Opening statements are about to begin - figured I'd start a new thread for it.
Here comes the State....
The stream at WRAL is pretty good; sometimes will buffer, but overall is working well.
The prosecution started with the day Nancy did not show up to her friend Jessica's house, and is now giving overview of Nancy's discovery of Brad's affair, Nancy's preparation for the divorce, the couple's finances, etc.
Prosecution says that all Nancy's emails were being intercepted by Brad from April 2008 until the time of her death....
Jury is released for the afternooon....
Defense opening statements start in the morning. Nothing earth shattering presented during the opening, except maybe for the intercepting emails. Looks like a circumstantial case.
Interesting how the 2 phone calls from the landline were left hanging in the air, 2 phone calls, and the reference to VOIP. If the DA can prove Brad implemented those 2 phone calls, well...
Racing Doesn't Lie
Disappointed in the state's opening.
I feel certain the defense will set the stage with a much more convincing and compelling argument.
Most criminal cases are circumstantial cases. That's because anything outside of a confession, or eyewitness, or a videotape of the murder is, by definition, circumstantial.
That said, there were some important facts mentioned during opening statements:
1. Nancy's running shoes were found in the garage on a shelf, right where she left them. And no other shoes of hers were gone, so she didn't use a different pair of running shoes. The obvious conclusion is that she was not wearing shoes on her feet when she left (or was taken out of the house). And when her body was found, there were no shoes on her feet or anywhere in the vicinity.
2. Brad washed Nancy's dress from the party the night before. He claimed there was a stain on it. No other person saw such a stain.
3. Brad was doing many loads of laundry, including Nancy's laundry the morning she went missing. This is counter to the norm.
#2 - yes odd.
#3 - I don't necessarily believe (although I don't not believe it) that it is counter to the norm. As we discussed way back when...this will be based on Nancy's words to friends. I'm sure my wife would say I don't do nearly as much as I actually do around the house. And she isn't mad at me or divorcing me.
But I think to convict of murder, you are going to have to have more than he read her emails and did her laundry to convict. Hopefully they have more than what they presented during opening statements.
I'm quite surprised they didn't mention her necklace during opening statements. This is huge, IMHO. Nancy was known to never take off that necklace...ever. And it was found in a desk (possibly Brad's desk) inside the residence. It was something she would have worn at the party the night before and probably seen/noticed at least by a few women there (we women notice such things). That they didn't even bring it up has me wondering why.
They sure didn't cover much in their opening...it was much more brief than I expected it would be. All of 30 or 40 min.
Of course it's possible. But notice the wording they used and it was quite specific. NO shoes of hers, including running shoes, were missing from that shelf. That shelf in the garage is where she kept her (running) shoes. That should tell you something right there. And her running partner--the one she was training with at the time of her disappearance, said those blue Sauconys were the ones she was using. Those running shes were the same ones she had with her just a few days before her death, when she was on vacation with her family.For #1, isn't it possible she had more than 1 pair of running shoes? I certainly do.
Good catch there, RC. Unless it was sitting in the washing machine or dryer at the time, but he didn't tell anyone that? Remember he was doing lots of laundry. It couldn't have been too far as he was able to produce it. BTW, unless that dress is a simple cotton one, it seems odd that it would be machine washed.the speaker indicated the dress could not be found when requested for use by the canine but Brad produced it the next day. Where was it since it wasn't in the house
I do, and many women do.Honestly, what woman wears jewelry while jogging, swimming, or other activities like that?
I have a gold bracelet I got for my Bday and I have not taken it off from the moment it was put around my wrist, in Dec. That includes showering, exercising, sleeping, etc.
Brad's biggest mistake was thinking he could outsmart everyone and run his mouth.
That 8 hour sworn video deposition will be edited to show his many inconsistencies vs what he told the cops.
Yep plus his behavior was odd too. He didn't cooperate, he was doing activities that were known by many to be quite different than his normal sloth-like-at-home self (there was testimony during the custody hearing about this), he didn't attend any memorial service, he never spoke to her family, he didn't even tell his own daughters that their mommy was dead--he left that up to the inlaws. And this was before the kids were taken from him, btw. None of that automatically = murder, but you have to realize how it would look to the people who knew both of them and of course her family as well. They noticed because it was ODD behavior.
I assume there will be testimony to address this. And if she did have multiple pairs, someone would know about it. In fact, I think Brad might have been asked this during the depo. I'm trying to remember it, but I think he himself said she had just the one blue pair...#1 I'm not convinced she didn't have multiple pairs of the same running shoes. Many people do.