NCEast
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 4,217
- Reaction score
- 7
he took his abuse up a notch the moment he read the separation agreement..
Absolutely--that's when a lot of things changed.
he took his abuse up a notch the moment he read the separation agreement..
he took his abuse up a notch the moment he read the separation agreement..
...Also Brad accessed the bank account that had no online access for 2 years...maybe to make it look like Nancy accessed it!!
I bought my friend an ipad 2 it gets delivered today
IIRC..All these items were obtained from Nancy's computer yesterday , Yes? No? I seem to recall from another witness (notblacked out) that Brad's Blackjack Phone had been either wiped, or been reset to indicate was it 31 hours, or 31 days...Of course he did have that phone until Oct.-8 and Nancy's computer was handed over on the 15/16th....Her phone seemed to have been worked on first. IF Brad could sign on her acct. on her computer, surely he could have signed on her phone too??..Then locked it pasword protected...Voila.Det. McDreamy ended up deleting data :banghead:
I agree, I tend to think Brad's plan backfired..He was not prepared for such a quick alert of her being missing...He had to go into high gear to unload more stuff. BTW..Did I hear from that security guy that Brad went to office on that Sat. July 12th?..IF so, what did he return to his office? and What time of day was that?..
Never mind, I have so many things rolling around in my head..Some things are clear as day, and others are abut murky..
I seem to recall from another witness (notblacked out) that Brad's Blackjack Phone had been either wiped, or been reset to indicate was it 31 hours, or 31 days...
Ok. Do we know the ages of jurors and their professions. I know there are only two men.
IIRC, he went to his office at Cisco on July 17th. That was also the day his badge was deactivated.
Ok. Do we know the ages of jurors and their professions. I know there are only two men.
I don't believe it was about money. It was about control and abandonment. She was really going to leave. And it was going to 'cost' him - he didn't like it - but not that it was really a money thing. I see very little evidence that HE loved money all that much. His car was older / less expensive, his yard and home did not reflect the illusion of wealth, he personally had few trappings of wealth.
He couldn't control her. He's lose control of his financial destiny, not necessarily the money itself. And it's not that he wanted her to stay, either - just control and if she left - it should be on HIS TERMS.
He determined it was either her or him that had to die. Ultimately, his self love and arrogance told him he was more worthy to live and she needed to go. (And he figured with his superior intellect, he'd get away with it)
LIKE BEING on Trial for murder isn't Negative!!!
wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Defense attorney Howard Kurtz: "This is simply a way of making Brad appear in the most negative light possible." #coopertrial
12 Apr
WRAL NEWS in NC
wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Defense attorney Howard Kurtz objects & says: "Suicide has no relevance in a homicide case." #coopertrial
are there any original posters from CTV here?
I think those arguments at the preschool were beginning to show the 'other side of Brad'. He could get very angry, very quickly. And his previous girlfriend show's he had an extremely huge vindictive side to him also. MOO
I would like to see/hear the pros. revisit that judges ruling. Taking into account what Garry Rentz stated, 'brad dreaming about seeing three bodies..." along with the suicide site, I think that should be allowed for the jury to consider. MOO
I can buy that, but it contradicts the fact that he was very willing to let her go for a period of time. I don't think he cared if she left, just don't leave and make him barely scrape by for a living.
Another thing that gets forgotten is I haven't heard if NC tried to make revisions (what were they) to the sep. agreement and if he just rejected all of them.