Moving van at Cooper House now (11/13/08)

[jumpstreet]

Right - is everyone in NC incompetent in your view?

Uhhh... I don't believe I've ever suggested anything about anyone's competency... not sure where you're getting that from...

I had only suggested that a possible explanation for your admitted confusion over the X5 is that the online information you were viewing might not be 100% accurate/error-free/current. Online information (in any state) often isn't 100% perfect/error-free/current.

 

[Anderson]

So he was selfish for fighting to get his kids back? :waitasec:


He didn't initiate the custody dispute, the Rentz family did.

I didn't mention the custody case in my post. But, IMO, I think that the Rentzes responded in a reponsible way. The instances of BC's selfishness seem obvious to me and they have been reviewed several times on the board. IMO, it doesn't seem likely that the children will know their father and that may be --understandably -- extended to their paternal grandparents. I was just expressing some sadness for the girls. That's all.

 

[ncsu95]

I didn't mention the custody case in my post. But, IMO, I think that the Rentzes responded in a reponsible way. The instances of BC's selfishness seem obvious to me and they have been reviewed several times on the board. IMO, it doesn't seem likely that the children will know their father and that may be --understandably -- extended to their paternal grandparents. I was just expressing some sadness for the girls. That's all.

What I don't understand is that they initiated the custody case to remove his kids...and then want him to pay their lawyer bills. How is that reasonable? I don't care if this is BC or anyone else...how is it reasonable?

 

[SleuthyGal]

I believe the logic goes something like this: <voice of Rentz/Lister families to BC> "you killed Nancy and are not a fit parent and might be a danger to the kids so we had to initiate legal action to do the right thing to protect these children and get them into a safe/nuturing environment. And you're the direct cause of all of this heartache and loss and the need to protect the children, and therefore as the proximate cause, you need to pay the lawyers fees too."

Think of any liability case, say a product liability case in which a drug company loses a suit. Not only do they have to pay compensatory & punitive damages to the people harmed by the drug, but they also typically have to cover the attorney costs and fees as well.

 

[Albert]

What I don't understand is that they initiated the custody case to remove his kids...and then want him to pay their lawyer bills. How is that reasonable? I don't care if this is BC or anyone else...how is it reasonable?

I believe the Rentzes acted within reason and without a doubt they are entitled to financial support. Who knows what the Rentzes are doing the money, my guess is that they are putting the money aside for the children. I have no idea who they are but from their appearances they don't seem to be in dire needs financially.

Who knows what is a reasonable reaction to a situation where either you son or daughter is murdered. Who can judge their reaction since it is doubtful that any of us have ever experienced this type of situation. They are being very proactive for their granddaughters and their approach should be applauded not condemned. This is not a case of charity.

 

[Anderson]

I didn't mention the custody case in my post. But, IMO, I think that the Rentzes responded in a reponsible way. The instances of BC's selfishness seem obvious to me and they have been reviewed several times on the board. IMO, it doesn't seem likely that the children will know their father and that may be --understandably -- extended to their paternal grandparents. I was just expressing some sadness for the girls. That's all.

I guess that I did mention custody costs. I really don't know much about these things, but I thought that the decision to spend 10,000 on the mental evaluation was extravagant. I didn't say that he was selfish to want custody, though. Although that is one possibility. IDK.

 

[Anderson]

I believe the Rentzes acted within reason and without a doubt they are entitled to financial support. Who knows what the Rentzes are doing the money, my guess is that they are putting the money aside for the children. I have no idea who they are but from their appearances they don't seem to be in dire needs financially.

Who knows what is a reasonable reaction to a situation where either you son or daughter is murdered. Who can judge their reaction since it is doubtful that any of us have ever experienced this type of situation. They are being very proactive for their granddaughters and their approach should be applauded not condemned. This is not a case of charity.

I agree. I imagine that NC's family's resources have been substantially depleted over the last few months. Before that NC's father was sending money to BC and NC to help out. I don't think they are doing this to make money. And I suspect that if the family were to get compensation it will all go to the girls rather than their pockets. It seems like a very reasonable request.

 

[RaleighNC]

Perhaps they are doing this to stake some claim to some of the assets that Brad is looking to hide / move / transfer?

WTH was he doing signing crap over in JULY?????

It seems to me that he was trying to maintain "his" stuff and purposefully keep these things from his children.

Again - not what an innocent dude is doing 2 weeks after his wife is murdered.

 

[Star12]

Perhaps they are doing this to stake some claim to some of the assets that Brad is looking to hide / move / transfer?

WTH was he doing signing crap over in JULY?????

It seems to me that he was trying to maintain "his" stuff and purposefully keep these things from his children.

Again - not what an innocent dude is doing 2 weeks after his wife is murdered.

I think he was signing stuff over in July because he didn't have cash to give his attorneys a retainer. His check for $7000 to the Rosen Law Firm bounced. And Rosen is to divorce and custody what TS is to criminal.

But the timing on the moving van surely is something, isn't it. Makes me go "ehhhh".

 

[fran]

It is a very expensive proposition to raise two children. I should know, my late husband and I raised six. One of the six belonged to someone else, (long story). We only received FULL custody after we voluntarily put in writing that we would not ask for one dime of support from either parent AND not submit for support payments from the state (as a foster child).

IMHO, it appears Nancy's family had received a heads-up from someone in Cary that Brad or his family were in the process of preparing to remove contents from the home and perhaps even putting the house on the market. As this all was in part Nancy's property and the children's as well, it was prudent that they in fact filed the emergency motion the other day to protect what rightfully should be preserved for the two minor children.

I understand that the two autos have been gone from the premesis for a while. The fact that the remaining contents of the house was removed so soon after the motion was filed, it appears it was done in response to the court order. Learning that the ownership of all of these personal possessions were signed over so long ago and shortly after Nancy was murdered, tells me that Brad and his attorneys knew that an arrest was imminent.

With all this back and forth, what I'd like to know is, what happened to that HUGE bonus of Brad's? You know? the one that a member here was 'absolutely positive' Brad was to get over the next year? The one Brad 'failed' to mention in his deposition? ($250K?) I would hope the grandparents have instructed their attorney to persue this and whether it's in fact true or not. That could be a hefty sum to assist in raising these two children for the next 20 years or so.

I don't begrudge Brad using his resources to defend his custody of the children or his defense for the murder of his wife. But now he doesn't have to pay for his murder defense, it's not necessary that he maintain ownership over all of the 'joint' marital assets. His two children are in immediate need of support. Although Nancy's family are the ones who instituted the custody battle, IMO, that should NOT eliminate Brad's responsibility for support. He owes it to his two children, no matter what.

IMHO, Brad and his attorneys must be feeling pretty smug about now. That they were able to 'one up!' the family and their team of lawyers. But, I don't think this is over. IMO, the 'property' may NOT have been Brad's to give or assign. With Nancy's death, that puts a new spin on the ownership angle. IMO, we haven't seen the end of this part of the drama. Brad and his attorneys may have won the battle, but the war has just begun.

JMHO
fran

PS..........GOSH! hate to say this, but another parallel to the Lacy/Scott Peterson case. ....the mother of the accused whining about Lacy's jewelry, "WE WANT THOSE!"........fran

PPS.......I must admit how sad I was the other day seeing the moving van at Nancy's house. Another reminder of how swiftly one's life can be 'Erased!'...... fran

 

[ncsu95]

It is a very expensive proposition to raise two children. I should know, my late husband and I raised six. One of the six belonged to someone else, (long story). We only received FULL custody after we voluntarily put in writing that we would not ask for one dime of support from either parent AND not submit for support payments from the state (as a foster child).

IMHO, it appears Nancy's family had received a heads-up from someone in Cary that Brad or his family were in the process of preparing to remove contents from the home and perhaps even putting the house on the market. As this all was in part Nancy's property and the children's as well, it was prudent that they in fact filed the emergency motion the other day to protect what rightfully should be preserved for the two minor children.

I understand that the two autos have been gone from the premesis for a while. The fact that the remaining contents of the house was removed so soon after the motion was filed, it appears it was done in response to the court order. Learning that the ownership of all of these personal possessions were signed over so long ago and shortly after Nancy was murdered, tells me that Brad and his attorneys knew that an arrest was imminent.

With all this back and forth, what I'd like to know is, what happened to that HUGE bonus of Brad's? You know? the one that a member here was 'absolutely positive' Brad was to get over the next year? The one Brad 'failed' to mention in his deposition? ($250K?) I would hope the grandparents have instructed their attorney to persue this and whether it's in fact true or not. That could be a hefty sum to assist in raising these two children for the next 20 years or so.

I don't begrudge Brad using his resources to defend his custody of the children or his defense for the murder of his wife. But now he doesn't have to pay for his murder defense, it's not necessary that he maintain ownership over all of the 'joint' marital assets. His two children are in immediate need of support. Although Nancy's family are the ones who instituted the custody battle, IMO, that should NOT eliminate Brad's responsibility for support. He owes it to his two children, no matter what.

IMHO, Brad and his attorneys must be feeling pretty smug about now. That they were able to 'one up!' the family and their team of lawyers. But, I don't think this is over. IMO, the 'property' may NOT have been Brad's to give or assign. With Nancy's death, that puts a new spin on the ownership angle. IMO, we haven't seen the end of this part of the drama. Brad and his attorneys may have won the battle, but the war has just begun.

JMHO
fran

PS..........GOSH! hate to say this, but another parallel to the Lacy/Scott Peterson case. ....the mother of the accused whining about Lacy's jewelry, "WE WANT THOSE!"........fran

PPS.......I must admit how sad I was the other day seeing the moving van at Nancy's house. Another reminder of how swiftly one's life can be 'Erased!'...... fran

I missed that...when was that discussed?

 

[Anderson]

I missed that...when was that discussed?

I think in August. I can't remember the member's name (I think there were 9s in the user name?). I remember that someone else came on the board and dismissed this, I believe based on experience at Cisco. However, the original poster seemed quite sure about this. IDK. Someone else will probably remember more details.

 

[raisincharlie]

I think in August. I can't remember the member's name (I think there were 9s in the user name?). I remember that someone else came on the board and dismissed this, I believe based on experience at Cisco. However, the original poster seemed quite sure about this. IDK. Someone else will probably remember more details.

Post #562

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2466581#post2466581

 

[ncsu95]

Post #562

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2466581#post2466581

Thanks. Obviously that's a bunch of crap like you guys already figured out.

 

[fran]

Thanks. Obviously that's a bunch of crap like you guys already figured out.

Actually, it hasn't been figured out, IMHO. The poster was quite confident of their information.

As another poster pointed out, Cisco is a very large corporation which goes by a fiscal year or some such thing, ie from july to june or something. It is quite conceivable, IMO, that Brad MAY have actually been given that large of a bonus and not been collecting on it yet. After all, wasn't NC murdered just at the beginning of a fiscal year?

IMHO, it would be prudent of the 'family's' attorney to hire a forensic accountant AND request documents from Cisco regarding Brad's pay, etc. There could possibly be $285K MORE reasons for Brad Cooper to have murdered his wife, IF he is in fact guilty.

UNTIL it's proven there was no $285K bonus, I will keep it in the back of my 'websleuth mind.'

Just sayin'
fran

PS.........on a somber note, the latest posting on nancycooperblogspot is very sad. It brings home the senselessness and heartache of this crime.....
My heart goes out to Nancy's family and friends.....fran


http://nancycooper.blogspot.com/

The November 13 entry, titled "Furnishings"

 

[raisincharlie]

<snip>

With all this back and forth, what I'd like to know is, what happened to that HUGE bonus of Brad's? You know? the one that a member here was 'absolutely positive' Brad was to get over the next year? The one Brad 'failed' to mention in his deposition? ($250K?) I would hope the grandparents have instructed their attorney to persue this and whether it's in fact true or not. That could be a hefty sum to assist in raising these two children for the next 20 years or so.

I don't begrudge Brad using his resources to defend his custody of the children or his defense for the murder of his wife. But now he doesn't have to pay for his murder defense, it's not necessary that he maintain ownership over all of the 'joint' marital assets. His two children are in immediate need of support. Although Nancy's family are the ones who instituted the custody battle, IMO, that should NOT eliminate Brad's responsibility for support. He owes it to his two children, no matter what.

<snip>

JMHO
fran

PS..........GOSH! hate to say this, but another parallel to the Lacy/Scott Peterson case. ....the mother of the accused whining about Lacy's jewelry, "WE WANT THOSE!"........fran

PPS.......I must admit how sad I was the other day seeing the moving van at Nancy's house. Another reminder of how swiftly one's life can be 'Erased!'...... fran

Fran, it seems that Brad's financial situation is a moving target, Brad says his income is 120K, ABC is saying 150K. Brad says he is only 25k in debt and for some reason ABC is saying 240k. Right now it is hard to figure what is reality.

I do not begrudge Brad using his money to fight for his kids. By the same token however I am of the opinion that his legal fees ran up to date are both excessive and most likely not even justified. I say that because of all the bluster put up before the first hearing in July - it was ridiculous some of the stuff K & B was doing - demanding autopsy notes and reports that weren't even finished for example. The best example of wasting money is the publicity battle to argue over Brad's image and so on are other fine examples of K & B, in my opinion, taking advantage of this man just so they can bow out of the hearing before it even took place. Hiring a PI, for what ? Hiring a shrink when not yet so ordered - for what ? The defense had nothing to prove - Brad was not accused of anything by any legal means.

Then comes Sandlin and who knows how many hours billed, knowing full well that the judge would have to consider things beyond a simple custody issue in reality. Sandlin knew Brad would not be put on the stand and without doing so, the case was lost before it was heard. It is my opinion these lawyers ripped him off and if Brad was pushing them to do something - they should have had the guts to confront him and properly advise him of the silliness of his actions. To me there has been a theft - a bunch of lawyers basically stole financial support from two little innocent children whose Mother was murdered. That's how I see it anyhow. I wonder how they sleep at night or look in a mirror actually.

JMO

 

[RaleighNC]

Actually, it hasn't been figured out, IMHO. The poster was quite confident of their information.

As another poster pointed out, Cisco is a very large corporation which goes by a fiscal year or some such thing, ie from july to june or something. It is quite conceivable, IMO, that Brad MAY have actually been given that large of a bonus and not been collecting on it yet. After all, wasn't NC murdered just at the beginning of a fiscal year?

IMHO, it would be prudent of the 'family's' attorney to hire a forensic accountant AND request documents from Cisco regarding Brad's pay, etc. There could possibly be $285K MORE reasons for Brad Cooper to have murdered his wife, IF he is in fact guilty.

UNTIL it's proven there was no $285K bonus, I will keep it in the back of my 'websleuth mind.'

Just sayin'
fran

PS.........on a somber note, the latest posting on nancycooperblogspot is very sad. It brings home the senselessness and heartache of this crime.....
My heart goes out to Nancy's family and friends.....fran


http://nancycooper.blogspot.com/

The November 13 entry, titled "Furnishings"

The poster was MISTAKEN. Brad was paid the balance of his annual bonus in September -after Cisco's fiscal year closed on 7/31/08. It was completely in line with what a top performer would have received with someone with his salary - approximately 35% or so and 3.5% was paid in February as the mid year bonus.

Unless he was a fairly high ranking executive - and he's not - he would not be seeing $250K in bonus. Additionally, the other poster claimed that he was getting that huge bonus due to a major deal he helped land. He's not in sales, he's not a sales engineer - positions that might have a different bonus structure.

All of this would have been easy to substantiate and there's no way he'd have lied about that.

 

[raisincharlie]

Thanks for the blogspot link Fran.


Hmmmm, so the key table was not used for the placement of keys -interesting since that is exactly where Nancy's keys were found by LE.

 

[Anderson]

Thanks for the blogspot link Fran.


Hmmmm, so the key table was not used for the placement of keys -interesting since that is exactly where Nancy's keys were found by LE.

Yes, that must have been a consideration, as the case against Brad was being built. I'm sure that DD mentioned that information to investigators ages ago.

 

[fran]

Fran, it seems that Brad's financial situation is a moving target, Brad says his income is 120K, ABC is saying 150K. Brad says he is only 25k in debt and for some reason ABC is saying 240k. Right now it is hard to figure what is reality.

I do not begrudge Brad using his money to fight for his kids. By the same token however I am of the opinion that his legal fees ran up to date are both excessive and most likely not even justified. I say that because of all the bluster put up before the first hearing in July - it was ridiculous some of the stuff K & B was doing - demanding autopsy notes and reports that weren't even finished for example. The best example of wasting money is the publicity battle to argue over Brad's image and so on are other fine examples of K & B, in my opinion, taking advantage of this man just so they can bow out of the hearing before it even took place. Hiring a PI, for what ? Hiring a shrink when not yet so ordered - for what ? The defense had nothing to prove - Brad was not accused of anything by any legal means.

Then comes Sandlin and who knows how many hours billed, knowing full well that the judge would have to consider things beyond a simple custody issue in reality. Sandlin knew Brad would not be put on the stand and without doing so, the case was lost before it was heard. It is my opinion these lawyers ripped him off and if Brad was pushing them to do something - they should have had the guts to confront him and properly advise him of the silliness of his actions. To me there has been a theft - a bunch of lawyers basically stole financial support from two little innocent children whose Mother was murdered. That's how I see it anyhow. I wonder how they sleep at night or look in a mirror actually.
JMO

TA!


fran