April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness

[gracielee]

I don't like to write this, but I think it's rather obvious that NC didn't take marriage vows seriuosly. Neither did Brad, for that matter. Based on their pre-marriage history, Brad and Nancy should have known that it would be a problem in the marriage. Once it became an obvious problem, they should have put their cards on the table and dealt with it rather than carry on with the facade of a marriage.

Does anyone besides me remember that 'Nancy did want a divorce'. 'She was supposed to go to Toronto.' 'Brad said she and the girls could go to Toronto, until he snooped into her private attorney client email and found the first draft of the separation agreement.'

 

[SleuthSayer]

I'm here. Sorry I'm late.

I've never been in to conspiracy theories. It's not because I think that conspiracies never happen. But, it's just that the conspiracy theories that I hear about are typically so illogical. This is such a case.

The thinking is that the defense is planting posters on some message board to try to convince people that Brad is not guilty? What would be the point in that? Is the defense supposedly unaware that Brads fate is not going to be decided by a public opinion poll? It's going to be decided by 12 people who [supposedly] are not out reading message boards about the case. If they are, then the trial has a much bigger problem. (That being said, I am skeptical that jurors stick to the rules as much as they should.)

You would think that rather than trying to sway the opinions of anonymous people on message boards, the defense would be focused on their futile attempt to keep the guy out of jail.

 

[sunshine05]

I really think that the jury is going to steer away from all the technical stuff. The phone calls and computers and even the affairs and fights. It's going to come down to whether or not they believe she left the house that morning to jog. If they believe she did go jogging, they will most likely find Brad not guilty. If they believe she did not go jogging, obviously they will find Brad guilty. So far the defense produced two eye witnesses neither of whom can testify that they are sure it was Nancy. Neither of them knew her and determined that someone who ran past in a few seconds or less resembled the smiling face on the flyer. The jury is not going to micro-analyze all of this testimony the way we have done. MOO

I disagree. This case is all about technical evidence. It will be up to both sides to make it clear for them in closing, with bullet points if necessary.

 

[LyndyLoo]

She called law enforcement first.

Ohhh dear ncu..Another Defense witness who felt she had evidence that was related to a murder 7 years down the road..Intersting concept..IF she did call them (LE) then they knew what happened 7 years prior.. but for some reason couldnt connect the dots..Ms Webb needed her 15 minutes I guess..but unfortunately any friends she has now and/or in future just may wonder about what she would do with her inside info??..

Anyway..Thanks did not realize she called LE:seeya:

 

[ncsu95]

Your link kinda made me chuckle abit..first this women knew about this secondary cell phone and felt the need to inquire about his possible use for an affair...So this phone in this case wasnt unknown...but I do get your point..and given Brad's expertise and ability to snoop and find out stuff..I am sure he woulda known about such items..

nancy was far to busy being a mom and making sure they were properly looked after, even tho she didnt trust Brad..she hardly expected him to harm her or the kids, however..I am sure she felt he WOULD try to HURT her by taking those kids and claim she was a "Bad Mom" or something..Now that I think is what she believed....

BUT something happened just before July 11th,2008 to make her contact Realtor to get out QUIK?? Wonder what that was about?? And please dont deny that Brad knew about that contact..OF course he did..IMO:maddening:

I'm sorry. All the testimony in this trial indicates NC was leading a fairly regular life. She was doing plenty of friend things without the kids. She was training for a half marathon. She was going on vacation. Plenty of stay at home moms somehow find time for affairs....especially ones going through a divorce. I'm not saying Nancy did or was because I have no idea and haven't seen any testimony yet to suggest she was...but she had plenty of opportunity to do so. Any of those "girls nights out" could have been with a guy. I know, because my ex-wife did that to me 14 years ago. Any of thos early morning runs could have been something else. Heck, she could have done something during the day when her kids were in pre-school. Again, I'm not suggesting she did, but she definitely had plenty of opportunity to do so.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I disagree. This case is all about technical evidence. It will be up to both sides to make it clear for them in closing, with bullet points if necessary.

Did Nancy leave the house to go jogging that morning or not? What evidence do they have that she did not leave the house? What evidence do they have that she did?

 

[ncsu95]

You sir are being held in contempt!

:fence:

:slap:

:slapfight:

I deserve that. I couldn't resist. :dance:illowfight2:

 

[sunshine05]

I've never been in to conspiracy theories. It's not because I think that conspiracies never happen. But, it's just that the conspiracy theories that I hear about are typically so illogical. This is such a case.

The thinking is that the defense is planting posters on some message board to try to convince people that Brad is not guilty? What would be the point in that? Is the defense supposedly unaware that Brads fate is not going to be decided by a public opinion poll? It's going to be decided by 12 people who [supposedly] are not out reading message boards about the case. If they are, then the trial has a much bigger problem. (That being said, I am skeptical that jurors stick to the rules as much as they should.)

You would think that rather than trying to sway the opinions of anonymous people on message boards, the defense would be focused on their futile attempt to keep the guy out of jail.

Well said. I agree with all of it, except the highlighted part. I thought Kurtz with JW was brilliant. All the clues of tampering were brought out, even with having to go around the forensic specialist stuff. I have no doubt Google will bring it all to light (if it's true they are having them as a witness).

People here who know me, know I do not work for the defense, lol.

 

[FullDisclosure]

< sound of loud buzzer >

And another non answer.

If you (the royal you) believe Brad Cooper is innocent of this crime, then you must have a reason for it. And that reason must be based on something. If Brad didn't do it, then who did?

So, if the jury doesn't come back with a guilty verdict, will they be required to provide evidence of who they think did it? No, they will not. If they don't believe the State made their case that Brad did it, that's all they need to base it on.

 

[gracielee]

I am interested in the JY trial as well. CA is just to hear the verdict for me. On another board not mentioned that horse has been beat to death. I need to get off the fence on this on before I move on to another.

Yeah, I am interested in hearing the verdict too. CA I mean. How anybody could not think she's guilty boggles the mind. There was one guy on another group who made every excuse in the book as to why casey is innocent. He even wanted to send money to her prison account because he 'felt sorry for her'. Sheesh.

 

[sunshine05]

Did Nancy leave the house to go jogging that morning or not? What evidence do they have that she did not leave the house? What evidence do they have that she did?

They have the phone records for the 6:40AM call.

 

[ncsu95]

Yeah, I am interested in hearing the verdict too. CA I mean. How anybody could not think she's guilty boggles the mind. There was one guy on another group who made every excuse in the book as to why casey is innocent. He even wanted to send money to her prison account because he 'felt sorry for her'. Sheesh.

No, it's because he thinks she's hot.

 

[Cheyenne130]

They have the phone records for the 6:40AM call.

And what evidence do they have to show who made that call?

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

The Cary Police testified to who their investigation led them to and what facts, info, and evidence led them there. We don't have to ask them--they told us over the last 5 weeks.

I am saying those who think or believe Brad is factually innocent need to make a decision on who done it and whether it was a random attacker or someone known to Nancy.

It is not up to the defense team to find out who DID murder NC, but to provide reasonable doubt that BC did NOT murder NC. If the CPD would have been more thorough in looking at this as a violent crime rather than just a domestic disturbance gone wrong, then maybe they would not have been called inept by the defense. They took the easy way out and, I feel, wanting to keep the Cary "safe" image alive, rather than making the general public in this area feel at any bit unsafe.

 

[LyndyLoo]

I'm sorry. All the testimony in this trial indicates NC was leading a fairly regular life. She was doing plenty of friend things without the kids. She was training for a half marathon. She was going on vacation. Plenty of stay at home moms somehow find time for affairs....especially ones going through a divorce. I'm not saying Nancy did or was because I have no idea and haven't seen any testimony yet to suggest she was...but she had plenty of opportunity to do so. Any of those "girls nights out" could have been with a guy. I know, because my ex-wife did that to me 14 years ago. Any of thos early morning runs could have been something else. Heck, she could have done something during the day when her kids were in pre-school. Again, I'm not suggesting she did, but she definitely had plenty of opportunity to do so.

Dont mean to be picky..but the youngest was NOT in Preschool (only 2)..only the eldest ..so She had the youngest either with her or with Brad..So dont think she had that much free time...
to caboodle about...:waitasec:

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

I'm here. Sorry I'm late.

Yep - here - about to put kids to bed soon but will be back

 

[jmflu]

I posted last night that it would not sway me if someone had planted something on BC's computer. (If "A" then "B" post)

I also feel it is ok to have blind faith in the police just as some have blind faith in BC.

People have seen the defense looking at WS. Don't know if anyone there is posting here, but I wonder if anyone who reported seeing Nancy to the CPD and didn't get the attention they felt they deserved is posting here. I also wonder if a paramour of Brad's could be posting here. There is absolutely no reason for someone to completely ignore every lie Brad has told and point out other's lies, no reason for them to speak of Nancy's but not Brad's indescretions, no reason for them to sound so bitter towards anyone taking the ME where it leads. Unless...

 

[gracielee]

< sound of loud buzzer >

And another non answer.

If you (the royal you) believe Brad Cooper is innocent of this crime, then you must have a reason for it. And that reason must be based on something. If Brad didn't do it, then who did?

Yup, he should have stopped off and bought himself a lottery ticket that Saturday afternoon too. Abrha cadabra, and your whole *problem* magically disappears. Poof, nancy is gone and so is that pesky separation agreement. Thank goodness none of the wives who actually were in good marriages decided to go jogging that morning, 'eh?

 

[less0305]

I've never been in to conspiracy theories. It's not because I think that conspiracies never happen. But, it's just that the conspiracy theories that I hear about are typically so illogical. This is such a case.

The thinking is that the defense is planting posters on some message board to try to convince people that Brad is not guilty? What would be the point in that? Is the defense supposedly unaware that Brads fate is not going to be decided by a public opinion poll? It's going to be decided by 12 people who [supposedly] are not out reading message boards about the case. If they are, then the trial has a much bigger problem. (That being said, I am skeptical that jurors stick to the rules as much as they should.)

You would think that rather than trying to sway the opinions of anonymous people on message boards, the defense would be focused on their futile attempt to keep the guy out of jail.

I don't know that it's so much to convince people on boards. I'm not about conspiracy theories either - but I do believe it is possible to try to gauge public opinion and whether to go with this witness or that witness and where we should make our biggest push. How does the public feel if we trend this way or trend that way in our presentation. That's just my thoughts on it. Gritguy was very nice in explaining to me that perhaps the defense team already has their horse in the stream and can't exactly change up if they find public opinion is against their tactics. I appreciated his experience and knowledge - but he also said he practiced in a time where the internet was not what it is today. I still believe it's *possible* that defense teams plant someone - a legal aid, an intern, a family member - to gauge public opinion and get a feel for how their case is going. JMO - and MO only. I think anything is possible in this day and age.

 

[jmflu]

Madeleine, it seems that no one has any idea who murdered Nancy. No one thinks it's important to determine that since that was CPD's job. But it sure as hell wasn't BC. That's the ONLY thing that matters.