Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #12

[fran]

those things don't seem controlling to me. If he would have not gotten the X5 that she insisted on having or the 1200 purse or let her do anything or have any friends.

You see, one way these guys control their victim, is through lavishing the abused with gifts, flowers, jewelry, fine wine.

Just ask Scott Peterson. He even lavished his g/f, Amber with roses (whole story to that little tidbit). Of course, Laci had just hocked some of her grandmother's jewelry she'd inherited so he had the money for them.

Just sayin'
fran

PS...Laci thought he was going on a business trip and was using the money for his expenses for that. Yeah, .....robbing peter to pay paul.....fran

PPS....I'm sure everyone has heard about the 'honeymoon period' of an abusive relationship. After the abuser goes on a tirade and hurts the abused in some way. He makes up to her by lavishing her with flowers or whatever. It's part of the psychological TORTURE.....fran....sad, but true.....

 

[CyberPro]

I just really hope for those girl's sakes that their father didn't do this.
If I am wrong I will say so.

IIRC the Rentz's and the Lister's had two press conferences where they didn't want to discuss the case, brad or nancy. They only wanted to discuss the girls, then BOOM, they request and receive emergency custody and in the custody order they did alot of slinging mud. It is only human for Brad to come out of the corner swinging with the answers he did. I know I would have done the same thing.

KTaylor,

Please see my earlier (today) post in the Quotes section for information about the BC Mudslinging.

CyberPro

 

[fran]

I just really hope for those girl's sakes that their father didn't do this.
If I am wrong I will say so.

IIRC the Rentz's and the Lister's had two press conferences where they didn't want to discuss the case, brad or nancy. They only wanted to discuss the girls, then BOOM, they request and receive emergency custody and in the custody order they did alot of slinging mud. It is only human for Brad to come out of the corner swinging with the answers he did. I know I would have done the same thing.

You would have done the same?

But..........WOULD it have been the TRUTH?

Personally, I don't believe 1/2 of what Brad had in his affidavit. It's only truth in his mind. His way.

JMHO
fran

 

[KTaylorsc]

He was giving his wife what she wanted to make her happy to try and save his marriage.

IMO

 

[Tink56]

I'm thinking that BC didn't even know what colors Nancy had on. My husband will ask me if I've had a shower when he comes home and I'm still in my work clothes...I'm just saying Husbands "normally" (I agree there are some who would) notice what color of shirt you have on when you go out the door.

ETA: to me it would look more suspicous if he had know the exact color of shirt and shorts she had on.
JMO

I REALLY agree with your last sentence. If it's early and he's tired, my husband would know I was "wearing running stuff." That's it!

 

[d99gr81]

You see, one way these guys control their victim, is through lavishing the abused with gifts, flowers, jewelry, fine wine.

Just ask Scott Peterson. He even lavished his g/f, Amber with roses (whole story to that little tidbit). Of course, Laci had just hocked some of her grandmother's jewelry she'd inherited so he had the money for them.

Just sayin'
fran

PS...Laci thought he was going on a business trip and was using the money for his expenses for that. Yeah, .....robbing peter to pay paul.....fran

PPS....I'm sure everyone has heard about the 'honeymoon period' of an abusive relationship. After the abuser goes on a tirade and hurts the abused in some way. He makes up to her by lavishing her with flowers or whatever. It's part of the psychological TORTURE.....fran....sad, but true.....

I was Manipulated, controlled and mentally abused by my ex wife and I didn't get any gifts.

 

[fran]

He was giving his wife what she wanted to make her happy to try and save his marriage.

IMO

I'm not saying that Nancy didn't purchase some of this more expensive designer type stuff herself, I'm sure she did. But,.....that doesn't mean anything, really, in the BIG picture.

He was a professional and had just received his MBA. They lived in a very nice home and drove expensive cars. But do you, or anyone think, that Nancy would INSIST on the MOST expensive amenities, when she was a SAHM? Seriously.........ask YOURSELF that.

He had an image to portray and that included his family as well. They were a reflection of HIM, part of his image to the world. They had to go to the best schools wearing the best clothes and Nancy had to drive a car, that when some people saw her, it filled them with envy. Envy that included her having such a successful husband.

Everyone seems to be blaming Nancy for their expensive lifestyle, because Brad said it in his affidavit. Hey,.............Nancy is dead so she's not here to dispute what he's saying.

When you're thinking that all of this family's problems were because of Nancy, because Brad said so,........stop and ask yourself, what has come out from the other side?

According to Nancy's friends, Brad was controlling, etc., YET he denies every single word.

ABUSE is all about CONTROLL. So, when you look at the two sides, think of who is NOT here to tell their story.

There's a reason why Nancy is not here, IMHO.

What do you think?

JMHO
fran

 

[Deduction]

Did you mean something else here? I think you were making points as to why she was NOT controlled but maybe I am reading that wrong?

The only thing he tried to control seems to be her spending in recent months. The stories from friends are hear say and he had rebuttals that seemed provable and contradictory to those claims.

Yes I left out the Not----that is why I do not post much, I am forever doing typos and tangling up words---too old to keep up with you younger folks.
I did correct it on original post

 

[fran]

I was Manipulated, controlled and mentally abused by my ex wife and I didn't get any gifts.

Yeah, and you're also here to tell us about it.

Seeeeee........that's the difference, IMO.

You have compared what happened to you and related it to this case. Which, is what we do as human beings, base much of our decisions and opinions on what we've experienced and seen.

While we all appreciate everything you've shared here, showing how it's NOT always the man who's the CHEATER AND ABUSER, either physically or mentally, the difference is you both came out to tell your side of the story. Whatever story is told, at least you both can tell it, whether it's truth or contradictory or not.

THIS case, THIS story, has one dead. One is silenced, one is here to tell all the dirty little secrets, or at least their version.

IF the other side contradicts his side, and part of the deceased story was that he was controlling and abusive. Just the mere fact the person claiming the ABUSE is dead, should be enough evidence to anyone looking from the outside in, that the survivor is most likely the perp. Especially as he was the LAST ONE with the victim.

Now,................to prove it.

JMHO
fran

PS....Like I've said, IF I am wrong, I will profoundly aplogize on this forum and to every single person who's read my words. This is JUST MY OPINION....fran

 

[runnermomof5]

ahhh.....but...you......see.......that is just it!!

Years of abuse and control and finally the abused stands up for herself, she talks back, the abuser is loosing control. The abused files for divorce. The abuse gets uglier, more violent. The words turn into action, ie physical violence.

That is why anyone you talk to about an abusive relationship, will be the first to tell you, the most dangerous time for the victim, is when severing the relationship.

That is why this once, most likely psychologically abusive relationship turned into physical violence.

Look through any news paper archive in the country. Look at the, mostly women, who are murdered by the so, whether married or not, and read the story behind the crime. The murder, usually, is the result of the, mostly woman, severing ties, breaking up, divorcing, separating, distancing herself from her abuser. Many of them have restraining orders as well (which are really only good as the paper they're written on, if the abuser has the intent to kill the abused, there is a way).

Le is called in to pick up the dead body. One of the first important clues that the perp is most likely the victim's so, they were in the midst of a separation, divorce, severing ties.

That's the way this works. Anyone presently in an abusive relationship should be aware that when they decide to take their life back, run and seek help. They are not alone. Shelters are filled with women and children who've been there and done that, and are survivors.

Please, seek help. You are not alone and there are people who care. Please, get help.

Jmho
fran

fran, i totally agree with everything that you stated. I was married for 20 years to a man whom everyone thought was so nice, so wonderful. What they did not know is that at home, he was verbally abusive, ranted, raged, threw temper tantrums, etc. I could not go next door to visit my neighbor without him calling over there and telling me to come home. I could not have a phone conversation with a friend without him picking up the phone and saying something rude to me. I did not start running until i was in my 30's. When i started running, i gained confidence in myself. And with that confidence, he began to feel threatened and tightened the control even more. He was controlling and manipulative. In our family, it was like we were so dysfunctional because even though this was going on,the kids and i never let on to anyone. Very few times did he "blow up" in front of others. So, when i finally got the courage to divorce him, our friends were shocked. They all thought that we had the perfect marriage. I basically walked away without anything, i just wanted my life back. When i left, and we were doing the joint visitation thing, before the divorce was final, he became physically abusive . Up until then, it was verbal with physical damage to walls, objects, etc. But not to me or the kids. He was reported to cps 2 times during the separation for abusing the kids. Also, he started counseling and begged me to say , saying that he could change. I had nothing left in me. I did not trust him to change. I got out. He had bullets that he had written my name on. No kidding. He had told the kids that he was going to kill me. Meantime, all our friends were standing up for him. Boy, you really find out who your true friends are when you are going thru a divorce. Lol
anyway, i know this is long, and i have not shared about my personal life, because, hey, it is personal. Lol
but i wanted to make a point here. Fran is so right on!
Meantime, i remarried to a wonderful man and he and i had 2 children together. Hence, 5 kids! I have never been happier in my life! I am so blessed! I wish that nc would have had that chance at a 2nd life!

 

[Deduction]

You would have done the same?

But..........WOULD it have been the TRUTH?

Personally, I don't believe 1/2 of what Brad had in his affidavit. It's only truth in his mind. His way.

JMHO
fran

Fran

I would like to ask a simple question. Do you believe 100% that was said in all the affidavit's of Nancy's friends? even 75% what about 50% do you believe what Nancy went around telling her friends?

 

[Star12]

I'm not saying that Nancy didn't purchase some of this more expensive designer type stuff herself, I'm sure she did. But,.....that doesn't mean anything, really, in the BIG picture.

He was a professional and had just received his MBA. They lived in a very nice home and drove expensive cars. But do you, or anyone think, that Nancy would INSIST on the MOST expensive amenities, when she was a SAHM? Seriously.........ask YOURSELF that.

He had an image to portray and that included his family as well. They were a reflection of HIM, part of his image to the world. They had to go to the best schools wearing the best clothes and Nancy had to drive a car, that when some people saw her, it filled them with envy. Envy that included her having such a successful husband.

Everyone seems to be blaming Nancy for their expensive lifestyle, because Brad said it in his affidavit. Hey,.............Nancy is dead so she's not here to dispute what he's saying.

When you're thinking that all of this family's problems were because of Nancy, because Brad said so,........stop and ask yourself, what has come out from the other side?

According to Nancy's friends, Brad was controlling, etc., YET he denies every single word.

ABUSE is all about CONTROLL. So, when you look at the two sides, think of who is NOT here to tell their story.

There's a reason why Nancy is not here, IMHO.

What do you think?

JMHO
fran

Oh, Fran, you are so right on with this.

We just have Brad's word that Nancy was the one that insisted on the BMW SUV. Brad's word that Nancy was a spendthrift. Brad's word.

A narcissic controller is all about themselves. Their own image. They buy expensive things for their subjects because it makes themselves feel and look good - they don't care a hoot about their subject, what she would like, what would make her happy. About pleasing her. It's about "look what I got her; I'm so successful I can afford this nice house, these nice cars, this jewelry, these expensive clothes, this expensive spa visit (pedicure), this expensive day care, etc, etc. I can buy it, I will buy it, and everyone will admire me."

It's all about his image.

Image. Kinda like his affidavits. He poured a bowl of cereal once, so that means he often made breakfast.

I've lived it. Stuff don't mean squat. Especially when you are crying all the time from listening to all his "love" - (just think of all the bad words you know, toss them together, spit a little to make your point, slap some, punch a little) - know what I mean?

Expensive paintings, BMWs, jewelry, phooey.

IMO, Nancy was telling her friends what her life was like. Those who scoff are looking at the "Brad image".

 

[lunarmodule]

My understanding is that abuse exists on a continuum, and some abusers traverse that continuum at a different speed than others. Emotional and verbal abuse on one end, physical abuse on the other. When I’ve heard domestic violence professionals speak about this, they’ve always said that it’s a question of when, not if, an abuser crosses to the violent side. My impression from what I’ve read about BC is that he was a very passive aggressive. Some posters who knew him describe the brooding and sulking, then erupting over little things and the whole wall of perceived hurts comes tumbling down. If you’ve ever been around someone like this, it is extremely controlling…just perhaps not in a physical sense.

I’m just saying that controlling doesn’t have to be in the way most people might think, and controlling behavior might not preclude her from going on vacation with her family and other activities.

My other comment concerns the posts related to their spending. Some see this as profligate, but I have a different perspective and have discussed this a lot lately. For many young people in their twenties and early thirties, luxury items have become the entry point in the market. It seems odd to those of a different generation, but it is typical. The $4 cup of coffee is an everyday ritual. I’ve hired young women for whom designer clothing and handbags are simply what everyone buys. For me, I worked for close to twenty years before “splurging” on a $300 Coach bag. I’ve had 24 year olds come into interviews with $800 Prada bags. When I was 24, I bought work suits at Dress Barn.

My point is that NC or BC don’t have to be completely out-of-control, they’re just doing what lots of young professionals their age are doing. It’s “keeping up with the Jones”, but on a generational scale. It’s the new normal. And as long as cheap credit was around, they could all do it. The economy may have a way of correcting that cultural phenomenon.

Sorry for the long post.

 

[Deduction]

I'm not saying that Nancy didn't purchase some of this more expensive designer type stuff herself, I'm sure she did. But,.....that doesn't mean anything, really, in the BIG picture.

He was a professional and had just received his MBA. They lived in a very nice home and drove expensive cars. But do you, or anyone think, that Nancy would INSIST on the MOST expensive amenities, when she was a SAHM? Seriously.........ask YOURSELF that.


JMHO
fran

You're kidding me right? I thought you had been following this story and picked up on the FACT ( I'll borrow your word) Nancy was a gold digger.
I'm not saying Brad didn't have expensive taste also, I am certain he did, but please lets try and use some common sense and honesty here.

 

[KTaylorsc]

sorry...this work thing is really cutting into my websluething

;O)

 

[KTaylorsc]

KTaylor,

Please see my earlier (today) post in the Quotes section for information about the BC Mudslinging.

CyberPro

I think you are gone now but I couldn't find that post. I'll look around some more.

Thanks,

 

[IMHO63]

They have apparently gotten a warrant and seach his office at Cisco. Here is the updated link from WRAL. Sorry if this has already been posted. Just trying to keep up with all the posts.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3302342/

 

[KTaylorsc]

I'm not saying that Nancy didn't purchase some of this more expensive designer type stuff herself, I'm sure she did. But,.....that doesn't mean anything, really, in the BIG picture.

He was a professional and had just received his MBA. They lived in a very nice home and drove expensive cars. But do you, or anyone think, that Nancy would INSIST on the MOST expensive amenities, when she was a SAHM? Seriously.........ask YOURSELF that.

If she was a SAHM why did the girls go to an expensive school. Why didn't she try to save money by having her girls home with her?Why would she need a new car to run the kids to school and to run errands? Brad himself drove the older car so she could have the car she wanted. IMO

He had an image to portray and that included his family as well. They were a reflection of HIM, part of his image to the world. They had to go to the best schools wearing the best clothes and Nancy had to drive a car, that when some people saw her, it filled them with envy. Envy that included her having such a successful husband.

Everyone seems to be blaming Nancy for their expensive lifestyle, because Brad said it in his affidavit. Hey,.............Nancy is dead so she's not here to dispute what he's saying.
I'm not blaming Nancy for a thing. I'm just sayin (as you say) that there are 3 sides to every story...hers...his and somewhere in between there is the truth. We all know Nancy is dead otherwise we wouldn't be here to discuss this. I just don't think it is as clear cut as you think. If I am wrong I will apologize but we don't know for sure right now that BC is the person that killed NC do we?

When you're thinking that all of this family's problems were because of Nancy, because Brad said so,........stop and ask yourself, what has come out from the other side?

According to Nancy's friends, Brad was controlling, etc., YET he denies every single word.

ABUSE is all about CONTROLL. So, when you look at the two sides, think of who is NOT here to tell their story.

There's a reason why Nancy is not here, IMHO.

What do you think?

JMHO
fran

again this is JMO and we all have one so lets just agree to disagree shall we?

 

[cassadinechik]

I know, work is really in the way The nerve really!

Just a couple of points and some questions I have. One for the VoIP guy. Can you have a Cisco phone service? My father works for Cisco and he has everything paid for by Cisco pretty much. His VERY high speed data line, his cell phone and his VOIP service. His VoIP service is from Vonage, but he uses Cisco phones. Oh wait, I think I know what you mean. Like he would have the whole system in the house? Like the old style Nortel systems where you have a whole system in the house? Why would one do that though? If they just had VoIP, I would assume that they still had either Time Warner service (hence the Time Warner subpoena) or Vonage. I am assuming Time Warner though since they were indeed subpoenaed.

Ok, I think I know what you meant now. Typing it out helped! LOL

One other point, I don't think he lied about the training. He did not register for the Ironman and he had not updated his blog since January, so where was the lie there that he hadn't been training? I am confused unless there are blog posts I had missed. The friends I have who are techies that train update their training blogs pretty regularly if nothing but to keep note of their times and the like. Especially if they have the data recorders from Nike and such which I think someone said Brad did purchase or have.

Just for the sake of discussion, I want to repeat that I am from Cary, have multiple family members employed at Cisco (and others formerly employed at Cisco), am a degreed computer scientist who graduated from NC State and I am married to a "phone" guy, though he isn't real deep in the Cisco IP phones.

And just to reiterate someone else's statement. Your VoIP line has nothing to do with telecommuting. That is your high speed data line. Two separate things though many people around here have both provided by Time Warner.

 

[jilly]

I think you are gone now but I couldn't find that post. I'll look around some more.

Thanks,

It's there. I just read it. On the Quotes thread.