State vs Bradley Cooper 4-21-11

[LAWsy_ME]

I think it is human nature to "circle the wagons" when something tragic happens in the life
(or death) of a loved one. To say that they framed the brad, planted evidence, manipulated evidence etc. etc. etc. is not credible. JMO

 

[yeknomaras]

I agree. I'd hate to have to testify in court. Whether someone is a defense witness or a prosecution witness, it seems like all they have to do is make a trivial misstatement and the other side will pounce on it and portray them as a liar. So they have to be overly cautious about what they say. It would make me nervous.

It would most definitely make me nervous too, especially if I thought I was just trying to do the right thing and that anything I might say could be picked apart by the opposing side and then later on the news...

 

[Hartzy34]

It was relevant in that it showed people up to something nefarious within the area. Now, do I think the man was crazy after hearing his doorbell ring to then go look out, see nothing, and proceed to open his door anyhow and walk outside, YES, he was. He should have stayed in the house and called the police. What if someone wanted to get inside and rang the doorbell to bring him down to the door, hid, and then when he walked out had attacked him.

2 things....a) I would never been able to get back in bed without being sure all was okay near my home, police or not. I think it's a a guy thing... b) I keep a baseball bat near the door and would have had that with me when I went out.

 

[Bernie]

No, that would be Jehovah Witnesses.

Damn bell ringers ........ I am a disfellowshipped JW ............talk about a cult ....

 

[yeknomaras]

There could have been a van with people engaging in criminal activity on July 11th who thought she may have witnessed them doing something when she went home that night. They see her the next morning follow her and kill the witness. They attempt to remove her clothing, can't get the sport bra off so they leave it and dump the body quickly. Motive wasn't robbery so they don't worry about the earrings.

Is that really so incredibly far-fetched as to not even be worth looking into?

IMO, I believe that if you have that on one side, and then on the other you have a man and wife who aren't getting along, ready to go through what would probably be a nasty divorce and custody battle, and then the woman shows up dead.... yea I think one certainly sounds more plausible than the other. JMO.

 

[SleuthinNC]

2 things....a) I would never been able to get back in bed without being sure all was okay near my home, police or not. I think it's a a guy thing... b) I keep a baseball bat near the door and would have had that with me when I went out.

Add to that he is retired Navy. I wouldn't doubt adrenaline and the thought of protecting his family and home trumped good sense a wee bit. Maybe he had a registered firearm with him.

 

[jrb0124]

Sure that's what they are doing - but so far nothing has shown me that zeroing in on a suspicious, lying, odds on favorite to being her killer was the WRONG thing to do....

Give me a credible alternative - what were those other possibilities?. We don't even have consistent reports of suspicious activity in a common colored van. No other criminal activity, no attempted kidnappings, no men driving around in vans exposing themselves, no assaults, no private stalking of NC where she said she was uncomfortable and she called the police. Nada, zip, zero, zilch. And then explain why someone would kill NC, take her clothing - no sexual assault - and leave her diamond stud earrings. Nothing makes sense and if it doesn't make sense........................

We haven't heard from all the defense witnesses yet. I will admit though, that I'm pretty sure she knew her killer (BC or someone else). Even if the defense is also going to suggest that as a possibility (someone she knew) this testimony is still serving to support the contention that CPD did not consider any other possibility. That's different from excluding possibilities because they are not possible.

 

[yeknomaras]

2 things....a) I would never been able to get back in bed without being sure all was okay near my home, police or not. I think it's a a guy thing... b) I keep a baseball bat near the door and would have had that with me when I went out.

same here... except I would be carrying a Glock 19.

 

[LyndyLoo]

It was relevant in that it showed people up to something nefarious within the area. Now, do I think the man was crazy after hearing his doorbell ring to then go look out, see nothing, and proceed to open his door anyhow and walk outside, YES, he was. He should have stayed in the house and called the police. What if someone wanted to get inside and rang the doorbell to bring him down to the door, hid, and then when he walked out had attacked him.

And their incident was documented and report was taken ..and I am sure it was considered, and increased potrols were requested...And all this happened at midnight on July11th/12th, and Missing person was at a party..
Be assured, if Nancy had of been found raped, jewellry taken, and all, and the finger nail scapings identified someone other than Brad..they would have got more into this report..Course, given the hundreds of tips, observations by the locals, along with getting the true history of Brad's relationship with his wife..I am sure they put their efforts into trying to clear him as a suspect...but the more they looked, the more suspicious they became..

Maybe IF Brad had of been more forthcoming at the beginning...might have been helpful??..

Its always a given, defense teams and those that favour defenses..always blame police of ineptness, rush to judgement, bunglings, etc...Nature of the beast...However, I think when corruption as alleged..they went too far..JMO of course..

 

[Wyn]

Morning, all! Just an interesting note to start our day. In case any of you were not up late last night and do not go back and read the late-night comments, you might want to this time. Jay Ward came on Websleuths and posted a nice long note to us all!!

Just saw this. I'm sure it's been discussed thoroughly, but how extremely unprofessional. The day of his testimony in a murder trial and he's posting on a message board? I can see perhaps doing something like this AFTER a verdict has been rendered, but the day of his testimony! I'd love to know what/who even directed him to this board.

 

[RoughlyCollie]

Just saw this. I'm sure it's been discussed thoroughly, but how extremely unprofessional. The day of his testimony in a murder trial and he's posting on a message board? I can see perhaps doing something like this AFTER a verdict has been rendered, but the day of his testimony! I'd love to know what/who even directed him to this board.

He probably Googled his name.

 

[gracielee]

No, that would be Jehovah Witnesses.

Where we used to live, we got far more Mormons than Jehovah's. But that's true, the Mormons *usually* ride bikes, not vans.

 

[jrb0124]

IMO, I believe that if you have that on one side, and then on the other you have a man and wife who aren't getting along, ready to go through what would probably be a nasty divorce and custody battle, and then the woman shows up dead.... yea I think one certainly sounds more plausible than the other. JMO.

While as an observer that's perfectly fine and normal, but as a police detective you are obligated to investigate and eliminate (to the best of your ability) the other possibilities.

Its obvious to me that the CPD was heavily influenced in one direction from the start, and put a little too much weight into certain statements/opinions. I know the husband is always a suspect (initially), but in this case the CE evidence available to them prior to making him THE suspect seems very flimsy. I really don't think they explored any other alternatives.

 

[cassius]

IMO, I believe that if you have that on one side, and then on the other you have a man and wife who aren't getting along, ready to go through what would probably be a nasty divorce and custody battle, and then the woman shows up dead.... yea I think one certainly sounds more plausible than the other. JMO.

And thankfully the standard of proof in a criminal trial is not by the greater weight of the evidence.

 

[Bottle Cap]

Total new person here - glad to have found you all.

I've been waiting for something good from the defense, and want to make sure I have today's testimony completely clear in my mind: On Friday night, the criminals were smart enough to drive away with the lights off in order to avoid detection. By Saturday morning, they had painted their van another color to avoid detection and were in full of neighborhood residents while they just waited for a jogging victim to come by so they could pick her off and dump her some yards down the road. Rather than putting her body in the van and getting the heck out of there. Have I got this correct?

I do wonder, also, at the need for these witnesses for follow up by CPD. They had no further information to give, did they? Did they really expect CPD to personally call on every single tipster who phoned in information? As a citizen, I prefer my tax dollars to go to officers who are actively working a case, rather than coming around for a chit chat to assure that the information I already gave is, ah, still the same.

 

[RaleighNC]

There could have been a van with people engaging in criminal activity on July 11th who thought she may have witnessed them doing something when she went home that night. They see her the next morning follow her and kill the witness. They attempt to remove her clothing, can't get the sport bra off so they leave it and dump the body quickly. Motive wasn't robbery so they don't worry about the earrings.

Is that really so incredibly far-fetched as to not even be worth looking into?

I could buy into 'possible' until you stated that the "witness killers" (for a serious enough crime that would warrant killing a witness, which occurred close to the time that NC was killed - that has never been reported, let alone solved) took off her clothes (?) and left the diamonds.

Spend time looking into that?

I would not find that a good use of police time.

 

[gracielee]

Sure that's what they are doing - but so far nothing has shown me that zeroing in on a suspicious, lying, odds on favorite to being her killer was the WRONG thing to do....

Give me a credible alternative - what were those other possibilities?. We don't even have consistent reports of suspicious activity in a common colored van. No other criminal activity, no attempted kidnappings, no men driving around in vans exposing themselves, no assaults, no private stalking of NC where she said she was uncomfortable and she called the police. Nada, zip, zero, zilch. And then explain why someone would kill NC, take her clothing - no sexual assault - and leave her diamond stud earrings. Nothing makes sense and if it doesn't make sense........................

Just an educated guess here, but if somebody ever finds my body, I'm guessing it will still have it's 'Hanes Her Way's' on, but my diamond studs will be *missing*. Granted, that's just a guess. Oh yeah, and I think my rings will be taken too, even if they ( the bike riding/van riding/hispanic hawaiian mormons), have to take my fingers to get 'em. :floorlaugh:

 

[yeknomaras]

While as an observer that's perfectly fine and normal, but as a police detective you are obligated to investigate and eliminate (to the best of your ability) the other possibilities.

Its obvious to me that the CPD was heavily influenced in one direction from the start, and put a little too much weight into certain statements/opinions. I know the husband is always a suspect (initially), but in this case the CE evidence available to them prior to making him THE suspect seems very flimsy. I really don't think they explored any other alternatives.

I very much agree.

I would like to state for the record that I was a fence-sitter until recently.

The thing is, we can't imagine what the jury is thinking yet. They don't know all that we do... and they have been sitting there for over a month (I think, right?) listening to every piece of info they've been allowed to hear.

I honestly don't know if all 12 of them will be able to convict him based on what has been laid out so far. And the defense isn't even done yet.

 

[LAWsy_ME]

:balloons: + wire:ghost: =:takeabow: + :blowkiss:

 

[jrb0124]

Total new person here - glad to have found you all.

I've been waiting for something good from the defense, and want to make sure I have today's testimony completely clear in my mind: On Friday night, the criminals were smart enough to drive away with the lights off in order to avoid detection. By Saturday morning, they had painted their van another color to avoid detection and were in full of neighborhood residents while they just waited for a jogging victim to come by so they could pick her off and dump her some yards down the road. Rather than putting her body in the van and getting the heck out of there. Have I got this correct?

Actually, no one testified to any of that nor has the defense suggested it. What we have heard is that the CPD was not interested in sending any detectives to follow-up on police reports/statements concerning possible suspicious or criminal activity in the immediate vicinity prior to and just after NC disappearance. When a person is missing - those are the things you do.