Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #7

[Coolmomof4]

Tide works great on blood stained carpet.

That is very true. And OxyClean is great for that too.

 

[Lurker]

My list is currently void of reliable, material and competent inculpatory evidence. Your list contains what?

So basically in your line of thinking we shouldn't discuss the possibility of Brad as the killer since he's presumed innocent until proven guilty?

Hmm, what is websleuths for then?

Who do you think killed Nancy? Some maniac hiding in a home under construction on the off chance that a woman jogging alone would happen by?

There are several reasons why many of us beleive that he did it, do we have proof? No. Do we have theories? Yes and that's what websleuths is for.

We've seen it time and time again. Husband and wife are having problems, husband is having affair, wife "leaves" after an argument, gets out of the car on a dark street, never comes home from work, goes jogging etc.

Wifes body is sometimes found, sometimes ala Drew Peterson it hasn't been found yet but more often than not, the husband did it.

 

[RoughlyCollie]

Aha! For those who watched Greta last night, the article Fran posted has a friend named Marion quoted in it:

"Nancy did not allow her circumstances to bring her down," said close friend Marion McHugh. "She was always positive, always up, always cheerful. She was also very honest about what was going on in her house with all of us. We all knew what was going on."

http://cary.mync.com/site/cary/news/story/5580/family_holds_private_memorial_for_cooper

 

[Wudge]

Yes, I do. I know that, on a message board, I can theorize and speculate. I think Brad is guilty. If I were chosen for jury duty, I would put that speculation aside and be able to look at all of the evidence. I would not take my job as a jurist lightly. I would have a totally different mindsight.

I see a message board as a brainstorming type of activity. We are not privy to much if any of the actual evidence. That is revealed at trial.

I spoke to concluding guilt without having the necessary evidence, not speculation. Concluding guilt estabishes a point of view. A point of view of "guilty" prejudices the interpretation of circumstantial evidence, the presumption of innocence and a fair trial.



HTH

 

[RR0004]

I think he meant he wasn't worried about Nancy being killed by her husband.

Meanwhile, her mother was worried about the situation.

I doubt anyone thought Nancy would be killed. The reason I doubt that is because, based on what we have heard, there just is nothing that points to Nancy having been in danger. Sure, her husband acted like a jerk (alleged affair(s), withholding money, hiding passports, refusing to move out of house). But that would not have sent up red flags that a homicide was in the near future, at least not for me.

To me, biggest red flag occurred after, or contemporaneous to, Nancy's disappearance: the husband's visit to the grocery store to buy bleach (or detergent with bleach) at 4 a.m.

Thanks, RC...ITA!

 

[whiteangora]

The point here is that IF THEY HAVE FORENSIC EVIDENCE from the home, it makes no difference whether anyone else was a focus of the investigation. It makes no sense that the prosecutor would need to say "we have blood, and bleach and a murder weapon at the house, and by the way, no one SAW her jogging". What difference would that make at all? To me, this indicates that they did NOT find what they were looking for in the home.

Not trying to be a spoil-sport, but I'm agreeing with what you are saying.
What IF LE found no evidence from the home or cars? Unless they are tryin
to find out if anyone saw BC's car in the area.........maybe he killed Nancy outside of the home.
But, that would shoot down the detergent/bleach theory.
Oh, I'm so confused now.:waitasec:

 

[Pepper]

I was referring to this case, where some posters have concluded Brad is guilty without having the required evidence.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2395678&postcount=172

Going in circles here. I'm getting dizzy again.

 

[Wudge]

So basically in your line of thinking we shouldn't discuss the possibility of Brad as the killer since he's presumed innocent until proven guilty?

Hmm, what is websleuths for then?

Who do you think killed Nancy? Some maniac hiding in a home under construction on the off chance that a woman jogging alone would happen by?

There are several reasons why many of us beleive that he did it, do we have proof? No. Do we have theories? Yes and that's what websleuths is for.

We've seen it time and time again. Husband and wife are having problems, husband is having affair, wife "leaves" after an argument, gets out of the car on a dark street, never comes home from work, goes jogging etc.

Wifes body is sometimes found, sometimes ala Drew Peterson it hasn't been found yet but more often than not, the husband did it.

I have no problem with discussion or theorizing. I have a problem when people conclude on guilt without the required evidence.

As for who killed Nancy, I said my reliable evidence list is void.

 

[Pepper]

I have no problem with discussion or theorizing. I have a problem when people conclude on guilt without the required evidence.

As for who killed Nancy, I said my reliable evidence list is void.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2395678&postcount=172

 

[Aimee729]

The point here is that IF THEY HAVE FORENSIC EVIDENCE from the home, it makes no difference whether anyone else was a focus of the investigation. It makes no sense that the prosecutor would need to say "we have blood, and bleach and a murder weapon at the house, and by the way, no one SAW her jogging". What difference would that make at all? To me, this indicates that they did NOT find what they were looking for in the home.

Noted on Fox news:

Interpretation is difficult in a case where two people are living together, as in the case of a married couple because you expect both their DNA to be in common areas like the house, in the car, etc. because they are sharing these things- DNA could even be expected on the victims body. Determination of forensic evidence would only indicate whether or not it was present- not why.
Motive is certainly there in this case. Other circumstantial evidence could add up to implicate BC. Is there a murder weapon? We don't know. IMO he did it in a moment of anger. But there is still a lot we do not know.

 

[nanandjim]

The point here is that IF THEY HAVE FORENSIC EVIDENCE from the home, it makes no difference whether anyone else was a focus of the investigation. It makes no sense that the prosecutor would need to say "we have blood, and bleach and a murder weapon at the house, and by the way, no one SAW her jogging". What difference would that make at all? To me, this indicates that they did NOT find what they were looking for in the home.

I sure hope that they have evidence tying Brad to this crime. As his former girlfriend posted, Brad is very smart. He had many hours to clean. So, let hope that there was evidence of a struggle.

 

[Wudge]

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2395678&postcount=172

Going in circles here. I'm getting dizzy again.

I can't use what you refer to as evidence to conclude Brad killed Nancy.

If you think you can structure the necessary premises from that list that would force a conclusion of guilt, please layout out those premises. Though you should first decide what the charges would be; i.e., murder one, murder two or manslaughter.

 

[Pepper]

Not trying to be a spoil-sport, but I'm agreeing with what you are saying.
What IF LE found no evidence from the home or cars? Unless they are tryin
to find out if anyone saw BC's car in the area.........maybe he killed Nancy outside of the home.
But, that would shoot down the detergent/bleach theory.
Oh, I'm so confused now.:waitasec:

The job of a good investigating team is not only to find new evidence, but also to rule out theories. So far from everything I've heard, they are doing a thorough job, and that is the important thing.

 

[RoseRed]

FACT: Nancy Cooper was murdered

Yes

FACT: The body was found at the end of an undeveloped cul-de-sac next to a retaining pond.

yes

FACT: An undeveloped cul-de-sac is not where a runner in training would be jogging.

Not fact, we have seen photos of a jogger running past this exact spot.

FACT: Brad Cooper was the last person to have seen her alive (by his own admission)

Not necessarily that is only a presummed fact.

FACT: Their marriage was "troubled" (admitted by Brad)

correct, but not all troubled marriages end in murder by one spouse or the other.

FACT: Nancy was planning a separation and divorce (according to family members)

FACT: LE says this is an isolated incident and no reason to fear other joggers/neighbors are in danger.

LE have made this statement before and been wrong.

FACT: In most cases with similar facts as stated above, a close family member is usually the perp.

Not a given 100%

CONCLUSION: 1 + 1 = 2. It is a safe assumption/speculation to conclude that Brad Cooper had motive, means and opportunity to kill Nancy.

 

[CyberPro]

So if Nancy went running and he went to the grocery store, who was watching the girls?

IMO, I think NC was unable to run at the time he visited the store. She might have been physically in the home, but I do not think she would have been able to respond to any of the needs of the kids at that point.

I might be slow coming to the realization than some of you are, but I was driving near the area where this took place about an hour ago, and it occurred to me that something is missing from this case.

Where are the tip lines to call if you have information?

Where are the rewards for information?

Why has BC's employer not stepped in and offered a reward?

I know LE said "Isolated" "No threat to community" and so forth, but they must feel that they have a fairly strong set of evidence. All this, and BC is not even vowing to look on every golf course in the state for the killer!

CyberPro

 

[CyberPro]

I'm not bothered by rightful convictions. I'm bothered by wrongful convictions. And I'm very bothered when rumor, innuendo, falsehood, myths, lies and lies given by LE to the media -- so as to have the media villify a person -- are used to destroy a person's right to the presumption of innocence.

Salve your feelings with this:

Earlier you said he had the best law firm in the state representing his interests.

Surely, they understand how to call for a change of venue, if warranted.

Doubtless they will put on a spirited defense of their (obviously guilty) client.

If this is a prosecution only trial, it will be a rarity!

CyberPro

 

[SuziQ]

The point here is that IF THEY HAVE FORENSIC EVIDENCE from the home, it makes no difference whether anyone else was a focus of the investigation. It makes no sense that the prosecutor would need to say "we have blood, and bleach and a murder weapon at the house, and by the way, no one SAW her jogging". What difference would that make at all? To me, this indicates that they did NOT find what they were looking for in the home.

Why wouldn't LE and a DA want all the evidence possible? They not only need evidence, they need to back it up with more evidence. Besides, the first thing a defense attorney would do is bring up the fact that LE didn't look elsewhere and soley focused on their client from the get-go. So doing what LE has been seen doing would kill two birds with one stone.

 

[Wudge]

FACT: Nancy Cooper was murdered

Yes

FACT: The body was found at the end of an undeveloped cul-de-sac next to a retaining pond.

yes

FACT: An undeveloped cul-de-sac is not where a runner in training would be jogging.

Not fact, we have seen photos of a jogger running past this exact spot.

FACT: Brad Cooper was the last person to have seen her alive (by his own admission)

Not necessarily that is only a presummed fact.

FACT: Their marriage was "troubled" (admitted by Brad)

correct, but not all troubled marriages end in murder by one spouse or the other.

FACT: Nancy was planning a separation and divorce (according to family members)

FACT: LE says this is an isolated incident and no reason to fear other joggers/neighbors are in danger.

LE have made this statement before and been wrong.

FACT: In most cases with similar facts as stated above, a close family member is usually the perp.

Not a given 100%

CONCLUSION: 1 + 1 = 2. It is a safe assumption/speculation to conclude that Brad Cooper had motive, means and opportunity to kill Nancy.

Given means, motive and opportunity, a reasoned person cannot conclude guilt.

HTH

 

[Aimee729]

IMO, I think NC was unable to run at the time he visited the store. She might have been physically in the home, but I do not think she would have been able to respond to any of the needs of the kids at that point.

I might be slow coming to the realization than some of you are, but I was driving near the area where this took place about an hour ago, and it occurred to me that something is missing from this case.

Where are the tip lines to call if you have information?

Where are the rewards for information?

Why has BC's employer not stepped in and offered a reward?

I know LE said "Isolated" "No threat to community" and so forth, but they must feel that they have a fairly strong set of evidence. All this, and BC is not even vowing to look on every golf course in the state for the killer!

CyberPro

That is a good question.:clap:

 

[TGIRecovered]

I joked about murderous gypsies camping on the cul-de-sac last night to play with some folks theorizing about a defense plant. But, the reality is that when I was in my 20s, we'd often cruise the roads in that immediate area to smoke dope and we'd have unprotected sex in the neighborhoods under construction. And, we'd do it in that particular area because it was convenient to Cary, but not in the town limits, so the likelihood of encountering a county cop was slim to nil.

After all, we can assume that the victim's body was dumped early on Saturday morning, but it wasn't found until late Monday.

Well, what are the odds? Magister just so happens to have spent his youth smoking dope and having unprotectected sex in the very spot this poor woman's body was dumped, and he waits until now to menton it.