Custody

[Magister]

Boy, for someone who probably just met BC, that lawyer sure knows his client well.

In reality, I'd venture that Brad's lawyer has at least met him, unlike the majority of people...


Of course Brad is planning to fight for custody and his lawyers are going to try every legal trick in the book because it's in their client's best interest.

If Nancy had already agreed to a joint arrangement, then that would have to be taken as her wish and it implies that Brad also wanted responsibilty for his children.

As of right now, he hasn't been charged, arrested or convicted of anything and under the law, his rights should win. Though, perhaps because this is such a high profile case and because several of the factors cited in the petition remain true, but possibly temporary, I fully expect the judge to continue the case for a month or another couple of weeks, with Brad's permission.

And, Brad's public motivation to agree would be because the children are better protected from the media glare and public slanders against their father, if they're shielded in another country; His private motivation would be because, whether or not he is guilty, any future possible defense wouldn't be served by him testifying on the record.

Again, right now, I expect a continuance because not only would it be better for the kids, but it'd serve Brad for the reasons cited and it'd serve the grandparents because under the current situation, Brad would most likely win.

 

[piedmontmom]

Apologies, this is the thread I need to be posting in relative to custody. I'm hot and bothered...well, just a little. I was prompted to reply to some comments about the custody in other threads.

What bothers me about custody is that I tend to think NC didn't think Brad was a safety concern relative to their girls. Reason being, if she was concerned about him with the girls, then why would she have continually left them in his care while she jogged/trained for her half marathon? And , in particular, on the eve of her death, why would she have left the girls with him while she was at this party? If I thought my husband would harm my kids I wouldn't have left them alone with him...especially when the situation would have been at its heigtened stage. Seriously, how can her family dispute this?

 

[piedmontmom]

On another note...I am bothered by comments in his rebuttal affadivit, regarding Mrs. Rentz and her alleged repeated car accidents. So many that even her sister supposedly wouldn't allow her own kids to be alone with her.

Listen, if he is found guilty then they should not be with him. CLEARLY. But I'm also bothered by his description of how they came into custody, meaning the night that armed police had to pick up the girls without the Rentz's there. I guess that can all be checked out...so if it happened as he described I find that apalling, especially since he was on his way to meet up with them at Bullwinkles. (Aahh, come to think of it, this place looked closed down the last time I drove by it...hmmm).

 

[fran]

Listen, if he is found guilty then they should not be with him. CLEARLY. But I'm also bothered by his description of how they came into custody, meaning the night that armed police had to pick up the girls without the Rentz's there. I guess that can all be checked out...so if it happened as he described I find that apalling, especially since he was on his way to meet up with them at Bullwinkles. (Aahh, come to think of it, this place looked closed down the last time I drove by it...hmmm).

Whyyyyyyyy,,...................he wouldn't have lied on an affidavit would he?

I'm shocked, shocked I tell ya.

Maybe he didn't know they closed down. just showin' I can be fair about this and see both sides

JMHO
fran

 

[RoughlyCollie]

I agree with you on this. I would not leave my kids alone with my husband if I thought they would be harmed in any way.

Even if BC did kill NC, that does not mean he will hurt his kids. Previously, I thought that the kids would be better off with NC's family until the case is resolved because I thought BC was a killer. Now I'm not so sure, although I think the odds favor that he is. We really don't know about any evidence that he is a killer.

The problem with this custody situation is that bridges have been burned. If Brad keeps the kids, will he want NC's friends and family to help out, especially if he did not kill NC and if he was not as bad as he has been portrayed?

Before this happened, it is possible that BC would have welcomed the help of these people and they could keep an eye on things. Now, if he gets custody, that may not happen.

If I were in BC's shoes and I were innocent and some (or many) of the things that were said about me were either untrue or misrepresented, I wouldn't want to be around any of those people.

I hope he is factually innocent of the murder and that he is not as bad a person as is being portrayed in the affadavits.

Respectfully,
RC

If I thought my husband would harm my kids I wouldn't have left them alone with him...especially when the situation would have been at its heigtened stage. Seriously, how can her family dispute this?

 

[Sewing_Buddy]

What bothers me about custody is that I tend to think NC didn't think Brad was a safety concern relative to their girls. Reason being, if she was concerned about him with the girls, then why would she have continually left them in his care while she jogged/trained for her half marathon? And , in particular, on the eve of her death, why would she have left the girls with him while she was at this party? If I thought my husband would harm my kids I wouldn't have left them alone with him...especially when the situation would have been at its heigtened stage. Seriously, how can her family dispute this?

I don't think Nancy believed Brad would kill her or physically harm the children....and if her parents had even a clue that he could be so violent, I don't think they would have let her return after the Hilton Head vacation. IMO Brad exhibited many narcissistic traits but the killing was an "argument gone bad" after Nancy got home from the social gathering.

 

[piedmontmom]

Whyyyyyyyy,,...................he wouldn't have lied on an affidavit would he?

I'm shocked, shocked I tell ya.

Maybe he didn't know they closed down. just showin' I can be fair about this and see both sides

JMHO
fran

This made me smile. BTW, I have always thought posters here to be fair. It is afterall a discussion, but it is quite civil.

Yeah, those that know me well can tell ya...I always look both sides. Grew up that way...there were many times I would have wanted more support from my parents...like in highschool "yeah, he is a jerk for doing that to you" vs. well, what did you do to add to this, you have to look at your actions as well.

I am married to someone that can do no wrong in his mothers eyes. And yeah, a part of me, as a mother, thinks it should be so. OK. I'm rambling and my reality is calling to me. Have a great day.

 

[stillblv]

Apologies, this is the thread I need to be posting in relative to custody. I'm hot and bothered...well, just a little. I was prompted to reply to some comments about the custody in other threads.

What bothers me about custody is that I tend to think NC didn't think Brad was a safety concern relative to their girls. Reason being, if she was concerned about him with the girls, then why would she have continually left them in his care while she jogged/trained for her half marathon? And , in particular, on the eve of her death, why would she have left the girls with him while she was at this party? If I thought my husband would harm my kids I wouldn't have left them alone with him...especially when the situation would have been at its heigtened stage. Seriously, how can her family dispute this?

I think we have to look at what could happen now, rather than what they thought before Nancy was killed.

They may be very afraid for the children's safety; if they are convinced that he killed Nancy they have to be worried that he might do himself, his daughters, or all of them in. It happens all the time in these kinds of situations.

 

[fran]

Just in case anybody is here that didn't catch it.



http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3280910/

Nancy Cooper's family keeps children until October

The two sides met in the judge's chamber for about 75 minutes before reaching the decision, which keeps the children in the care of their grandparents and aunt in Canada for 75 days. The hearing was continued until Oct. 13.

 

[carolinalady]

On another note...I am bothered by comments in his rebuttal affadivit, regarding Mrs. Rentz and her alleged repeated car accidents. So many that even her sister supposedly wouldn't allow her own kids to be alone with her.

Listen, if he is found guilty then they should not be with him. CLEARLY. But I'm also bothered by his description of how they came into custody, meaning the night that armed police had to pick up the girls without the Rentz's there. I guess that can all be checked out...so if it happened as he described I find that apalling, especially since he was on his way to meet up with them at Bullwinkles. (Aahh, come to think of it, this place looked closed down the last time I drove by it...hmmm).

Originally Posted by fran


Whyyyyyyyy,,...................he wouldn't have lied on an affidavit would he?

I'm shocked, shocked I tell ya.

Maybe he didn't know they closed down. just showin' I can be fair about this and see both sides

JMHO
fran

Just an FYI (as I've gone to Bullwinkles only to have found it closed), their website says it is regularly closed on Mondays and Tuesdays (http://www.bullwinkles.com/hours.html). I need to look back to see the original custody date.

 

[Magister]

Whyyyyyyyy,,...................he wouldn't have lied on an affidavit would he?

I'm shocked, shocked I tell ya.

If he were knowingly lie on an affidavit, he'd be commiting perjury. And, if he's ever subjected to a criminal trial over the death of his wife, if he were to take the stand, the prosecutor would be able to say; "Why should this jury believe you, since you've previously lied under oath?". Thus, anything that he'd like to say or any defense that he'd like to mount would simply go out the window.

 

[carolinalady]

So, the Ex Parte hearing was 7/16, a Wednesday.

I guess someone could call Bullwinkles to verify that it was closed that day.

Also, it sounds like the police met BC at Bullwinkles (based on BC's motion to dismiss), so I guess they could also verify that it was closed.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

I am really surprised that the judge is going to allow the grandparents to keep the children with them in another country for 75 days. I haven't heard anything that I thought would cause him to lose his kids. Here in Canada you have to do pretty bad stuff before they will remove your kids. Its kind of sad but thats the system here. There are parents who would make Brad look like an angel that are raising their kids.

All i can think is that the judge knows something that we don't. I thought the point about the judge not wanting to risk it was a good one however, has this ever happened in any of the other missing wives/suspicious husband cases? Does Drew peterson have his kids? Surely, those kids are at a great risk from him. Everyone knows he is a murderer - what judge could sleep at night knowing they left kids with him?

I really think Brad may be aware that he is about to be arrested and the cops just don't want the public to know yet.

 

[carolinalady]

July 25 statement on behalf of Brad Cooper regarding custody case

http://www.wral.com/news/local/page/3282901/

 

[carolinalady]

I am really surprised that the judge is going to allow the grandparents to keep the children with them in another country for 75 days. I haven't heard anything that I thought would cause him to lose his kids. Here in Canada you have to do pretty bad stuff before they will remove your kids. Its kind of sad but thats the system here. There are parents who would make Brad look like an angel that are raising their kids.

All i can think is that the judge knows something that we don't. I thought the point about the judge not wanting to risk it was a good one however, has this ever happened in any of the other missing wives/suspicious husband cases? Does Drew peterson have his kids? Surely, those kids are at a great risk from him. Everyone knows he is a murderer - what judge could sleep at night knowing they left kids with him?

I really think Brad may be aware that he is about to be arrested and the cops just don't want the public to know yet.

It doesn't sound like the judge heard any additional testimony in the case. We've seen the loads of affidavits that were filed. In the end, it sounds like BOTH parties agreed to some things (& probably made concessions, too) and the judge gave his OK.

 

[jilly]

Just in case anybody is here that didn't catch it.



http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3280910/

Nancy Cooper's family keeps children until October

The two sides met in the judge's chamber for about 75 minutes before reaching the decision, which keeps the children in the care of their grandparents and aunt in Canada for 75 days. The hearing was continued until Oct. 13.

Thanks Fran! Just got home from work and figured I'd have to wade through 20 pages to find out! Appreciated!

I'm happy with the outcome today. Looks like Brad agreed with my earlier post :wink: and even extended the time.

#5 07-22-2008, 05:39 PM
jilly
Shhhhhh - Peppurr's sleeping Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,486

If I was him, I'd consent to a temporary custody order for a month to see where this investigation goes.


I am happy regarding the outcome today.It was the right thing to do considering the circumstances. I'm also relieved because it says to me that Brad has probably put the best interests of his children ahead of any ill feelings he has towards the inlaws. I'll give him that - unlike the way Jason Young has denied his mother-in-law access to her grandaughter just because she thinks he's guilty of murdering her daughter.:furious:

 

[panthera]

Just in case anybody is here that didn't catch it.



http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3280910/

Nancy Cooper's family keeps children until October

The two sides met in the judge's chamber for about 75 minutes before reaching the decision, which keeps the children in the care of their grandparents and aunt in Canada for 75 days. The hearing was continued until Oct. 13.

It seems to me that Brad must have agreed to this arrangement, so I don't see it as unfair to anyone and am glad the judge didn't have to make the decision. There hasn't been an arrest made in Nancy's murder yet, and it's still quite possible Brad did it. This will keep the children out of harm's way and in a loving home until LE has more opportunity to investigate her death and if it turns out Brad isn't arrested, then the children could be returned to him. The best place for them right now is with Nancy's family, imo.

 

[panthera]

Just wanted to post some important highlights of the agreement ~

Under the terms of the settlement, the children will be allowed contact with their father a minimum of four times a week via telephone or Web cam for a minimum of 15 minutes.

Both sides also agreed to two supervised weekend visits before October in which Brad Cooper will be allowed to see his children for a maximum of four hours each day.

Other conditions of the settlement include:

• Counseling for the children to begin as soon as reasonably possible.
• Keeping the children out of a vehicle driven by Donna Rentz. (Brad Cooper stated in his affidavit that she was not a safe or reliable driver.)
• Keeping the children away from dogs. (Brad Cooper stated in his July 23 affidavit that one of his daughters is allergic to dogs.)

Neither side is allowed to talk about the circumstances surrounding Nancy Cooper's death or the pending custody case.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3280910/

 

[raisincharlie]

I sure am curious as to why Brad super dad would ever agree to this 75 day extension of custody. He came out swinging in those affidavits and today he whimps out and agrees to this - for what reason?

I am also curious as to why a judge would even consider this, unless he has a whole lot more to look at than affidavits from both sides with a whole lot of unsubstantiated claims in them. Something is missing from this picture or possibly the judge is seeing a much more detailed picture to allow this man's children to be taken from him. 75 days - wow, supervised visits only - wow.

Just can't figure why super dad agreed...he says he has proof. :crazy:

 

[SleuthyGal]

My theory: he didn't want to be subjected to a forced psych evaluation because of what might be uncovered by that. I don't know why I think this would be the main point of contention, but I think this would worry him and his lawyer.