PDA

View Full Version : Brad plays 'I Spy'



SleuthyGal
12-05-2008, 08:20 AM
Since no discussion allowed in media links and there's been a new SW returned in the case...

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/crime_safety/story/1321372.html

And, as a bonus, best irony ever: the writer of this article? Samuel Spies, Staff Writer


------
From the article: "Brad Cooper was intercepting his wife's e-mail and read some messages the day before she disappeared, according to a search warrant made public Thursday.

The document also says some notes intercepted earlier were between Nancy Cooper and her lawyer, who was drafting a separation agreement between the Cary couple.

The search warrant application, signed this month by a Cary Police Department detective, says investigators searched a laptop computer belonging to Brad Cooper's employer and assigned to him. They learned that all incoming e-mail to Nancy Cooper's account was being copied and sent to an account associated with Brad Cooper's Web site."

piedmont
12-05-2008, 09:39 AM
This is the kind of person he was and is why she was trying to get away from him.

Skittles
12-05-2008, 10:16 AM
Aha! So now we understand some of the questions AS asked Brad in the deposition. I was wondering why she was asking about the AdventuresofBrad site. I thought it had to do with Celine, though.

Star12
12-05-2008, 10:16 AM
That just sickens me.

RaleighNC
12-05-2008, 10:45 AM
N&O reports that he read emails that were for Nancy 3 times on July 11th!

I smell premeditation.... And - once again - it explains why he never got her money on Friday. His through process - "why waste a perfectly good $300?" he was busy in the office reading her email and plotting to kill her.

I believe this to my core. And it's beginning to sound like the DA has the evidence to back it up.

Maja
12-05-2008, 11:24 AM
I wonder if there were any e-mails from the man in Canada she was texting? If yes, seems he may have been infuriated, especially in light of how angry NC was over his adulterous relationship with HM. Just a thought...

per_curiam
12-05-2008, 11:29 AM
When I saw Maconrich's early post this morning about Brad's email adventures, I felt like a kid on Christmas morning for sure. Wow.

Now, does anyone know if Brad would have figured out how to get Nancy's emails like he did, or do you think he had help in figuring this one out? (I don't know anything about that, so you may see this as a dumb question that I should know the answer to.)

IF there is a possibility that someone else told him how to do this, they would not necessesarily be dragged into this crime, would they (whomever would have helped Brad do this)?

He probably did it himself, BUT if he had help (his brother is a computer science major, he has "people" who have expertise via friends, work, and he had Google too!)...he could have worked with someone else who either knew it was Nancy's email, or not.

Nevertheless, what a twist. I wonder for how long he was doing the spying.

Too bad Nancy didn't have spy mechanisms, oh, say...in the master bedroom closet, for instance.

fran
12-05-2008, 11:34 AM
Why am I not surprised by this revelation?:rolleyes:

Looks like Nancy's friends were right after all, about Brad spying on Nancy. :mad:

How he thought LE wouldn't find this out, is beyond me.

JMHO
fran

raisincharlie
12-05-2008, 11:36 AM
Is anyone really surprised to hear this - really ?

JWB in her affidavit indicated that the jailed one had a habit of entering her apartment after they had gone their seperate ways. Jessica and Brent Adam both put in affidavits that the jailed one was spying on Nancy, albeit, telephonically. But the portrait of hisability and willingness to do this type of thing was described long before this warrant.

Doesn't surprise me one bit actually and it won't surprise me one bit to hear how HE made the 6:40 am call to make it appear as though Nancy had called him. The truth will come out about that as well.

Rot in jail freak.

SleuthyGal
12-05-2008, 12:04 PM
Is anyone really surprised to hear this - really ?

Nope, not at all.

justthinking2008
12-05-2008, 01:03 PM
Maconrich,

You do not have to be an expert, you can change settings in most email accounts to send emails or copies of emails to other mailboxes, only takes a few minutes. I do not know what type of email NC had but I bet it was a free web based email which he could have quickly changed to copy from web into his box. Also there are keystroke finders you can buy for under a $100 they run silently in the background and record all information about email addresses, passwords, net activity. I have a keystroke finder on my kids computer so I can monitor their INTERNET activity, email, myspace, facebook, etc. You cannot see the keystroke finder once installed and a special code must be entered to even bring it up. So he probably used a keystroke finder to get email addresses and passwords and then logged in and re-routed her emails. Just my guess, could be wrong, but it sounds plausible.

raisincharlie
12-05-2008, 01:03 PM
Nope, not at all.

He's a sneaky pervert. 3 times on July 11 he checked Nancy's emails but couldn't be bothered to go to the bank to get the money promised. Slimey.

justthinking2008
12-05-2008, 01:07 PM
Also if he had a remote interface installed he could have accessed her computer from another computer to do the changes he needed. It is basically the same way employers monitor company emails.

SleuthyGal
12-05-2008, 01:12 PM
He's a sneaky pervert. 3 times on July 11 he checked Nancy's emails but couldn't be bothered to go to the bank to get the money promised. Slimey.

I bet her emails were automatically being copied/forwarded to his email account via a setting in the email system or via a program he used.

Too bad he couldn't seem to find time to get Nancy her weekly allowance...then again, didn't he allegedly tell her she wouldn't need it since she was earning money by painting?

SleuthyGal
12-05-2008, 01:14 PM
Also if he had a remote interface installed he could have accessed her computer from another computer to do the changes he needed. It is basically the same way employers monitor company emails.

I'm sure he would know how to do this. I have such software running on all the computers on my home network so I can access any of them.

raisincharlie
12-05-2008, 01:16 PM
I bet her emails were automatically being copied/forwarded to his email account via a setting in the email system or via a program he used.

Too bad he couldn't seem to find time to get Nancy her weekly allowance...then again, didn't he allegedly tell her she wouldn't need it since she was earning money by painting?

He didn't get the money because he knew she wouldn't be needing it at all seems to me. She was leaving and not taking the kids one way or the other - his mind was made up.

SleuthyGal
12-05-2008, 01:21 PM
He didn't get the money because he knew she wouldn't be needing it at all seems to me. She was leaving and not taking the kids one way or the other - his mind was made up.

Appears to be a reasonable inference!

raisincharlie
12-05-2008, 01:44 PM
Appears to be a reasonable inference!

The DP is not off the table 100% - it can always be requested before trial. LE is still collecting evidence - who knows what they may find.

SleuthyGal
12-05-2008, 04:18 PM
RC, the warrant (http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/12/05/4086622/warrant.swf) is now posted (and I also put it in the legal docs section).

raisincharlie
12-05-2008, 04:32 PM
RC, the warrant (http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/12/05/4086622/warrant.swf) is now posted (and I also put it in the legal docs section).


Thanks SG - so many warrants released today - brain drain ! :crazy:

Appreciate it SG !

SleuthyGal
12-05-2008, 04:40 PM
You're very welcome.

Today's a good day for sure! Esp. with OJ sentenced (FINALLY).

raisincharlie
12-05-2008, 04:44 PM
You're very welcome.

Today's a good day for sure! Esp. with OJ sentenced (FINALLY).

Hey SG - to the jailed one's list of lies - and this is now a confirmed lie, one can add that per this warrant the jailed one was reading Nancy's email at 10:13 pm on July 11 - while in his deposition he claims he was sound asleep with the girls by 9 pm.

LIAR -not an inconsistency - a flat out lie.


poor pitiful OJ - he didn't know he was doing anything wrong. not only is he arrogant - he is dumber than a door knob to lay that bs on a judge.

SleuthyGal
12-05-2008, 04:50 PM
Hey SG - to the jailed one's list of lies - and this is now a confirmed lie, one can add that per this warrant the jailed one was reading Nancy's email at 10:13 pm on July 11 - while in his deposition he claims he was sound asleep with the girls by 9 pm.

LIAR -not an inconsistency - a flat out lie.

Isn't that interesting? While Nancy is back at the party across the street, Brad is on his laptop, reading Nancy's private emails.

raisincharlie
12-05-2008, 04:54 PM
Isn't that interesting? While Nancy is back at the party across the street, Brad is on his laptop, reading Nancy's private emails.


Even more interesting that he had been reading her private emails as of April 2008. What a pestilence, being kind.

RaleighNC
12-05-2008, 04:55 PM
Isn't that interesting? While Nancy is back at the party across the street, Brad is on his laptop, reading Nancy's private emails.

Stewing, getting more and more angry by the minute.

Based on the aggressive nature of Alice Stubbs, and Nancy's new found courage / ability to stand up for herself, I can only imagine the tenor of those emails......

SleuthyGal
12-05-2008, 04:59 PM
That might have been the final 'trigger.' We were thinking it was Nancy correcting him at the BBQ (for not being able to understand what Katie wanted), but this has me rethinking that.

raisincharlie
12-05-2008, 05:05 PM
That might have been the final 'trigger.' We were thinking it was Nancy correcting him at the BBQ (for not being able to understand what Katie wanted), but this has me rethinking that.

Could have been SG, could have been - we won't know until trial what those last emails were and from whom. Seems to me by this point in time, no matter what Nancy did, it was wrong in his view, to include breathing.

SleuthyGal
12-05-2008, 05:07 PM
But the portrait of his ability and willingness to do this type of thing was described long before this warrant.

Yes it was. And here JWB was labeled by some as a "bitter ex with an axe to grind," and NC's friends as 'liars.'

raisincharlie
12-05-2008, 05:17 PM
Yes it was. And here JWB was labeled by some as a "bitter ex with an axe to grind," and NC's friends as 'liars.'

JWB nailed him right - even the Dr. agreed. It will be interesting to see what comes of the accusations about the phone - right now I think it is more likely than not that he was doing exactly as both JA and BA indicated he was doing. Bet he had every form of Nancy's communications covered actually.

SleuthyGal
12-05-2008, 05:32 PM
I feel so sad when I learn of these things. Brad's ability to read NC's emails...sigh... poor Nancy didn't have the technical expertise to better protect her email/electronic communications. Her lawyer probably didn't realize what was possible either.

There are some key things to do to protect oneself from prying eyes, but then again, you'd have to know what you're dealing with.

Maja
12-06-2008, 02:48 AM
That might have been the final 'trigger.' We were thinking it was Nancy correcting him at the BBQ (for not being able to understand what Katie wanted), but this has me rethinking that.

Approximately a month ago on here, I put "out there" a rhetorical question with regard to Alice Stubbs and it was in reference to my curiosity about her feeling slightly guilty over the proposed agreement she drafted, knowing (via NC) BC would be livid. It seems the amount being sought was absolutely outrageous/unreasonable.

I also wonder if there were e-mails from NCs "flame" in Canada? If yes, BC would have been livid about it too; especially in light of NCs rage (understandable) over BCs "indiscression" with HM -- then he finds out she is pursuing a relationship behind his back (possibly).

piedmont
12-06-2008, 08:39 AM
I think this whole set-up was a very dangerous situation-NC's sister saw that clearly. I'm not sure NC got good advice-or maybe she did and just didn't realize how much danger she really was in, obviously. I guess if it was me in the situation, I'd probably think "Yeah, this will definitely anger him greatly, but he's certainly not going to KILL me." After all, he hadn't been a violent person before.
I also don't understand a lawyer emailing a client about such huge matters. Maybe NC wanted that, and it didn't occur to her that he could be reading them. I guess I'm a little upset with the judgement of the lawyer-actually surprised.

SleuthyGal
12-06-2008, 09:07 AM
I agree, Piedmont. With a sneaky-bastard/techie/estranged husband, the last thing Nancy should have been using for confidential correspondence was any computer in her own house (or any computer Brad had access to/control of), or any email address Brad knew.

She probably used the email address that was setup for her when they first established Internet service; even if she changed her password he still could install a key logger on all computers in their house and gain access to alter her settings. It's just so unfortunate that she continued to use the computers in her house, not realizing what he was doing (but having the sense that he was spying on her, which he was).

Had she setup a brand new email address, with a new password that was not something Brad could guess, and she only used that email account on external computers (like at the library or at a friend's house), Brad would not have been able to hack into her account and see her communications with her lawyer or anyone else.

A unique email addy should always be setup for exclusive use with one's lawyer and not given to anyone else and not accessed on any shared computer in an estranged household. Passwords should be unique and not shared between accounts and should never be something that anyone could guess.

I am in NO way blaming Nancy at all. She didn't know and the fault lies solely and completely on the jailed-one. But at the same time there are some lessons to be learned and ensuring one has confidential communication be it email, cell phone, texting, IMing is paramount, especially in an estranged/contentious marriage, separation, and divorce.

per_curiam
12-06-2008, 09:48 AM
Approximately a month ago on here, I put "out there" a rhetorical question with regard to Alice Stubbs and it was in reference to my curiosity about her feeling slightly guilty over the proposed agreement she drafted, knowing (via NC) BC would be livid. It seems the amount being sought was absolutely outrageous/unreasonable.

I also wonder if there were e-mails from NCs "flame" in Canada? If yes, BC would have been livid about it too; especially in light of NCs rage (understandable) over BCs "indiscression" with HM -- then he finds out she is pursuing a relationship behind his back (possibly).

Why would Brad be "livid" over Nancy having a romantic interest other than himself? He already had plenty of that in his life. He knew the marriage was doomed. He was probably livid over what he READ in the emails that we don't know about, no matter to whom the emails were written, by Nancy.

I doubt Alice Stubbs is feeling guilty because of any emails she wrote to Nancy or because of the divorce draft with large amounts of money requested for Nancy and girls.

I think that more and more, with computer technology the way it is today, we see it change crime, how crimes are committed, how they are investigated, etc. Life morphs on. Killing someone with an axe and throwing it in the woods behind the house is too simple. Now, it's the cyber-murder scenario.

Brad would have been more livid over the divorce draft (it sought to take him to the cleaners and muss his image as well), and isn't the narcissist more concerned about mussing his hard-crafted image of himself? He didn't want divorce. It would show him in a low light, take his money and Nancy would be the winner: take all and run, in his eyes.

per_curiam
12-06-2008, 10:00 AM
I feel so sad when I learn of these things. Brad's ability to read NC's emails...sigh... poor Nancy didn't have the technical expertise to better protect her email/electronic communications. Her lawyer probably didn't realize what was possible either.

There are some key things to do to protect oneself from prying eyes, but then again, you'd have to know what you're dealing with.

I disagree. I would hope that in today's technical world of computers that lawyers certainly know that is possible (for others to find a way into other people's computers). As well, most people know that what's out there in cyber space is for public knowledge. Alice Stubbs is no dummy in that regard.

As to "...poor Nancy... not having the ...techinical expertise to better protect her email/electronic communications...", she was no dummy in that regard either. When she met Brad she was working in the computer related field, or was in IT technology IIRC. I'd have to look back on that to keep from being lashed out at here, for incorrectly quoting info. (Do it yourself!:))

By Brad's computer spying, this will only serve to make others more aware of the realm of technology as related to computers and lack of privacy.

Better to be smart going in than a dummy going and coming. (I made that up. Laugh if you will. I can't think of the quote I need here!).

raisincharlie
12-06-2008, 10:17 AM
I agree, Piedmont. With a sneaky-bastard/techie/estranged husband, the last thing Nancy should have been using for confidential correspondence was any computer in her own house (or any computer Brad had access to/control of), or any email address Brad knew.

She probably used the email address that was setup for her when they first established Internet service; even if she changed her password he still could install a key logger on all computers in their house and gain access to alter her settings. It's just so unfortunate that she continued to use the computers in her house, not realizing what he was doing (but having the sense that he was spying on her, which he was).

Had she setup a brand new email address, with a new password that was not something Brad could guess, and she only used that email account on external computers (like at the library or at a friend's house), Brad would not have been able to hack into her account and see her communications with her lawyer or anyone else.

A unique email addy should always be setup for exclusive use with one's lawyer and not given to anyone else and not accessed on any shared computer in an estranged household. Passwords should be unique and not shared between accounts and should never be something that anyone could guess.

I am in NO way blaming Nancy at all. She didn't know and the fault lies solely and completely on the jailed-one. But at the same time there are some lessons to be learned and ensuring one has confidential communication be it email, cell phone, texting, IMing is paramount, especially in an estranged/contentious marriage, separation, and divorce.

SG the "I Spy" warrant indicates that the jailed one began intercepting Nancy's emails in April, the date on the the separation agreement was 4/18/08 and from previous warrants we know that Nancy emailed this to the jailed one as well for his review. The over all feel I get from all that I have read is there was a minimum of real communication between these two.

I think it is unfair to place blame on anyone other than the one responsible, who now sits in jail. Statistics indicate for women in abusive relationships that the most dangerous time for them is when they are trying to leave the situation - I think Star can back that up. Based on that it seems to me that some issues should be addressed.

Perhaps the best approach is through lawyers who provide services for divorce and/or separation. Perhaps at the very beginning there should be a conversation between lawyer and client emphasizing this concept - the danger level will increase. There are too many case discussions on WS alone that point out this problem and it is not just in the Raleigh or NC area - check a media outlet just about anywhere and I'll venture there will be something similar being reported, sad to say.

SleuthyGal
12-06-2008, 10:27 AM
G'morning RC!

I'm not placing blame on anyone EXCEPT the jailed-one, and hopefully I conveyed that thought in my original post.

As a techie myself I know what is possible, which is why his being able to snoop on Nancy frustrates me--because I also know how to prevent it, and the part of me that wishes I could *do something* wishes I could magically be transported back in time and help protect Nancy in that way.

It's the emotional reaction I'm having--learning what Brad boy was doing, even though it didn't surprise me in the least.

raisincharlie
12-06-2008, 10:55 AM
G'morning RC!

I'm not placing blame on anyone EXCEPT the jailed-one, and hopefully I conveyed that thought in my original post.

As a techie myself I know what is possible, which is why his being able to snoop on Nancy frustrates me--because I also know how to prevent it, and the part of me that wishes I could *do something* wishes I could magically be transported back in time and help protect Nancy in that way.

It's the emotional reaction I'm having--learning what Brad boy was doing, even though it didn't surprise me in the least.


Sorry SG - didn't mean to imply blame was being placed - not my intent. I understand what you are saying but as you point out, being a techie gives you an advantage. For me, the average bubba - these kinds of thoughts never enter my mind - someone intercepting my email i.e. especially not my spouse. For the average joe I doubt it would enter their mind either is all I'm trying to say. I'm not surprised to hear the jailed one was doing this and I suspect more will come out of a similar nature actually. I agree - emotionally it is disgusting and shows a certain depravity.

Nancy perhaps should have realized the potential given the jailed one is a techie and there was obvious concern about the telephone, and BC's past history - i.e. BC not being able to admit a closet adventure even though the rest of Cary seemed to know about it. We take a lot of things for granted daily. What is infinitly more disturbing to me is, having followed conversations here, the understanding of abuse and its manifestation seems to be lacking for some, too many IMO.

Good Morning back at you !

Maja
12-06-2008, 11:54 AM
Sorry SG - didn't mean to imply blame was being placed - not my intent. I understand what you are saying but as you point out, being a techie gives you an advantage. For me, the average bubba - these kinds of thoughts never enter my mind - someone intercepting my email i.e. especially not my spouse. For the average joe I doubt it would enter their mind either is all I'm trying to say. I'm not surprised to hear the jailed one was doing this and I suspect more will come out of a similar nature actually. I agree - emotionally it is disgusting and shows a certain depravity.

Nancy perhaps should have realized the potential given the jailed one is a techie and there was obvious concern about the telephone, and BC's past history - i.e. BC not being able to admit a closet adventure even though the rest of Cary seemed to know about it. We take a lot of things for granted daily. What is infinitly more disturbing to me is, having followed conversations here, the understanding of abuse and its manifestation seems to be lacking for some, too many IMO.

Good Morning back at you !



As I understand NC was a techie too and just didn't consider this; or knew he would/could intercept and frankly didn't give a hoot - not considering/fathoming BCs reaction to it.

It did seem Alice Stubbs proposed $ amount per month was over the top and really unreasonable based on the deposition and BCs math in public over the amount per month - far exceeded his after tax income.

I believe we will hear BC testify he "inadvertently" (perhaps suggest NC left the computer logged in under her credentials) saw e-mail traffic between NC and, I believe his name is "Brett" from Canada. Clearly there was text traffic between the two. Believe one of the affidavits explained how JA saw a text on NCs phone from a man named "Brett" and really had an emotional reaction - perhaps thinking "Brett" was her husband. So, if there were text messages, there may very well be other forms of communication and "the interceptor" was lurking...

I also believe he will say she came home from the BBQ and he approached her with regard to his "accidental discovery" and challenged her. He may say she got physical with him and he restrained her and somehow it led to her death.

raisincharlie
12-06-2008, 12:11 PM
As I understand NC was a techie too and just didn't consider this; or knew he would/could intercept and frankly didn't give a hoot - not considering/fathoming BCs reaction to it.

It did seem Alice Stubbs proposed $ amount per month was over the top and really unreasonable based on the deposition and BCs math in public over the amount per month - far exceeded his after tax income.

I believe we will hear BC testify he "inadvertently" (perhaps suggest NC left the computer logged in under her credentials) saw e-mail traffic between NC and, I believe his name is "Brett" from Canada. Clearly there was text traffic between the two. Believe one of the affidavits explained how JA saw a text on NCs phone from a man named "Brett" and really had an emotional reaction - perhaps thinking "Brett" was her husband. So, if there were text messages, there may very well be other forms of communication and "the interceptor" was lurking...

I also believe he will say she came home from the BBQ and he approached her with regard to his "accidental discovery" and challenged her. He may say she got physical with him and he restrained her and somehow it led to her death.

His accidental discovery that lasted 3 months - inadvertantly - never gonna fly as a defense for his actions. Jurors will see it for what it is and that approach will only prove him to be more of an unbelievable liar than some of the more common lies he has created. For some reason I can see this happening however.

Star12
12-06-2008, 12:52 PM
As I understand NC was a techie too and just didn't consider this; or knew he would/could intercept and frankly didn't give a hoot - not considering/fathoming BCs reaction to it.

It did seem Alice Stubbs proposed $ amount per month was over the top and really unreasonable based on the deposition and BCs math in public over the amount per month - far exceeded his after tax income.

I believe we will hear BC testify he "inadvertently" (perhaps suggest NC left the computer logged in under her credentials) saw e-mail traffic between NC and, I believe his name is "Brett" from Canada. Clearly there was text traffic between the two. Believe one of the affidavits explained how JA saw a text on NCs phone from a man named "Brett" and really had an emotional reaction - perhaps thinking "Brett" was her husband. So, if there were text messages, there may very well be other forms of communication and "the interceptor" was lurking...

I also believe he will say she came home from the BBQ and he approached her with regard to his "accidental discovery" and challenged her. He may say she got physical with him and he restrained her and somehow it led to her death.

Starting backwards, I don't think self defense is going to hold any water here. K may make a stab at it, but there are too many witnessess that will show BC's "bad character" - plus his own actions or lack thereof, that are just indefensible.

I do think that the final emails were the last straw, though, but I'm not sure if they or any one of them on Friday was from Brett, or was the triggering factor. It could have been emails to or from Krista or one of her friends outlining imminent escape plans. Jessica, remember, was pretty quick to assume BC had done something to Nancy, and her friends were aboard that train immediately. As pointed out, the closer to leaving it gets, the more dangerous it is for the woman. The man realizes the woman is not only defying him (the traitorist b*tch), but he has lost his ultimate control over her. Thus, the rage - he can no longer control her, and he cannot control himself. Domestic violence is the result. Or, as Chief Bazemore said, "domestic violence of the worst kind" - death.

On the email interception I cannot see how anyone would believe an "inadvertant" discovery - especially going back to April and continuing through to her death. And given BC's expertise....

When I first saw the separation draft I was stunned. Incredible, but then I figured that BC must be rolling in it. Evidentally Nancy thought so too, and conveyed that to AS. Then I found out what he actually made, and was not that impressed. BC would have been more than livid. IMO, Nancy should have somehow terminated the living arrangement right then to protect herself.

And, at that, I'm off for luncheon with my daughter and granddaughter, to think of happier things.

per_curiam
12-07-2008, 01:03 AM
Not only is Brad a computer guy, his brother Grant is a Computer Science major who has expertise. Check out his credentials at Medicine Hat College.

Maja
12-07-2008, 01:30 AM
Not only is Brad a computer guy, his brother Grant is a Computer Science major who has expertise. Check out his credentials at Medicine Hat College.


http://www.mhc.ab.ca/user/grantcooper/default.html

Skittles
12-07-2008, 10:36 AM
http://www.mhc.ab.ca/user/grantcooper/default.html

Hmmm...Grant's biography page has an "ask me a question" link.

ETA: I tried the link, but there's no place to enter anything. If it was enabled a some point it's not now.

per_curiam
12-07-2008, 10:43 AM
Hmmm...Grant's biography page has an "ask me a question" link.

Thanks Maja, for posting the link that I mentioned.

Yes, Skittles. Grant Cooper's site has an "ask me a question" link. I thought about it. I really did! Maybe someone else will do it! (I noticed that Grant needs to check up on his typos).

panthera
12-07-2008, 04:15 PM
I think this whole set-up was a very dangerous situation-NC's sister saw that clearly. I'm not sure NC got good advice-or maybe she did and just didn't realize how much danger she really was in, obviously. I guess if it was me in the situation, I'd probably think "Yeah, this will definitely anger him greatly, but he's certainly not going to KILL me." After all, he hadn't been a violent person before.
I also don't understand a lawyer emailing a client about such huge matters. Maybe NC wanted that, and it didn't occur to her that he could be reading them. I guess I'm a little upset with the judgement of the lawyer-actually surprised.
I really don't either except maybe she agreed it would be more convenient than her trying to get to his office. It's sad she didn't think that BC would be reading them or I'm sure she would've used a new email address and read them on someone else's computer, like one of her close friends. :( MOO