Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #13

[momto3kids]

Actually I think there is a misunderstanding about this NEW SW it really isn't new it was dated June21st and was actually served yesterday on his office, or at least that is what I have seen reported. If this is true then apparently LE wasn't in such a big hurry to search his office. I am beginning to not believe but only about 25% of even what is in the media.

I wonder if this was held back in case the LE didn't find enough evidence at the residence and vehicles???
This could be a sign that nothing is concrete so far. JMO

 

[reddress58]

Carrie Clarke could have easily admitted or denied what BC stated about Friday mornings cancellation. Did they not want to show BC did state some truth in his statement if he is telling the truth? She jogged with NC and had to know some things about BC. I can't imagine she had many different things to say about BC or did she?

Diana Duncan's husband???? Did he not do one because he had some positive things to say?

I am just saying it is strange to see who was picked and chosen...Many spouses, but the ones directly across the street only the wife did one? JA jogs with NC, but so does Carrie.

Theresa went to the cameras immediately talking about her friend NC, started organize the search, where is she?

This was for the custody case not criminal...why would they not do a statement? This is why I find it strange not everyone involved with NC did one.

Carrie would not have confirmed or denied Brad's statement, because the affidavit from Nancy's friends was dated the 22nd and his the 23rd. He then followed with a rebuttal. I doubt he would have stated the Friday cancellation if it weren't true. Too easy to confirm. And somewhere in all of this, I think Clea's interview on Fox, it was mentioned that Carrie did say there were no plans to run SAT. morning...when Brad said Nancy was running with Carrie.

 

[Deduction]

I can NOT imagine sitting within 4 walls, losing my spouse forever and my children being taken from me, no job to go to right away, and anywhere I go in public people will spot me. It has got to be a horrible feeling.

If he did it I know it will get worse before it gets better, especially waiting for the knock on the door and the silence he is experiencing.

If he didn't do it, what a horrible punishment he's received for being innocent.

I agree mom to 3kids---I am thinking along those same lines, just can't imagine.

 

[reddress58]

Actually I think there is a misunderstanding about this NEW SW it really isn't new it was dated June21st and was actually served yesterday on his office, or at least that is what I have seen reported. If this is true then apparently LE wasn't in such a big hurry to search his office. I am beginning to not believe but only about 25% of even what is in the media.

Good deduction, Deduction! ABC reported this I think yesterday (or the day before) and WRAL waited until today. Sounds like an "after the fact" and "let's wait to broadcast this when we've run out of new details".

 

[jumpstreet]

Good deduction, Deduction! ABC reported this I think yesterday (or the day before) and WRAL waited until today. Sounds like an "after the fact" and "let's wait to broadcast this when we've run out of new details".

I don't know if I've seen any original copies of the warrants posted anywhere, so it's unclear when they were granted/served.

However, while watching the WTVD video clip (http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6294423), I believe they show scans of at least one of the new ones (around 2:10 mark), and it appears dated July 25th (last Friday). I also think I read somewhere the statement that the office search was conducted during "off hours".

I therefore wouldn't be surprised if the office warrant was obtained Friday, and the search performed late Friday night, or at some point over this past weekend (possibly in the middle of the night over the weekend) - to avoid disruption with other employees, etc.

 

[Deduction]

Good deduction, Deduction! ABC reported this I think yesterday (or the day before) and WRAL waited until today. Sounds like an "after the fact" and "let's wait to broadcast this when we've run out of new details".

Yeah, their headline was misleading when it said New but in the body of the message it said "A warrant issued on July 21 allowed police access to an office on the Research Triangle Park campus of Cisco Systems Inc.,"

So have to wonder why they waited 8 days to search.

 

[KTaylorsc]

I was thinking on the way home mostly because I'm obsessed.

What if BC's lawyer told him to take NC off the credit cards, take her name off the checking account and give her an allowance and that's why he did it. I mean how many times have we heard of people getting seperated/divorced and one takes all the money out of the account or maxes out the credit cards.

just a thought

 

[raisincharlie]

Actually I think there is a misunderstanding about this NEW SW it really isn't new it was dated June21st and was actually served yesterday on his office, or at least that is what I have seen reported. If this is true then apparently LE wasn't in such a big hurry to search his office. I am beginning to not believe but only about 25% of even what is in the media.

Did you mean July 21st ? The media report - I don't recall it saying what day(s) the search was conducted at Cisco, only that it was done. Same with the other warrant. The media routinely checks the clerks office for returned warrants - if the warrant was issued the 21st it is about right that a return including a notice to seal would be filed about 5 to 7 days later. I'll watch the report again but i don't believe Ed Crump reported what day the search was actually done.

 

[jumpstreet]

Did you mean July 21st ? The media report - I don't recall it saying what day(s) the search was conducted at Cisco, only that it was done. Same with the other warrant. The media routinely checks the clerks office for returned warrants - if the warrant was issued the 21st it is about right that a return including a notice to seal would be filed about 5 to 7 days later. I'll watch the report again but i don't believe Ed Crump reported what day the search was actually done.

Check the video here - http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6294423 at around the 2:10 mark... seems like July 25th?

 

[Raebie]

Maybe LE is trying to clear him with the Cisco warrants. To eliminate all lines of evidence. Just a thought.

 

[momto3kids]

Carrie would not have confirmed or denied Brad's statement, because the affidavit from Nancy's friends was dated the 22nd and his the 23rd. He then followed with a rebuttal. I doubt he would have stated the Friday cancellation if it weren't true. Too easy to confirm. And somewhere in all of this, I think Clea's interview on Fox, it was mentioned that Carrie did say there were no plans to run SAT. morning...when Brad said Nancy was running with Carrie.

Some of the statements for NC were done ont he 23rd. Obviously Carrie and NC had some things in common. She wouldn't have to confirm or deny BC's statement but do what NC other friends did and state times and days and ackknowledge the relationship. Maybe why she cancelled? Did she plan to do it on Saturday? Her friends might say no, but let Carrie tell it.

The issue I am having is NO word from her or Diana Duncan's husband either.

 

[raisincharlie]

Check the video here - http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6294423 at around the 2:10 mark... seems like July 25th?

Yep - the undisclosed location was issued the 25th which tends to make me think the 21st warrant revealed something and LE got the second warrant to follow up.

LE does not return a warrant the same day it is issued, nor do they return it once the search is done - instead they return it when the inventory taken is returned to LE and all items are logged and placed in evidence. Takes a few days.

I'm thinking the 21st warrant was searched shortly after - something cuaght LE's eye and they obtained the 25th warrant to check.

 

[KTaylorsc]

Maybe LE is trying to clear him with the Cisco warrants. To eliminate all lines of evidence. Just a thought.

exactly! maybe they didn't find anything at the house so they searched his computer at work to make absolute certain he was cleared. Maybe they are looking in to those e-mails BC talked about between him, NC and Mr. Rentz.

 

[raisincharlie]

Maybe LE is trying to clear him with the Cisco warrants. To eliminate all lines of evidence. Just a thought.

Reabie - LE has to have probable cause to get a warrant. Warrants are not drawn to exclude anything only to search for something. Reasonable probable cause for a judge is a reason why LE thinks evidence of the crime will be found at the location listed. LeE's job is not to prove someone did not do something.

 

[KTaylorsc]

Reabie - LE has to have probable cause to get a warrant. Warrants are not drawn to exclude anything only to search for something. Reasonable probable cause for a judge is a reason why LE thinks evidence of the crime will be found at the location listed. LeE's job is not to prove someone did not do something.

so they wouldn't use the warrant to verify BC's e-mails between himself, NC and her father? among other things?

 

[raisincharlie]

so they wouldn't use the warrant to verify BC's e-mails between himself, NC and her father? among other things?

No Brad could do that himself why would LE need to do it for him? Why would LE waste their time trying to prove someone is innocent when a killer is free? It simply is not their job - their job is to find the killer and the evidence to prosecute said killer.

 

[KTaylorsc]

No Brad could do that himself why would LE need to do it for him? Why would LE waste their time trying to prove someone is innocent when a killer is free? It simply is not their job - their job is to find the killer and the evidence to prosecute said killer.

I see...you have a point. Thanks for the info

 

[raisincharlie]

I see...you have a point. Thanks for the info

Here is a link to an actual search warrant, unrelated to this case, so you can see how they work. Note the probable cause section - this is what helps the judge to decide to issue the warrant or not

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2007/01/05/1127622/Young_Warrant_1-5-07.swf

 

[KTaylorsc]

WOW thanks RC!

 

[wirehair]

Maybe they found some hints of something on the computer at home and wanted to see if there was more on the computer at work. People out of BC's past have even commented on this site about how controlling he was in a very passive way. NC probably wanted to avoid fights in front of the children. Her attorney had probably told her not to run with the children to Canada. BC spent his own share of money I'm sure. The spouse that transports the children usually has the newer car. I'm sure that when they went anywhere as a family that they probably used that car. Maybe she thought she was physically safe up until right before she was killed. The younger generation is so concerned with image... both male and female. She must have thought a lot of her husband at one time to have even bought him that expensive laptop case. Did they ever entertain at their house? Maybe we don't have statements from the 3 people mention because they don't have anything to add or the police have talked to them and asked them not to make a statement.