago. It has photo's in the book which I can't load, but here is a small description to maybe better explain the mark. Basically from reading this chapter the book is stating...she was attacked from behind, head jerked back with only her trachea elevated to make the mark much less in length.

I just pulled out my daughters book"BODIES of EVIDENCE" by Brian Innes, chapter is 'Breath of Life.'

Congestion, cyanosis and petechiae will develop if the pressure is maintained for more than 15 seconds. A strip of soft fabric is likely to leave a relatively faint and undefined mark; a broad cloth, such as a scarf or towel, can leave one or more narrow marks. If the killer has attacked from behind, the mark will be only across the front of the throat.

Yes, I did read this post and yet I am still baffled because the autopsy report indicates signs of what might be petechiae and minimal congestion....

It is just still difficult for me to believe that even if attacked from behind, someone with her fitness level would not have fought her attacker like a mad woman.....it almost seems as if the act was committed by someone she trusted....

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 09:45 PM

It is just still difficult for me to believe that even if attacked from behind, someone with her fitness level would not have fought her attacker like a mad woman.....it almost seems as if the act was committed by someone she trusted....

He could have taken her completely by surprise or at a time when she was less able to fight back--we don't know the details and I doubt he's going to tell us. Remember that the detectives DID note he had small red scratches on the back of his neck when they interviewed him on the afternoon of 7/12. It's possible she tried to fight back.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 09:55 PM

He could have taken her completely by surprise or at a time when she was less able to fight back--we don't know the details and I doubt he's going to tell us. Remember that the detectives DID note he had small red scratches on the back of his neck when they interviewed him on the afternoon of 7/12. It's possible she tried to fight back.

True. But adrenaline only takes seconds to kick in and to be attacked from behind you would most assuredly have to be standing up. The first reaction when someone puts something around your neck is to grab at what is at your neck at which point I would suspect that would have left deep scratch marks on her own neck. And of course, that maybe the case, we have yet to hear of any DNA that was found from her fingernails....

mahmoo

10-01-2008, 10:03 PM

we have yet to hear of any DNA that was found from her fingernails....

That's the magic key, in my opinion.......what was found under her nails (fingers crossed).

momto3kids

10-01-2008, 10:05 PM

I will go get her book again and see what I can find that I might have missed. The photo showing petechiae under the tongue is impressive, but of course hard to describe not seeing the picture.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 10:06 PM

That's the magic key, in my opinion.......what was found under her nails (fingers crossed).

Fingers crossed for what? Do you really hope that he did it?

momto3kids

10-01-2008, 10:09 PM

Might be a reason why LE collected the piece of childs clothing.
I never thought of that. Less length to have to deal with. Is that what you are thinking?

mahmoo

10-01-2008, 10:12 PM

Fingers crossed for what? Do you really hope that he did it?

No No No No No.............I wish nobody had done it !

I do hope the person that did it left their DNA (tissue/blood) under her fingernails though.

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 10:21 PM

I never thought of that. Less length to have to deal with. Is that what you are thinking?

I have no definite thought actually. I do wonder why the childs clothing would have been taken and can only figure the item was observed by LE on Saturday and there was something about it that caught their attention. We have two things to think about with that - one, Brad says they were up at 4 am with Katie and two, supposedly Nancy slept with the girls according to some. The green dress , if it was what was worn to the party, I can see LE collecting that but the childs clothing has me curious.

Also one other thing, based on the autopsy the only clothing on Nancy was a sports bra/halter and it was pulled up. If one thinks about that, and Nancy was attacked from behind, were she in the act of either putting it on or taking it off - her hands may have been above her head at the time of the attack. It could have been used for strangulation as well. She could well have reached back and caught the back of her attacker's neck leaving only small marks due to her vulnerable position. Possible

momto3kids

10-01-2008, 10:21 PM

Yes, I did read this post and yet I am still baffled because the autopsy report indicates signs of what might be petechiae and minimal congestion....

So far what I see.. this is a hb book, but not a text she will be using. It is more pictures and descriptions.

If the strangler has kept the pressure up for some time, the characteristic congestion and petechiae will be seen in the face of the victim. If, on the other hand death takes place within a few seconds, they do not appear.

jmflu

10-01-2008, 10:24 PM

I have no definite thought actually. I do wonder why the childs clothing would have been taken and can only figure the item was observed by LE on Saturday and there was something about it that caught their attention. We have two things to think about with that - one, Brad says they were up at 4 am with Katie and two, supposedly Nancy slept with the girls according to some. The green dress , if it was what was worn to the party, I can see LE collecting that but the childs clothing has me curious.

Also one other thing, based on the autopsy the only clothing on Nancy was a sports bra/halter and it was pulled up. If one thinks about that, and Nancy was attacked from behind, were she in the act of either putting it on or taking it off - her hands may have been above her head at the time of the attack. It could have been used for strangulation as well. She could well have reached back and caught the back of her attacker's neck leaving only small marks due to her vulnerable position. Possible

I think it makes perfect sense.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 10:28 PM

So far what I see.. this is a hb book, but not a text she will be using. It is more pictures and descriptions.

If the strangler has kept the pressure up for some time, the characteristic congestion and petechiae will be seen in the face of the victim. If, on the other hand death takes place within a few seconds, they do not appear.

Yeah, just I don't know, seems so unlikely with someone who was so physcically fit...almost like she was already out of breath from running and someone struck her with a force strong enough to break the hyoid? I just don't know....it is all so vague....

momto3kids

10-01-2008, 10:29 PM

I have no definite thought actually. I do wonder why the childs clothing would have been taken and can only figure the item was observed by LE on Saturday and there was something about it that caught their attention. We have two things to think about with that - one, Brad says they were up at 4 am with Katie and two, supposedly Nancy slept with the girls according to some. The green dress , if it was what was worn to the party, I can see LE collecting that but the childs clothing has me curious.

Also one other thing, based on the autopsy the only clothing on Nancy was a sports bra/halter and it was pulled up. If one thinks about that, and Nancy was attacked from behind, were she in the act of either putting it on or taking it off - her hands may have been above her head at the time of the attack. It could have been used for strangulation as well. She could well have reached back and caught the back of her attacker's neck leaving only small marks due to her vulnerable position. Possible
One of the thoughts I had about the kids clothing was it had been stated per affidavits how much of a slob BC was living like. He most likely had 1 of the 2 bathrooms upstairs. NC and the girls used the other bathroom.

Any parent that needs to bath their child won't do it in the filth his was supposedly like. Maybe it was an item left in the bathroom after they were bathed?

This would answer just a bra on, not even totally removed or on NC. She was in the bathroom changing.

Also maybe the braided rung that was on the floor as a scattered rug?

Bathroom the scene. Also the cleaning products were found in there as well.

mahmoo

10-01-2008, 10:32 PM

RC............two responses to your post.

I've come to believe there is some truth in BC's affidavit........I think the "encounter" started after Katie had woken up at 4 am ish. They possibly got her back to sleep but they didn't go back to sleep. I don't know if NC had really planned to run that morning but believe, if her and BC were arguing, she may have begun to dress to go for an unplanned run.

The thing with the sports bra/halter......and this is just my point of view as a woman (who hates bras).......a sports bra is not something I would wear under "street" clothing......especially a nice dress. It's not something I would sleep in either.......too constrictive. The only time I would wear something of that nature would be to run in......keep the bouncing to a minimum. So, possibly, there is some element of truth in him saying she was getting ready to go run.

rwesafe

10-01-2008, 10:36 PM

I have no definite thought actually. I do wonder why the childs clothing would have been taken and can only figure the item was observed by LE on Saturday and there was something about it that caught their attention. We have two things to think about with that - one, Brad says they were up at 4 am with Katie and two, supposedly Nancy slept with the girls according to some. The green dress , if it was what was worn to the party, I can see LE collecting that but the childs clothing has me curious.

Maybe the reason they were up so early is because one of the children had wet the bed and the article of clothing had urine on it? Took it for testing? Perhaps that was the source of the unidentifiable stain on the linens where NC slept, obseved by the LE.

mahmoo

10-01-2008, 10:39 PM

One other thought.............Nancy was not a small petite woman......she was quite tall and very fit it sounds like.......I just can't imagine her going down without a major fight. Even if she was caught off guard I still think she would have put up a big time fight.

CyberPro

10-01-2008, 10:45 PM

I have no definite thought actually. I do wonder why the childs clothing would have been taken and can only figure the item was observed by LE on Saturday and there was something about it that caught their attention. We have two things to think about with that - one, Brad says they were up at 4 am with Katie and two, supposedly Nancy slept with the girls according to some. The green dress , if it was what was worn to the party, I can see LE collecting that but the childs clothing has me curious.

Also one other thing, based on the autopsy the only clothing on Nancy was a sports bra/halter and it was pulled up. If one thinks about that, and Nancy was attacked from behind, were she in the act of either putting it on or taking it off - her hands may have been above her head at the time of the attack. It could have been used for strangulation as well. She could well have reached back and caught the back of her attacker's neck leaving only small marks due to her vulnerable position. Possible

{bolding is mine}

RC,

You beat me to the punch, I was about to suggest this as a possibility. I have studied several different martial arts in the past, and it would be difficult to achieve a good choke hold on someone who had their hands above their head, although the best results would be from the front in this case.

Try as I might I cannot clearly see how [the perp] could use the sports bra to choke if she was actually putting it on. With her arms in the contraption, it would be difficult to get the leverage on it that would be needed, and the victim could reduce the pressure by moving her arms downward, thereby pulling the bra away from the throat. If [the perp] merely grabbed the bra for use as a weapon, it would be easier, since it would not be entangled with arms, etc. An attack from behind would be more difficult to defend against if the bra was already around the throat before she had a chance to react, and that could easily result in small scratches on the back of [the perps] neck. Also fairly easy to slip the bra on partially.

Caveat, I have never worn a sports bra, so I will defer to those who have and have indicated that they fight back against putting them on.

CyberPro

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 10:50 PM

RC............two responses to your post.

I've come to believe there is some truth in BC's affidavit........I think the "encounter" started after Katie had woken up at 4 am ish. They possibly got her back to sleep but they didn't go back to sleep. I don't know if NC had really planned to run that morning but believe, if her and BC were arguing, she may have begun to dress to go for an unplanned run.

The thing with the sports bra/halter......and this is just my point of view as a woman (who hates bras).......a sports bra is not something I would wear under "street" clothing......especially a nice dress. It's not something I would sleep in either.......too constrictive. The only time I would wear something of that nature would be to run in......keep the bouncing to a minimum. So, possibly, there is some element of truth in him saying she was getting ready to go run.

Thanks for the explanation of the sports bra thing - I'm clueless. :crazy:
But I must admit that I thought it would be a bizare thing for her to have worn under a dress, actually I don't think we really know she wore a dress to the party. I also believe there is some truth to what BC told LE and I do think there was a reason for him to admit to LE they were up at 4 am that Saturday. I believe it was Clea Morwick who indicated that Nancy did tell her at the party that she planned to run Saturday morning so the sports bra does indeed make sense. Another item I think BC told the truth about was the time that Nancy had planned to run on Friday morning - 5:45 am - supposedly with Carey Clark - this was canceled according to Brad. Since we know for sure that Carey Clark spoke with LE - they know if this aspect was true or not. But the clothing and the planned running time and the 4 am wake up time I think is all possibly true.

CyberPro

10-01-2008, 10:54 PM

Yeah, just I don't know, seems so unlikely with someone who was so physcically fit...almost like she was already out of breath from running and someone struck her with a force strong enough to break the hyoid? I just don't know....it is all so vague....

rwe,

The Hyoid bone is normally difficult to break, unless someone manually strangles someone else. This is a fairly typical indication of cause of death, and as far as I have ever read or researched is not normally broken under any other condition.

I posted earlier about previous martial arts training. It is very easy to cause death to someone by asphyxation by striking them in the throat, but this is due to a fractured/ruptured larynx, and associated swelling, which was not indicated in the autopsy, and would not usually break the Hyoid bone.

The 1.3" mark could be indicative of a ligature mark, or could have been caused by a thin solid rod pressed against the throat, but I would lean more toward a ligature.

A "karate chop" to the throat could cause death, but it would likely look much different in the postmortem report.

CyberPro

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 10:54 PM

One other thought.............Nancy was not a small petite woman......she was quite tall and very fit it sounds like.......I just can't imagine her going down without a major fight. Even if she was caught off guard I still think she would have put up a big time fight.

How big is iron man Brad - anyone know ?

Mahmoo - now you did it. If the friends are correct and Nancy did indeed keep her keys handy even when she slept, the only time really she would be without contact to those keys would be during times she was changing clothes - you think ?

SleuthyGal

10-01-2008, 11:07 PM

How big is iron man Brad - anyone know ?

Nancy was 5'9" and based on pictures of the two of them together, I'm guessing Brad is about 6'3".

raisincharlie

10-01-2008, 11:26 PM

Nancy was 5'9" and based on pictures of the two of them together, I'm guessing Brad is about 6'3".

He looks pretty sizable - your guess is probably close enough. I just don't think we should lose sight of the fact he is rather large and once trained for the iron man thing. Pound for pound I just don't see Nancy being much of a contest against him in a fight if he is in an angry fit, even if she was a fit runner.

momto3kids

10-01-2008, 11:34 PM

Two things...

1- NC was wearing an athetic bra when she was found, BUT one was taken during the SW with a red shirt in the same evidence bag. It appears sports bras was what she might normally wear. The price of bra's it could be she wore one the night before if it was cut in the manner she needed to be hidden under her dress. Sometimes you have to wear one you don't want to, but because of it color or style you are forced to.

2- left dark discoloration of strap muscles. Also marked congestion of the supraclavicular tissues on left. Sounds like he got her from behind, and whatever he used to strangle her with he did with the his right hand for the marks to be on her left.

Was she trying to get out of her bra and he used that to strangle her?

longtimelurker

10-02-2008, 09:07 AM

I have been reading these posts from the very beginning. As I have a medical background I feel compelled to comment on the autopsy. From my reading I would say that the pathologist felt that NC was strangled probably with some sort of “ ligature.” In these cases it take 10-15 seconds for a person to become unconscious, very little time to fight back! If the ligature was something from the home( not the sports bra) then forensic testing can be performed on the ligature and DNA from the victim may be found, see below(11/14 cases) . If the bra was used this will not be helpful. If the item is something that would not normally have human skin on it and it was found in the home this would be very strong evidence that the strangulation occurred in the home. Although forensic pathology texts say that the fracture of the hyoid bone is uncommon or rare in strangulations there are a number of reports in medical literature stating that the fracture of the hyoid bond is common in ligature strangulation. The victims of this type of strangulation most often evacuate urine and feces. The autopsy said the bladder was empty but did not mention fecal staining on the buttocks or legs, perhaps because this area was too decomposed . There has been at least one case where DNA of the assailant was found under the fingernails of the victim who was strangled. However if NC was caught by surprise, ie assailant was behind her and caught her quickly in the neck with a ligature, she may not have been able to get her fingernails into the assailants skin.

In hanging and ligature strangulation, the noose mostly causes a mark or groove which is formed partly by compression of the skin and partly by abrasion with loss of the upper epidermal layers. The horny scales abraded from the neck may be transferred to the strangulation device or to the interposed textiles where they are sometimes visible at stereomicroscopic examination or even to the naked eye as silver–grey particles. The morphologic features of the epidermal transfer due to hanging and ligature strangulation is demonstrated by 14 case examples. The biological traces may be sufficient for comparative DNA typing by means of PCR-based methods. In 9 out of the 14 cases, genomic DNA typing was successful. Analysis of mtDNA succeeded in another two cases, although genomic DNA could not be detected. Beside the accumulation of solid epidermic particles the paper describes deposition of serous and fatty tissue fluid at the ligature (mainly adjacent to skin ridges).Forensic Science International
Volumes116, Issues 2-3, 15 February 2001, pages 107-115

So I expect they are a. trying to determine what was used as ligature, if it was not the sports bra, they may be looking for Nancy’s DNA on that, they obviously are looking for
the assailants DNA under her fingernails, evidence of feces/urine in the house/car etc
Another interesting note is that the mud was on the medial aspect of the left leg. Meaning if she was dragged that the inside of the left leg was what got dragged through the mud.

Unfortunately due to the weather, decomposition, time and insect infestation there may have been more evidence or forensic clues that had been there but were not able to be determined by the time the body was found and the autopsy performed.

LL

ncnative

10-02-2008, 09:37 AM

Thanks, Longtime. Welcome.

I keep thinking about BC saying that he cleaned the wood floors with vinegar and water. Was he concerned that they would find evidence of vinegar on the floors, from his cleaning? Vinegar could be used to neutralize bases, such as chlorine bleach. Vinegar works well to remove the chlorine bleach feel (slick and slimy) from the hands, as well as to help neutralize the odor. (The old acid/base thing from high school chemistry class).

Why would he mention that he used a vinegar and water rinse on the floors anyway? Plus, that would smell awful in the home. There are too many other things to clean a floor that don't stink, like soapy water. Their wood floors aren't old and in disrepair, with a home of that age. You can see the photos of the foyer floor in the photo of Nancy being silly, with her keys in one hand, wearing the flip flops...shiny,clean looking floor.

What else could he have needed vinegar for? Some people use it for animal urine stains/odor. Would he have used it for urine stains? Don't know. There are too many specialized products for that purpose. And again, vinegar stinks.

I keep thinking about why he had to mention that he used a vinegar and water mixture to clean the wood floors. I will try to find where he stated that.

ncnative

10-02-2008, 10:05 AM

OK. Here's the mention of vinegar and water rinse on the wood floors, by Brad:

Item #13 in Brad Cooper's amended rebuttal

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local...rad_Cooper.pdf

If that link doesn't work, look on the index of Nancy Cooper's WS page, go to Legal Documents and look for Brad Cooper's Amended Rebuttal

ETA: my link doesn't work, but you can find it the "hard way", listed above, a few clicks and you're there, item #13, BC's Amended Rebuttal doc.

SleuthyGal

10-02-2008, 10:20 AM

Vinegar & warm water is recommended for the cleaning of wood floors to keep them in good condition. (1/2 - 1 cup of white vinegar to 1 gallon of warm water is what is recommended.) Per Brad's affidavit he did NOT clean the wood floors before Nancy returned from HH.

Whether it was truly common for the Coopers to clean their floors with vinegar & water we don't know. And of course what he used to 'scrub' the floors clean on 7/12 we also don't know.

SleuthyGal

10-02-2008, 10:23 AM

WELCOME LONGTIMELURKER!

Great info; it's nice to have folks with medical expertise to draw upon.

jmflu

10-02-2008, 10:26 AM

I have been reading these posts from the very beginning. As I have a medical background I feel compelled to comment on the autopsy. From my reading I would say that the pathologist felt that NC was strangled probably with some sort of “ ligature.” In these cases it take 10-15 seconds for a person to become unconscious, very little time to fight back! If the ligature was something from the home( not the sports bra) then forensic testing can be performed on the ligature and DNA from the victim may be found, see below(11/14 cases) . If the bra was used this will not be helpful. If the item is something that would not normally have human skin on it and it was found in the home this would be very strong evidence that the strangulation occurred in the home. Although forensic pathology texts say that the fracture of the hyoid bone is uncommon or rare in strangulations there are a number of reports in medical literature stating that the fracture of the hyoid bond is common in ligature strangulation. The victims of this type of strangulation most often evacuate urine and feces. The autopsy said the bladder was empty but did not mention fecal staining on the buttocks or legs, perhaps because this area was too decomposed . There has been at least one case where DNA of the assailant was found under the fingernails of the victim who was strangled. However if NC was caught by surprise, ie assailant was behind her and caught her quickly in the neck with a ligature, she may not have been able to get her fingernails into the assailants skin.

In hanging and ligature strangulation, the noose mostly causes a mark or groove which is formed partly by compression of the skin and partly by abrasion with loss of the upper epidermal layers. The horny scales abraded from the neck may be transferred to the strangulation device or to the interposed textiles where they are sometimes visible at stereomicroscopic examination or even to the naked eye as silver–grey particles. The morphologic features of the epidermal transfer due to hanging and ligature strangulation is demonstrated by 14 case examples. The biological traces may be sufficient for comparative DNA typing by means of PCR-based methods. In 9 out of the 14 cases, genomic DNA typing was successful. Analysis of mtDNA succeeded in another two cases, although genomic DNA could not be detected. Beside the accumulation of solid epidermic particles the paper describes deposition of serous and fatty tissue fluid at the ligature (mainly adjacent to skin ridges).Forensic Science International
Volumes116, Issues 2-3, 15 February 2001, pages 107-115

So I expect they are a. trying to determine what was used as ligature, if it was not the sports bra, they may be looking for Nancy’s DNA on that, they obviously are looking for
the assailants DNA under her fingernails, evidence of feces/urine in the house/car etc
Another interesting note is that the mud was on the medial aspect of the left leg. Meaning if she was dragged that the inside of the left leg was what got dragged through the mud.

Unfortunately due to the weather, decomposition, time and insect infestation there may have been more evidence or forensic clues that had been there but were not able to be determined by the time the body was found and the autopsy performed.LL

WOW. Where have YOU been all this time??!!! I am so glad you came out of lurker mode! You are a HUGE bounty of information and I hope you don't go back into lurking mode! :)

Welcome!!!

ncnative

10-02-2008, 11:49 AM

Vinegar & warm water is recommended for the cleaning of wood floors to keep them in good condition. (1/2 - 1 cup of white vinegar to 1 gallon of warm water is what is recommended.) Per Brad's affidavit he did NOT clean the wood floors before Nancy returned from HH.

Whether it was truly common for the Coopers to clean their floors with vinegar & water we don't know. And of course what he used to 'scrub' the floors clean on 7/12 we also don't know.

Sleuthy, I'm not referring to whether BC cleaned their floors w/vin./H2O BEFORE Nancy returned from Hilton Head. I KNOW that it is a recommended solution to use for wood floors (I have wood floors but never use that, only vacuum and use damp mop if necessary, not that it matters).

I AM saying that Brad Cooper's rebuttal affidavit speaks of Brad's cleaning the floors w/vinegar and water. I don't see why he had to mention the cleaning solution he used. Was he concerned that LE would notice he'd cleaned the floors with that (being a diluted acidic solution...sometimes used for other reasons, such as neutralizing bases (chlorine bleach is a basic as opposed to acid) or maybe he thought he could clean up urine or other bodily fluids with the vinegar/H2O, so he thought he'd mention he CLEANED the floors with it, maybe to cover up why he really used it.

An example of acid sol. (vin/H2O) neutralizing a basic sol.(such as chlorine bleach) is using vinegar to remove the slick, smelly chlorine from your hands after cleaning with the chlorine bleach sol.

Now, I can't even find that rebuttal affidavit by Brad. I WILL, but the guys just got here to cut up a tree that fell on our lawn.....

jilly

10-02-2008, 12:15 PM

I KNOW that it is a recommended solution to use for wood floors (I have wood floors but never use that, only vacuum and use damp mop if necessary, not that it matters).

I recommend the vinegar and water!:crazy:I wouldn't do it any other way.
I don't think that it's odd that BC mentioned what he used. If you use it all the time, you'd probably say it without thinking. Maybe LE asked what he used or maybe they could smell it and asked about it.

garner_nc

10-02-2008, 12:18 PM

This was in his rebuttal..so, I suppose he had heard all the media reports about him buying bleach at HT. If he only stated he cleaned the floors, then people would speculate that he did so with bleach. I believe he mentioned the cleaning solution specifically to end the gossip that he cleaned (the floors) with bleach. Otherwise, it adds no value to the rebuttal. What he really wanted to say was "I cleaned with vinegar and water, so there....I did not use bleach, stop the speculation".

rwesafe

10-02-2008, 12:20 PM

I recommend the vinegar and water!:crazy:I wouldn't do it any other way.
I don't think that it's odd that BC mentioned what he used. If you use it all the time, you'd probably say it without thinking. Maybe LE asked what he used or maybe they could smell it and asked about it.

I don't think it is odd either, especially since he was accused of purchasing bleach to clean with. I'm sure he felt like it was necessary to state specifically what he used.