April 29 weekend of Sleuthiness

Status
Not open for further replies.
No body fluids on the boxed ducks
Body fluids were on the floors...the floors he decided to clean for some reason.

How do we KNOW he cleaned the floors? Perhaps he just said he did to account for time spent.
 
You must then believe that:

1) NC took it off before she was murdered
2) BC took it off before he murdered NC
3) BC took if off after he murdered NC

2 & 3 beg the question, why?

And, why would he not keep the earrings as well? Am I remembering correctly that NC was found wearing only one earring? If so, where is that other earring?

Both earrings were there, but one was about to fall out so investigators removed it at the scene and kept it separate.
 
Why did the ducks end up at the Lawyers office? They could have been purchased again? The lawyer they were given to (for payment?) should have known their importance and could have said something a month ago. The ducks were brought in for dramatics

I am so glad someone is finally bringing this up. I thought the lawyer had one duck in her office, the black one, and then the others were found? Is this true. The N & O said there was one duck in the office.
 
It seems that a lot of what the CPD did in this case was late. So much of what seems to have been important evidence was just left alone and not bothered with until weeks and months later.

My opinion is that they searched in October simply to say that they looked for them at trial. What if they had found them? It's not like they could test them in October for anything of value. That wouldn't have even been admitted in court.
 
It seems that all the heavy duty cleaning was in that area. We were shown Brad Cooper's pillow case, he was not the cleanest dude and he obviously DID NOT do laundry on a regular basis..I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't having the kid's help him do laundry that day

And his story changed. In one version, NC was doing the laundry, and in another version, he was doing laundry. For someone with yellow sheets, you would think he could remember WHO initiated the laundry. After all, NC would not have been doing his clothes, and we know he didn't do hers. So who was doing their laundry? Which one? And why can't he remember because it seems that it was a rare event for him to do his laundry? Maybe he can't remember because this was a facet of his alibi story.
 
Another thing to consider...

Kurtz is being paid $85/hr to represent Bradley. Rest assured he has racked up many hours to bill the state of NC, and has done little else in his own private practice.
The prosecution is on a piddly salary and juggles 100's of serious cases at any given time. I have said, this trio of prosecutors have not done a good job for the state and the people of Wake County.
Boz and Amy are on the DA drug squad....hardly seasoned for 1st degree murder cases.
 
The issue of the property was not a big portion of the testimony, but, unless he planned on never seeing his children again why would he give all of NCs jewerly to NCs family to give to the girls at a future date. The dispositon of her jewerly was not discussed.

Because it is illegal to profit from the death of anyone. Until he is found not guilty, he isn't entitled to any of nancy coopers estate. This was the same fight sharon rocha had with lee and jackie peterson. Fighting for laci's share of her estate. IIRC, the assets were kept intact until the end of the trial. I'm sure those of us trial followers recall the pick-up truck brigade, when the Rocha's drove to laci's house to retrieve her belongings after jackie had the locks changed. I know I was cheering, watching the video on television as those pick-up trucks pulled away, filled up with Laci & baby Connor's things. The items taken by the Rocha's were cataloged and held at their attorney's office until scott was convicted, just so jackie and lee *couldn't* sell them, dispense them, give them to scott's legal team, etc.
 
The prosecution knew about the ducks when they were located on April 6.

What is your theory on the ducks? The lawyers ran out an bought three ducks?

no they only would have to buy two ducks..one was still on fridge..but oddly ended up in the same box as the two missing ducks
 
Neighbors reported that Brad was okay with Nancy taking the children and leaving the country, but nothing Brad said or did supports that claim. Over and over again I read that Brad was okay with the move, but the facts suggest the opposite. Nancy had locked the passports in her car and she slept with the keys. If Brad was okay with Nancy taking the children out of the country, why did she lock the passports in her car? It sounds like she knew perfectly well that the only way to have both passports was to prevent Brad from having access.

One day Brad had to get something out of the car and she gave him the keys. He used that opportunity to take the passports. Why would he do that if he was okay with the children being removed from the country? Nancy and Brad then split the children's passports so neither could take them out of the country.

He was given a copy of the draft separation agreement, and didn't agree.

I have said this before, but IMO, he wanted her to go, or else he wouldn't have purchased an interview suit for her and bought paint for her to fix up the house. Yes that changed when he saw the separation agreement, done without consenting him bc apparantly, that wasn't part of his plan. He was splitting the "assets" fairly in his mind. She goes to Canada with the kids, supports herself, and he keeps the assets to fix the financial mess and just move on. Does anyone think that BC really intended to stay in Lochmere? He wanted to run away from the embarassing mess they had and start over.
 
it is obviously not that important to the case.
I did hear Det Young asked one question about the shoes and said they were not recovered.

I simply asked the question to the board about the mysterious shoes.
To me, it shows he ditched them for some reason.

It doesn't even show he ditched them. You had those ducks in your bucket list of items too. And guess what, he never ditched those either. I have always thought the idea of him ditching the shoes was down right stupid to begin with. The area on the morning of the 12th was dry. He obviously didn't dump the body between HT trips. The shoes looked absolutely fine in the HT video. He wasn't leaving a mud trail behind. You could clearly see the white stip on the shoe as McDreamy pointed out. Yet he felt the need to throw those away but not the running shoes that they did test? It's absurd. And since most BDI people believe he didn't go home, then he was smart enough to bring an extra pair of shoes with him, yet not smart enough to change them before his first visit to HT.

Are there any pictures of him on the 12th that show his feet? I wonder if he was wearing those shoes in any of the pictures from that day.
 
They were boxed by Nancy.
The ducks mean nothing to the case.
All it means is the struggle did not effect them...so what?

I have wondered all along if he just didn't like the ducks, and packed them away himself after he knew she wouldn't be coming back.
 
The ducks were packed up by Nancy in a box for the move.
Bradley's shoes were not.

I think it is hilarious everyone is using the 'ducks' to cover everything else, including missing routers, FXO cards and shoes.

The missing blowpoke was "found", making the DA look silly in the Peterson trial.
Guess what, he was convicted.

Wow, so JA was wrong? Weren't the ducks in your list of things that proved him to be guilty? Yet because CPD didn't look for the shoes until October, it means he ditched them. That's absurd.
 
She was wearing both earrings but one was very loose when her body was discovered. Leads me to wonder if somebody tried to remove them, or at least the one, and couldn't.

And perhaps that led them to believe they were screw-backed earrings?

Just sayin...
 
no they only would have to buy two ducks..one was still on fridge..but oddly ended up in the same box as the two missing ducks

Where do you suppose the ducks were purchased?
 
The ducks were not important to the case....just like the blowpoke in the Mike Peterson case. Just a theory.
She was strangled, not beaten with a duck.
It was nothing more than a theory, based on what the state thought they had. Just because the ducks were a mistake, in no way takes away from their theory she was strangled to death by Bradley in the house.

Yet you and many others posted it here as fact that he ditched them. Remember those lists of all the circumstantial evidence?
 
I say this with all due respect, but I seriously think that some of you have become a bit jaded based on what you have seen in past cases. This isn't Jason Young's trial or circumstance, or Scott Peterson, or Michael Peterson, or that last Peterson, or all those other cases. When I read some posts I wonder what the female equivalent word is for misogynist because I seem to see a lot of that in some posts. I know women who have suffered domestic violence, but I do not see that in this marriage from BC. I also notice that the term seems to be being thrown around with such frequency in our world lately that I think it is losing some of its significance. I think we also have a tendency to forget that the man in a relationship with domestic abuse is not always the abuser.

My whole point here is a man is on trial for his life and livelihood here, I am not dismissing the victim, but I don't think justice for her means just putting her spouse in prison because of statistics, I prefer to see some evidence, and so far I really haven't seen any.

I resent the misogynist reference. I specifically mentioned Ann Miller, I'll add Barbara Stager, and Blanche Taylor Moore. I can't help it if the males out-number the females, those who dispose of, rather than divorce. Especially in this area & lately.
 
It seems that all the heavy duty cleaning was in that area. We were shown Brad Cooper's pillow case, he was not the cleanest dude and he obviously DID NOT do laundry on a regular basis..I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't having the kid's help him do laundry that day

And what would the purpose of doing so much laundry? Except maybe a backlog of dirty clothes. We know he did his own clothes. What exactly is your theory as to why he did a bunch of laundry?
 
I have said this before, but IMO, he wanted her to go, or else he wouldn't have purchased an interview suit for her and bought paint for her to fix up the house. Yes that changed when he saw the separation agreement, done without consenting him bc apparantly, that wasn't part of his plan. He was splitting the "assets" fairly in his mind. She goes to Canada with the kids, supports herself, and he keeps the assets to fix the financial mess and just move on. Does anyone think that BC really intended to stay in Lochmere? He wanted to run away from the embarassing mess they had and start over.

She said that she had interviews lined up and needed a suit. Fair enough, he was probably happy that she was going to be working. If she wanted to move to Ottawa, he was probaby agreeable. We know that he and Nancy discussed him hiring a nanny for the children, presumably that he would have a nanny so Nancy could move.

How could anyone today actually believe that child support would not be a factor in divorce with children? Again, we have to believe that Brad was completely stupid to have thought that Nancy would not continue to ask for money after the divorce.
 
Another thing to consider...

Kurtz is being paid $85/hr to represent Bradley. Rest assured he has racked up many hours to bill the state of NC, and has done little else in his own private practice.
The prosecution is on a piddly salary and juggles 100's of serious cases at any given time. I have said, this trio of prosecutors have not done a good job for the state and the people of Wake County.
Boz and Amy are on the DA drug squad....hardly seasoned for 1st degree murder cases.

85/hr...are you trying to say that he is making A LOT of money? In his private practice he bills 3 or 4 TIMES that. Heck, my first year out of law school I was billed out at 165/hr. Not sure of the point you are trying to make.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
195
Guests online
1,316
Total visitors
1,511

Forum statistics

Threads
591,774
Messages
17,958,642
Members
228,604
Latest member
leannamj
Back
Top