Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #18

[CARYISHOME]

I agree with you on this for sure. The affidavits were for statements in why BC was NOT fit to have the children. Instead NC friends put things in there that are going to be needed in criminal court.

I say...state the facts and keep it pertaining to the subject at hand.

Now everything that was stated in those affidavits are going to have to be answered on cross examination.

Most of this will also be only hearsay unless they heard or saw it 1st hand.

I do think some unsuspecting people are going to be dragged into this and they are the innocent ones. Affair...what affair? What a mess this is going to be IMO

Either you guys are talking code or I totally missed something. Are you saying there was a current affair going on somewhere within the circle of friends?

Help a girl out here....

 

[Deduction]

I don't understand. Why was it a huge mistake?

Because they made so many statements that contradicted each other, and so many statements that most likely will be shot down with documented records.
When these statements were taken the children were already with Nancy's parents. These statements wern't needed to get the children to safety.
Instead the statements have opened up a can of worms, that I am thinking Ms. Stubbs now wishes she had left closed as long as possible. IMO

 

[CARYISHOME]

Because they made so many statements that contradicted each other, and so many statements that most likely will be shot down with documented records.
When these statements were taken the children were already with Nancy's parents. These statements wern't needed to get the children to safety.
Instead the statements have opened up a can of worms, that I am thinking Ms. Stubbs now wishes she had left closed as long as possible. IMO

Oh, I see. Makes sense.

 

[Jess]

Because they made so many statements that contradicted each other, and so many statements that most likely will be shot down with documented records.
When these statements were taken the children were already with Nancy's parents. These statements wern't needed to get the children to safety.
Instead the statements have opened up a can of worms, that I am thinking Ms. Stubbs now wishes she had left closed as long as possible. IMO

On the other hand, these statements might never be addressed in court. Depending on the evidence that LE has, and that all the search warrants were done properly , there might never be the need for these opinions/hearsay. After evidence is shared, the defence lawyer might not want to go anywhere near them !

Edited to add- Weren't these statements given before the 25th ?? These statements were given to keep the children with the grandparents.

 

[momto3kids]

Either you guys are talking code or I totally missed something. Are you saying there was a current affair going on somewhere within the circle of friends?

Help a girl out here....

CIH....I am so sorry if we lost you on this one, I will try to explain since we are all touching the tip of the iceberg here.

1--Someone was mentioning about MM and NC...how they went to the beach alone without spouses.

2--also mentioned was this inner circle is going to bust open when they get on the stand and have to answer questions while being cross examined

3--also mentioned was Ms Stubbs allowed statements to be put in the affidavits that did not pertain to the custody

I do not know how much you have followed...SH & BC remain friends even after an affair with HM.

HM is being sued by another person for alientation of affection. This person sueing HM was a very close friend of NC. Their friendship dissolved when the person found out NC knew and didn't say a word.

I can understand how you are confused...this is making everyone's head swim.
This is why I said some very innocent people are going to get brought into this if affairs are common between this circle of friends. Of course this is IMO.

Now are you more confused.

 

[The Saint]

Either you guys are talking code or I totally missed something. Are you saying there was a current affair going on somewhere within the circle of friends?

Help a girl out here....

i'm not sure what mt3 is speaking about specifically, but these are some of the rumors out there:

brad had at least 4 affairs:
1. boss' wife
2. heather metour
3. woman in the MBA group
4. woman who called nancy to report that she was having an affair w/ brad (although this might be the same woman as 1,2 or 3)

brad says that nancy had an affair.
nancy claims it was not sexual, she didn't know that guy's name.
some of her friends say that it happened when she was pregnant w/ katie and it was merely a crush

a woman in nancy's close circle of friends is now suing heather metour for
alienation of affection for messing w/ the husband she is now divorcing.


scott heider and brad cooper have a weird dos amigos/male bonding thing going on because both of them have been scorned by the same woman: heather metour.

while married to scott, she cheated on him with brad.
she cheated on brad with the man whose soon to be ex-wife is now suing heather for alienation of affection.


these are the affairs or claims of affairs that i am aware of. perhaps other people know of other ones.

 

[The Saint]

are people claiming that nancy had an affair w/ micheal M?

 

[momto3kids]

On the other hand, these statements might never be addressed in court. Depending on the evidence that LE has, and that all the search warrants were done properly , there might never be the need for these opinions/hearsay. After evidence is shared, the defence lawyer might not want to go anywhere near them !

Edited to add- Weren't these statements given before the 25th ?? These statements were given to keep the children with the grandparents.

I think most of the statements were done on the 23rd and 24th.

You know Jess...I can see BC attorney's pulling in everyone one of the people who did a statement. I do not know how the custody case is handled, but if there is testimony they will begin with them there, then onto criminal court.

These people will have 2 rounds of court IMO.

 

[The Saint]

i think that the affidavits by nancy's friends show that husbands as well as wives witnessed brad's behavior and control of nancy. it was not just a bunch of nancy's women friends ganging up on brad. couples were unified. they witnessed the same thing.

 

[momto3kids]

are people claiming that nancy had an affair w/ micheal M?

Someone earlier said they couldn't imagine why NC and MM went alone to the beach with the kids. Some of us agree it really is highly unusual to have this occur. This circle of friends have had so much going on. We only know a portion of what has occured, but the rest will come out in due time. IMO

 

[momto3kids]

We had 4 couples (2 on my street, 2 in the other cul-de-sac) in our neighborhood go thru this a few years ago. All were couples wo/children, $ was no issue, socialized, wine drinking parties, 3 of the couples had BMW's, etc. Today 2 of the couples are still married,but 1 had to file bankruptcy (lived way past their means) the other 2 divorced because of the cheating going on. So basically only 1 couple survived this so called fun.

We sat back and laughed knowing this was only going to be a matter of time, and it came rather fast.

 

[Deduction]

i think that the affidavits by nancy's friends show that husbands as well as wives witnessed brad's behavior and control of nancy. it was not just a bunch of nancy's women friends ganging up on brad. couples were unified. they witnessed the same thing.

I am having a real problem with the words " Brad's Control of Nancy" here. Tell me did he control her when she was at the beach with MM, or was it when she was across the street at the party while he was home with the children? The women who have been the victims of REAL control would find Nancy's claim of control an insult. Also this is one reason the victims who are in truly abusive relationships often are not heard or taken seriously in the courts. The Judges and LE have seen too many pretenders.

 

[FlowerChild]

I am having a real problem with the words " Brad's Control of Nancy" here. Tell me did he control her when she was at the beach with MM, or was it when she was across the street at the party while he was home with the children? The women who have been the victims of REAL control would find Nancy's claim of control an insult. Also this is one reason the victims who are in truly abusive relationships often are not heard or taken seriously in the courts. The Judges and LE have seen too many pretenders.

ITA!!!!

She traveled, to the beach with MM, with her family and was going AGAIN in August without Brad and with both male and "couples" friends and she was out in the evenings late with those friends, drinking and partying. She had her own vehicle, she had her kids in partial day-care, she was going to the gym, out running/training frequently, going to Java Jive enough that a smoothie was named after Bella. Until Dec 07 Brad was working and doing an MBA, and competing in a couple of Triathalons - gone from home a lot (according to Nancy and her friends) and Nancy was eating dinner at other people's houses and having Garage Sales and doing social activities with her group of friends while he was gone. Nancy told her friends she was sleeping in her daughter's room and NOT doing Brad's laundry or cleaning his bathroom. Nancy had her own cell phone and computer access. When and how exactly was Nancy "controlled" other than Brad trying to reduce her spending starting in Jan 2008? He still wasn't controlling Nancy, just how much money she spent and on what - not her activities or her travel or her socializing. Nancy was NOT a controlled wife - not in the least. That they argued over money and Brad (probably with her agreement, at least initially) cut off the credit cards and ATM card and checking account and they went to cash only on a weekly allowance for Nancy and her household expenses, does NOT a controlled wife make. Doesn't sound like a single ACTIVITY that Nancy or the kids did was cut back (day care, dance lessons, gym membership,vacations), just the spending outlay on household and misc expenses and perhaps Nancy's personal shopping.

This is NOT even remotely a controlled wife situation - Nancy had a HUGE amount of freedom and even complained that Brad didn't call her ENOUGH. The friends say she was controlled and then say she was ignored by Brad and he was never there or engaged with her and the kids...It can't be both - she can't have been controlled and at the same time have been left alone too much and ignored while openly sleeping in another room and bragging about not doing anything for Brad. That is NOT a controlled wife.

My Opinion

 

[Anderson]

ITA!!!!

She traveled, to the beach with MM, with her family and was going AGAIN in August without Brad and with both male and "couples" friends and she was out in the evenings late with those friends, drinking and partying. She had her own vehicle, she had her kids in partial day-care, she was going to the gym, out running/training frequently, going to Java Jive enough that a smoothie was named after Bella. Until Dec 07 Brad was working and doing an MBA, and competing in a couple of Triathalons - gone from home a lot (according to Nancy and her friends) and Nancy was eating dinner at other people's houses and having Garage Sales and doing social activities with her group of friends while he was gone. Nancy told her friends she was sleeping in her daughter's room and NOT doing Brad's laundry or cleaning his bathroom. Nancy had her own cell phone and computer access. When and how exactly was Nancy "controlled" other than Brad trying to reduce her spending starting in Jan 2008? He still wasn't controlling Nancy, just how much money she spent and on what - not her activities or her travel or her socializing. Nancy was NOT a controlled wife - not in the least. That they argued over money and Brad (probably with her agreement, at least initially) cut off the credit cards and ATM card and checking account and they went to cash only on a weekly allowance for Nancy and her household expenses, does NOT a controlled wife make. Doesn't sound like a single ACTIVITY that Nancy or the kids did was cut back (day care, dance lessons, gym membership,vacations), just the spending outlay on household and misc expenses and perhaps Nancy's personal shopping.

This is NOT even remotely a controlled wife situation - Nancy had a HUGE amount of freedom and even complained that Brad didn't call her ENOUGH. The friends say she was controlled and then say she was ignored by Brad and he was never there or engaged with her and the kids...It can't be both - she can't have been controlled and at the same time have been left alone too much and ignored while openly sleeping in another room and bragging about not doing anything for Brad. That is NOT a controlled wife.

My Opinion

I do see what both you and deduction are saying. She did have a social life, but I respect her ability to form close friendships outside of her relationship with Brad. This was an essential thing for her to do, particularly because she couldn't work in the U.S. I wish her ability to form strong friendships had saved her, but this community of friends may now help bring justice. It seems that Brad was away much of the time and disengaged in some ways, at least according to some of the affidavits, so she really didn't have much choice. But I still think that Brad MAY have controlled Nancy in other ways. Control can come in a variety of forms (e.g., withholding money and passports, threatening suicide, emotional and physical abuse etc.).

Just some thoughts.

 

[MoonFlwr]

I am having a real problem with the words " Brad's Control of Nancy" here. Tell me did he control her when she was at the beach with MM, or was it when she was across the street at the party while he was home with the children? The women who have been the victims of REAL control would find Nancy's claim of control an insult. Also this is one reason the victims who are in truly abusive relationships often are not heard or taken seriously in the courts. The Judges and LE have seen too many pretenders.

Good post! lympics:

 

[carolinalady]

Hi Jess....yesterday was a little rough, huh? Not x1, but x2.

MT3K, I have enjoyed reading your side of things. But, I would respectful request that you quit bringing up that you feel that you were attacked. It only provokes more reactions (hence this post). Numerous posts of mine have been either flat out ignored or poked fun at. So, I would concur with some of my fellow posters that the contingent of us that are still looking at both sides of this case do get the short end of the stick.

Again, I've never stated that I think he did do it or did not do it. I hope for those girls that he did not do it. And no matter what Nancy did or did not do, she did not deserve to be murdered.

 

[tsfkms]

I am having a real problem with the words " Brad's Control of Nancy" here. Tell me did he control her when she was at the beach with MM, or was it when she was across the street at the party while he was home with the children? The women who have been the victims of REAL control would find Nancy's claim of control an insult. Also this is one reason the victims who are in truly abusive relationships often are not heard or taken seriously in the courts. The Judges and LE have seen too many pretenders.

I, too, have been having a hard time seeing that Brad "controlled" Nancy. It sounds that Brad started controlling Nancy's access to money (whether reasonably or unreasonable, I don't know...) and that was hard on Nancy. It also seems that Brad took the girl's passports. But we don't know under what circumstances or why.

Do you remember hearing Nancy's twin talk in a presser about the last time she spoke to Nancy? IIRC, she said something like--Nancy had been painting but would have preferred to be at the pool--Nancy was quite the princess--(I'll see if I can find a link...)

I've been trying to square this idea with what's in the affadavits and haven't yet formed a picture of Brad as "controlling" in the pathological sense. Although it may be that his controlling of access to money was the first step, and things were escalating rapidly. I don't know...

ETA link to Nancy's sisters comment: http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/3222784/ at 13 minute mark

 

[raisincharlie]

Please correct me if I am wrong with any of this.....

The SW was signed at 2am by Judge Stephens (16th)
By 3am LE was knocking on SH door wanting DNA sample from BC
Search took ? hours. I am thinking I heard 16 hours...Am I close?
Search concluded at 7pm (if it was a 16 hour search)
Judge signs Ex Parte @ 4:45 the 16th, 14 hours after the search began
Possible search was not even completed

Was something found during the search for NC family to move so quickly?

Mt3K

I wanted to address this as to if something was found during the search of the residence. I am going to say if anything was found during the search of the residence, that information would not be passed to the Rentz's. The search warrant(s) were sealed, the only persons who know, outside of LE, what was found, if anything, and what was taken, would be BC and his lawyer.

Because the Rentz's are Nancy's parents - does not mean LE is going to give them a play by play describing all the evidence etc. As to the other sealed warrants - the Rentz's will know no more about them than we do. This is one reason I studied on Interact - LE does refer victims to Interact, sorry to say I do not recall who posted the brochure showing this. It is possible that Interact assists the LE victims advocate during these periods, particularly the periods of distress for children. This is just my thought on it.

In my opinion, if LE provided any information for use at the custody hearing it would have been rather non specific with regards to physical evidence relating to Nancy's murder. As we can recall - LE was in the residence on the same day Nancy went missing - they had no warrant but it is a given they were making observations at that time and making mental notes in the event a warrant would be obtained. There is no telling what they saw on the 12th - but it is a given that on the 16th they had some ideas of what and where to look.

But let me ask a quick question - in the days before Nancy was found and identified, and her death ruled a homicide, and the children were taken away - why in several of the press conferences are the media asking Chief Bazemore if there is a suspect or person of interest ? Nancy was only missing - she could have gone away of her own volition - why would this question be raised at all ? Does that make any sense if a person is just missing ?

 

[Sewing_Buddy]

I think it is rather strange CC had absolutely nothing extra to say, except about her plans to jog.

You can tell she wants to distance herself on this one!

I still want to hear from DD husband. Being neighbors, across the streets form each other, you know he saw who did what at the home, and had to hear something.

Just to say mute after living a few years across the street....strange:waitasec:

Do people talk while they jog....or just jog? Even if CC wasn't a part the the neighborhood scene, you would think by jogging with Nancy, certain things would have been discussed. When I walk with friends (we don't jog) we cover lots of topics in our talks...just to pass the time.

IMO CC wanted to clear her name and not be drug into the whole investigation any more than necessary.

 

[raisincharlie]

" Upon information and belief Nancy Cooper never went jogging on July 12th 2008."

Information from who ??? LE? friends ???

I believe there must have been something as I believe Mr. Rentz did not have any "connections or pull " from his former position with the Alberta Government to get temporary custody at the ex parte hearing.

I agree - no pull, no influence - just some facts.