Found Deceased State v Bradley Cooper - 3/23/11

[sunshine05]

Yes, you are correct. Her life insurance policy was only $75k, certainly not worth killing someone over (not in his case anyways).

I do think he hated her though. If anything, he had no respect for her (cutting her off $, no access to online banking, stealing passports (although I can understand not wanting the kids to go to Canada - parental abduction type of thing), and multiple affairs.

If he did read her emails and saw the email from the atty that night (friday), he would be seething. She was buzzed from the party, would have been infuriated if he confronted her about it, and there you go. Two people who can't stand each other and it all begins and goes somewhere neither of them expected (Brad going into a rage and it's all over at that point).

So the only motive I can buy (from what I've read/heard) is losing control in a moment of fury and not being able to stop what's coming next.

I don't see that he had no respect for her. I think he tried to get her everything she wanted. She got the BMW SUV, the bear painting, the diamond necklace, he watched the kids while she stayed at the party. I am just not getting that picture.

And the money. I believe it's been documented that they were in deep debt, on a 2nd mortgage and borrowing from 401K just to make ends meet. I don't see living on a budget as cutting someone off. I don't see him as someone who would let his kids go hungry.

 

[jmflu]

Are we for sure that she wasn't concerned about having gotten an STD from her husband?

Excellent point.

 

[raisincharlie]

<snip>

If he did read her emails and saw the email from the atty that night (friday), he would be seething. She was buzzed from the party, would have been infuriated if he confronted her about it, and there you go. Two people who can't stand each other and it all begins and goes somewhere neither of them expected (Brad going into a rage and it's all over at that point).

So the only motive I can buy (from what I've read/heard) is losing control in a moment of fury and not being able to stop what's coming next.

It has been in the back of my mind for a very long time - what would push Brad over the edge ? He is cold, emotionless, and self serving.

I tend to think there is a direct link between the emails and the fact that Nancy is dead. I tend to think that there is a possibility that one of those emails or several for that matter, may have included information which would or could assist Nancy in getting away from Brad. Maybe not back to Canada but maybe just out from his control. I have stiudied and studied on why he agreed to allow her to return to Canada in April, at least until he saw the potential cost of that were he to allow it. Everything changed, what did not change was Nancy was still living out of boxes...she had no intentions of remaining IMO. Perhaps she was offered a way to get clear. Control is a very touchy thing.

 

[jmflu]

What has the defense lied about? I must have missed something.

Oh, my goodness!!

Where's SG?

 

[otto]

Disgusting. Heartless. This blame the victim approach that Brad supporters adopt only hardens me towards him.

This is not a "blame the victim" situation. It is a fact of the case. There's no reason to whitewash the facts, especially when they neutralize the fact that the accused had an affair and told the victim about it almost a year before the murder. This married couple were living like roommates for 2 years prior to the murder, so the fact that they were unfaithful to each other is not a surprise, and does not appear to be a factor in the murder.

 

[sunshine05]

Are we for sure that she wasn't concerned about having gotten an STD from her husband?

Well, I suppose it's possible, but in 05 I don't think BC was having the affair yet, or at least NC didn't know about it. The only thing we know is that she "allegedly" did an STD test.

 

[BrownRice]

I don't see that he had no respect for her. I think he tried to get her everything she wanted. She got the BMW SUV, the bear painting, the diamond necklace, he watched the kids while she stayed at the party. I am just not getting that picture.

And the money. I believe it's been documented that they were in deep debt, on a 2nd mortgage and borrowing from 401K just to make ends meet. I don't see living on a budget as cutting someone off. I don't see him as someone who would let his kids go hungry.

Well, having relations with your wife's close friend in your closet with your kids a home is pretty disrespectful to me. I agree they both seemed irresponsible with their spending habits (and maybe NC was more to blame, I don't know). But not allowing your wife online access to pay a water bill seems pretty controlling to me.

I'm open minded and haven't convicted him yet. I would hate for him to be imprisoned for a crime he didn't do. But, I also wouldn't nominate him for husband of the year. I can see how both of them could push each other's buttons and things could get heated and lead to a violent conclusion.

 

[carolinalady]

Are we for sure that she wasn't concerned about having gotten an STD from her husband?

According to documents, they weren't having intercourse (IIRC since Katie was conceived). Normally, an STD panel is done with prenatal bloodwork (meaning she would know if he had transmitted an STD to her at that time). Did any of the friends testify about NC saying how long since sexually active (I haven't heard all of the testimony).

 

[Cheyenne130]

Yes, he would have been irate with having to pay the alimony/child support and other expenses. But so mad to kill her? I just see him as too intelligent to be so stupid. Of course, it happens every day, but I would be shocked.

As I've said before, I think it was the perfect storm. The fact that he had the house to himself and got a sense of what it was like. The fact that he found out just how much this divorce might cost him. The fact that he decided for whatever reason to not give her whatever weekly allowance she was getting and she got royally P.O'd and resulted in her yelling at him in front of everyone at the neighbors. It was a molotov cocktail in full bloom!

 

[SleuthyGal]

RWESAFE said: I'm disgusted, at this point, that an indictment was handed down from the Grand Jury based on the nothing that has been presented.

I have a suspicion that the indictment was not based on the things we have seen (in which evidence did not exist) but on what they did find that we will (soon) see.

 

[rwesafe]

I remember reading that. But even Nancy's appearance doesn't support a random crime. No sexual assault, no theft, and missing items like shoes and socks that make no sense, not to mention strangulation which most often points to an emotional connection with the perp. No other *random* murders in the area. The quick arrest of BC. The inconsistencies, the lies, the motive, the means, the opportunity. They all point, together, to one man. Can we convict? Not yet. But intuition and common sense point us in the exact direction we are heading.

They did not say there was no sexual assualt, only that it could not be confirmed or denied based on the condition of the body.

A google search will show you that people have broken the hyoid bone puking on the toilet while intoxicated. The lack of ligature or finger marks around the neck is just as relevant.

Not a single one of us knows if a murderer is among us.

We have no way of knowing what is and isn't a lie because it was not said to us directly by any of the parties involved.

The evidence does not point to the one man. It would be a travesty of justice to convict at this point.

Common sense tells me that there is room to believe that there are other possibilities and potential motives.

If they were to run the two peaks of DNA that did not match NC or BC and it hit on a known killer (if we only had such a database )....that would be awesome because we would know for sure.

I'm not as sure as you are that we are going to get there. I hope we get to the truth and nothing but the truth...so help us all...

 

[sunshine05]

It has been in the back of my mind for a very long time - what would push Brad over the edge ? He is cold, emotionless, and self serving.

I tend to think there is a direct link between the emails and the fact that Nancy is dead. I tend to think that there is a possibility that one of those emails or several for that matter, may have included information which would or could assist Nancy in getting away from Brad. Maybe not back to Canada but maybe just out from his control. I have stiudied and studied on why he agreed to allow her to return to Canada in April, at least until he saw the potential cost of that were he to allow it. Everything changed, what did not change was Nancy was still living out of boxes...she had no intentions of remaining IMO. Perhaps she was offered a way to get clear. Control is a very touchy thing.

What gives you the impression he was cold, emotionless and self-serving? He seemed social, had a lot of friends, played tennis, did joint family vacations, went to neighbors for parties, etc.

BC stated in his dep. that he was all for her moving to Canada but only if he could find a job there so he could still see his kids. When he was unable to find a job, he changed his mind about her taking them away. It sounds completely believable to me.

 

[Tink56]

According to documents, they weren't having intercourse (IIRC since Katie was conceived). Normally, an STD panel is done with prenatal bloodwork (meaning she would know if he had transmitted an STD to her at that time). Did any of the friends testify about NC saying how long since sexually active (I haven't heard all of the testimony).

I followed the case closely in the summer/fall of 2009. Obviously I haven't seen all the most recent documents, etc. Who said the marriage was "sexless"? Where could I find these documents?

TIA

 

[otto]

In the seperation agreement the blank for child support was filled in. It was to be $2100 a month. The email to Nancy that may/may not have been intercepted by Brad indicated that the alimony field had not yet been filled in. There were other items in that seperation agreement as well. It's in the documents on WRAL. If you have not yet read that document, scan over and see if you wouldn't think that money might be a motive.

That's rather generous. If Brad made $112k, would his take home after taxes have been about $60k or $70k? Subtract $25k, that doesn't leave much. Who pays taxes on the child support - Brad or Nancy? That would have been about $1600 in Alberta (http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/fcy-fea/lib-bib/legis/fcsg-lfpae/tables2006/alta_2.html) with Brad paying taxes on the money.

 

[sunshine05]

Well, having relations with your wife's close friend in your closet with your kids a home is pretty disrespectful to me. I agree they both seemed irresponsible with their spending habits (and maybe NC was more to blame, I don't know). But not allowing your wife online access to pay a water bill seems pretty controlling to me.

I'm open minded and haven't convicted him yet. I would hate for him to be imprisoned for a crime he didn't do. But, I also wouldn't nominate him for husband of the year. I can see how both of them could push each other's buttons and things could get heated and lead to a violent conclusion.

Yeah, I see your point, but if she was withholding sex I think I can understand the affair. I do think there are witnesses who will back this up but I can't be sure who.

The water bill - normally bills are only in one person's name. Maybe he needed to be the one to reactivate their account. Not sure, don't really know the details of that one but it does show how broke they were. Who goes out and buys 9K painting when the water bill can't be paid.

 

[rwesafe]

I have a suspicion that the indictment was not based on the things we have seen (in which evidence did not exist) but on what they did find that we will (soon) see.

I sure hope you are right about that. I don't want to think that not liking someone is enough to send them to jail for something they may not have done.

 

[CyberPro]

Oh. It would seem strange to bring up possible paternity issue if it had not been confirmed that coitus had taken place...but, yeah, stranger things...

Well, even the judge has admonished Kurtz about the rabbits he was throwing, but this is really simple. If they think NC had a child that was not BC's all they gotta do is a DNA test. That would be really strong testimony.

 

[cygnusx1]

The thing that bothers me most about his story (and this is going to sound odd) but the fact that he claims to have fallen asleep at 9PM in the girls room. Who does that?

Me and my wife (especially my wife) when the kids were about that age. One of us would go into tuck the kids in and fall asleep on the bed for an hour or so before stumbling out. Especially on stormy nights.

I can see waiting for them to fall asleep...and then there's the report that he was checking email at 10:30PM.

I often fall asleep on the couch early in the evening, then something wakes me up (the "kick" from INCEPTION) after an hour or so and I go check email, watch TV, play my guitar, check WebSleuths , and then finally go to bed at 1:30.

Nobody else here falls asleep on the couch and then wakes and stumbles around the house locking doors before finally crashing in the bed?

 

[BrownRice]

Yeah, I see your point, but if she was withholding sex I think I can understand the affair. I do think there are witnesses who will back this up but I can't be sure who.

The water bill - normally bills are only in one person's name. Maybe he needed to be the one to reactivate their account. Not sure, don't really know the details of that one but it does show how broke they were. Who goes out and buys 9K painting when the water bill can't be paid.

Trust me, I agree with every single point you've made. Just not saying I don't think BC could have snapped. But everything else, yep I agree.

 

[Cheyenne130]

That's rather generous. If Brad made $112k, would his take home after taxes have been about $60k or $70k? Subtract $25k, that doesn't leave much. Who pays taxes on the child support - Brad or Nancy? That would have been about $1600 in Alberta (http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/fcy-fea/lib-bib/legis/fcsg-lfpae/tables2006/alta_2.html) with Brad paying taxes on the money.

I could be mistaken but I think I read that his salary at that time was $135,000. I don't know about Canada but in this country, the receiving spouse does not pay taxes on child support.