610 users online (158 members and 452 guests)  

Websleuths News


Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 248
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    554
    Yikes, this thread looks like a big old BII festival.

    Nobody knew BC. Nobody hand a handle on what sort of man he is, he seemed to be devoid of the sort of personality characteristics that usually distinguish a person. IMO, that's what's drawn so many supporters to him. He's like a blank slate, a movie screen upon which all sorts of things can be projected. Want to see an innocent martyr? There's your blank slate. Want to see a victim of injustice? There's your blank slate.

    Want to see a murderer? Look at the circumstantial evidence and use common sense. Wonder where the shoes are, and wonder why NC slept with the bedroom door locked. Imagine the blank slate stalking his previous girlfriend. The blankness takes on a far more sinister quality, in light of how he has dealt with women who want to leave him.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    41
    While I'm still not sure how to process everything, if I was going to go to the trouble of tampering with BC's computer to make him look guilty, I'd do better than planting a 41 second Google search. I'd search for something obvious, like "strangulation." Plus, if BC did that search AFTER NC's body was found instead of before, why didn't he mention that when asked about Fielding in the depo?

    We didn't get to see the FBI testimony, which IMHO helped sway the jury.

    Realizing there are no winners, even with this case over (for now).

  3. #18
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Bottle Cap View Post
    Yikes, this thread looks like a big old BII festival.

    Nobody knew BC. Nobody hand a handle on what sort of man he is, he seemed to be devoid of the sort of personality characteristics that usually distinguish a person. IMO, that's what's drawn so many supporters to him. He's like a blank slate, a movie screen upon which all sorts of things can be projected. Want to see an innocent martyr? There's your blank slate. Want to see a victim of injustice? There's your blank slate.

    Want to see a murderer? Look at the circumstantial evidence and use common sense. Wonder where the shoes are, and wonder why NC slept with the bedroom door locked. Imagine the blank slate stalking his previous girlfriend. The blankness takes on a far more sinister quality, in light of how he has dealt with women who want to leave him.
    As a quiet, introverted man, this quote scares the hell out of me. I've always followed the Twain mindset that it's better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. Gossip queens are far worse because they inject their opinions into the minds of others, who often accept those words as fact.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    878
    Quote Originally Posted by LyndyLoo View Post
    I have mentioned this many times throughout the Trial, but for some reason people keep relying on the stomach contents of Nancy to suggest she MUST have been alive at 7AM to go jogging...However, It is understood that the stomach digests and empties between 4-6 hours of eating...and since Nancy was at this dinner party (which she took ribs) about 630PM July 11th, She no doubt had her meal fairly early in the evening....so do the math I guess.. Food is one thing, however fluid or beverages consumed is entirely another as she was seen drinking up and until close to going home...

    Heres the link to Stomach Contents and utilizing it to TOD~~
    http://myweb.dal.ca/jvandomm/forensi...ntanatomy.html
    Her friends said she was eating throughout the evening.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,678
    Being a BDI, I won’t deny the defense put up a good fight, at times placed doubt with me. I feel the pros/LE dropped the ball at times.
    Not here to argue or say anyone is wrong for their conclusion, but I have my reason like every individual on WS has.

    1-I believe the “lay of the land,” is an important factor for the Cooper home, HT’s, Fielding Drive, Lochmere, Triangle Academy, etc.
    a) Different routes to each location can be taken, but not all were identified, because he didn't identify them as his route, but a possibility. Ex: New Waverly Place is a short cut to HT which misses a stop light, also has dumpsters.
    b) Cary Pkwy ends approx. 1 mile from BC home where it meets HS Rd. Different LE jurisdictions. CPD is Cary Pwky and HS Rd is WCSD.
    c) Cell tower sits within sight of the intersection of Cary Pkwy and HS Rd, this is not Cary land, but Wake Co. Was there a ping off that tower, because I admit I don’t know.
    d) as funny as it sounds, Lochmere has a large volume of yard sales in sSat mornings in the summer. Over 1600 homes causes much confusion for non-area seekers and slowing of traffic. Could be a reason he changed direction to HT. BC stating that is like telling LE he was in a rush.

    2- (1b) brings me to the license tag. Many ask why would he drive around to attract attention with no tag? This is one of my biggest RED flags which I only wish had been investigated further.
    a)It was safer going to Fielding than getting the 24/7 traffic cam to catch the tag and ID it. Tag off, tag on...with the exception of 1 bolt. Haste makes waste.
    b)CPD just doesn’t sit on the city limit line and WCSD has nowhere to sit unless on Cary Pkwy which isn’t their jurisdiction. A safe place to travel IMO.
    c)DD stated in his testimony a screw gun was located in the pantry/mud room. Just random to have one in a room right after exiting the garage? I don’t buy random at all.

    3-KL testified 2x and did a deposition about BC behavior.
    a)It certainly shows arguments, treatment to NC and the emotional roller coaster he had NC on. How many of us would think of our husband going behind us on a fresh painted wall and putting spackle on it not as controlling?
    b)He refused to buy her samples of paint and wanted only gallons before she tested colors? The list goes on in her affidavit.
    c)They couldn’t put items in BC trunk for the B-Day party. Full already and not B-Day items. Spotless after NC disappears? IMO, who’d rather have a spotless trunk and not spotless car.

    4-Dr Hilkey a forensic psychologist states BC is narcissistic and arrogant with anxiety and anger issues. IMO, BC is a classic case.

    5- Tire tracks and foot prints.
    a)Did anyone think of the portable light source brought in almost immediately? (yes, pros dropped the ball on this). There is a photo of it and appears to fit the width being discussed as many stated, golf cart size.
    b)Foot print couldn’t be done because of mud and distortion. EMS was 1st to go to body and covered it up. IMO, rain on the 14th distorted any previous footprint before NC was located.

    6- IMHO it is someone bigger, stronger, taller than NC. Who fits that bill? 3 minutes is a long time to conclude the job. From what it appears no struggle, NC didn’t have a fighting chance!


    All the debate over IT, google map, BC’s office equipment, etc wasn’t asked to be reviewed by the jury. It appears they used a simple strategy KISS.
    BC had Means Motive and Opportunity.
    Last edited by momto3kids; 05-09-2011 at 02:27 PM. Reason: change wording
    “It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." ~Mark Twain~

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,234
    Quote Originally Posted by sunshine05 View Post
    Moderators - is it okay if I start a new thread to discuss some remaining questions regarding this case? ( If you need to delete this I will understand.)
    Thanks for this!

    I also started a thread specifically for the Appeal - which I will try to keep updated.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,072
    Quote Originally Posted by azwildcat View Post
    Among other things I'd like to know the importance of the ducks and decorative sticks. Why were they mentioned as often as they were?
    Because, IMO, their disappearance after a friend (JA?) testified they had been in the foyer the day before NC disappeared, along with BC's washing the foyer floor that day, bolstered the theory that NC had been murdered in the foyer.

    The ducks and sticks needed to disappear because they were either vomited upon by NC during her murder, or they were somehow damaged during the strife.

    In turn, the vomit theory supports the idea that NC was killed soon after she arrived home, and since he was the only one there capable of killing her, BC did it. The autopsy report showed, IIRC, that she had only a small amount of red fluid and a small piece of onion in her stomach.

    BC's mother found the ducks packed in a box, after NC's body had been discovered, IIRC. This does not mean that BC did not hide the ducks after something happened to them, and then put them in the box himself after NC went missing. There is no proof of that, however. The missing sticks were never found.

    The trouble with the theory is that there is no proof, particularly beyond a reasonable doubt, that it is the truth. IMO, a theory is a lovely thing if it has evidence to back it up.
    Last edited by RoughlyCollie; 05-09-2011 at 02:07 PM.
    My posts contain my opinions only.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    198
    I have taken the days since the verdict off to try to get my life back on track after spending so much time on the trial - did Jay Ward ever come back and post what he found on the computer? I just watched Kurtz's interview with WRAL and it certainly sounds like they have concrete proof the computer was tampered with. Anyone???

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,436
    Quote Originally Posted by iucpa View Post
    I have taken the days since the verdict off to try to get my life back on track after spending so much time on the trial - did Jay Ward ever come back and post what he found on the computer? I just watched Kurtz's interview with WRAL and it certainly sounds like they have concrete proof the computer was tampered with. Anyone???
    Not yet....and after his post coming up in the trial, I doubt he will.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Wake Forest, NC
    Posts
    1,914
    Quote Originally Posted by RoughlyCollie View Post
    Because, IMO, their disappearance after a friend (JA?) testified they had been in the foyer the day before NC disappeared, along with BC's washing the foyer floor that day, bolstered the theory that NC had been murdered in the foyer.

    The ducks and sticks needed to disappear because they were either vomited upon by NC during her murder, or they were somehow damaged during the strife.

    In turn, the vomit theory supports the idea that NC was killed soon after she arrived home, and since he was the only one there capable of killing her, BC did it. The autopsy report showed, IIRC, that she had only a small amount of red fluid and a small piece of onion in her stomach.

    BC's mother found the ducks packed in a box, after NC's body had been discovered, IIRC. This does not mean that BC did not hide the ducks after something happened to them, and then put them in the box himself after NC went missing. There is no proof of that, however. The missing sticks were never found.

    The trouble with the theory is that there is no proof, particularly beyond a reasonable doubt, that it is the truth. IMO, a theory is a lovely thing if it has evidence to back it up.
    Did anyone else catch, in closing Kurtz said that JA initially told police she just called NC on Friday afternoon, then later changed it to she visited her at her home. I always wondered about that too because NC spoke to others on the phone that afternoon and JA never mentioned the calls while she was there. (KL and HP both called her). If she never was there, she wouldn't have seen the ducks or sticks (which I believe NC packed up long before in anticipation of moving).


  11. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    32,584
    Quote Originally Posted by sunshine05 View Post
    Another thing that bothers me about this case is how much attention was made about BC's affair, as if that indicated motive. It *could* if the suspect were still involved in the affair and wanted to off the spouse to be with the person they are having an affair with, but that doesn't apply in this case. The affair had nothing at all to do with this case, except that it was the reason for the divorce. I guess I'm just puzzled that the state made this such a large part of the case when it wouldn't have had anything to do with motive. I still fail to see what the motive was.

    KISS and common sense apply here.

    The affair was the motive for the divorce. The divorce was a motive for the murder.

    JMHO
    fran

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    362
    Will there be a public release of the transcript from the offer of proof given by CF on the subject of the windows system event log?

    I think that info will show that 3825 was in the house and being configured at 10:21pm on 7/11, but that router was not in the house on 7/12.

    Seems like if we could have a more interesting discussion about the router if we had info from that testimony that was not streamed.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,436
    Quote Originally Posted by macd View Post
    Will there be a public release of the transcript from the offer of proof given by CF on the subject of the windows system event log?

    I think that info will show that 3825 was in the house and being configured at 10:21pm on 7/11, but that router was not in the house on 7/12.

    Seems like if we could have a more interesting discussion about the router if we had info from that testimony that was not streamed.
    Actually, we don't know that the router wasn't there on the 12th. I'm not arguing that it was, but the search warrant for network equipment in the house wasn't served until October. It just wasn't in the pictures taken on the 12th.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Williston, VT
    Posts
    97
    Quote Originally Posted by RoughlyCollie View Post
    Because, IMO, their disappearance after a friend (JA?) testified they had been in the foyer the day before NC disappeared, along with BC's washing the foyer floor that day, bolstered the theory that NC had been murdered in the foyer.

    The ducks and sticks needed to disappear because they were either vomited upon by NC during her murder, or they were somehow damaged during the strife.

    In turn, the vomit theory supports the idea that NC was killed soon after she arrived home, and since he was the only one there capable of killing her, BC did it. The autopsy report showed, IIRC, that she had only a small amount of red fluid and a small piece of onion in her stomach.

    BC's mother found the ducks packed in a box, after NC's body had been discovered, IIRC. This does not mean that BC did not hide the ducks after something happened to them, and then put them in the box himself after NC went missing. There is no proof of that, however. The missing sticks were never found.

    The trouble with the theory is that there is no proof, particularly beyond a reasonable doubt, that it is the truth. IMO, a theory is a lovely thing if it has evidence to back it up.
    Did they ever really discuss this theory? I remember (but please forgive me it's now all one big jumble in my head now) thinking they would bring this up but felt like they never did. Then Cummings had the weird questions with Mrs. Cooper about the ducks and I felt very confused. Just seemed like an odd amount of time used on this for something that ended up not being much of anything.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Wake Forest, NC
    Posts
    1,914
    Quote Originally Posted by azwildcat View Post
    Did they ever really discuss this theory? I remember (but please forgive me it's now all one big jumble in my head now) thinking they would bring this up but felt like they never did. Then Cummings had the weird questions with Mrs. Cooper about the ducks and I felt very confused. Just seemed like an odd amount of time used on this for something that ended up not being much of anything.
    Everything JA told police laid the foundation for their entire case: NC never took off her necklace, the Cooper's only used ALL detergent, Nancy never ran alone, ducks and sticks were missing from the foyer and NC was due at her house to paint that morning. All have been proven false in the trial, except the paint plans, but that story has lots of holes in it. Take all of what she said away and the already very weak case becomes even weaker. What are we left with?
    He cleaned the floor
    He did laundry
    His trunk was clean - did anyone ever photograph the rest of the car to see if it was also clean? We're told it was not, but I haven't seen evidence or missed it if it was presented. Plus SBI said some dirt was found in the trunk. It was not showroom clean.


    I'm not even going to talk about the google evidence here because he was arrested for murder before that was even found.

Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast