"BC is innocent" or "I'm not convinced yet" Discussion

[Shadow722]

According to Brad's affidavit(s) there was a lot of laundry being done that morning 7/12, both by he and Nancy, with Nancy starting possibly as early as somewhere between 4am and 6am, Brad making a trip for laundry detergent at 6:30ish, and Brad continuing the laundry throughout the morning as part of his cleaning during the 4 hrs before he started to look for a missing Nancy (according to his affy). I find it hard to believe that he didn't have any clean short sleeve shirts or Tshirts with all that laundry being done.

Speaking of clothes...I wonder what Brad was wearing at the party the night before and if those items of clothes are still in his possession? Focus has been on what Nancy was wearing but what about Brad? Did he change clothes after coming home with the girls? What about the clothes he was wearing when he went to HT at 6:20am and 6:40am?

Sleuthy,

Some excellent points you have made, and many points to ponder. Thanks for bring it up.

 

[jmflu]

I meant consistent with how most people act when they are bitter or unhappy about a situation.

So, to you, that is normal, because "most people do it."

I do not think most people act the same when bitter or unhappy about a situation. Following spouse to gas station? I don't think so.

Most people who are still rational, though they may be bitter or unhappy in a situation, would not do this!

 

[Shadow722]

I think that the MH situation is a little different in that the police questioned him several weeks after the murder and it was seemingly focused on the cell phone - i.e. not just a random interrogation....

Something focused the police upon MH and the cell phone.... so it does lend itself to suspicion.

Another excellent observation, and a very important clue IMHO. It means that there was indeed a call from Nancy's cell to Brad's cell during the 6:40 AM time frame. The police are focused on these call(s) because they point to only one of three possible inferences:

1) Brad called himself with Nancy's phone. Indicating his guilt.
2) An accomplice of Brad called him using Nancy's phone. Also indicating his guilt.
3) Or Nancy was still alive at around 6:40 AM on the 12th of July. Indicating his innocence or another possible another perp?

If the police could prove either one or two, then they would then have some real proof of Brad's guilt. If the police could prove number three, then would it tend to be an inference of Brad's innocence, and somebody as yet unidentified possible guilt. Can we construct a scenario of Brad killing Nancy after 6:40 AM on the 12th? More thoughts to ponder?????

Thanks....

 

[garner_nc]

He cut her off from the credit cards because of her "spending habits". I can see him not wanting to hand over his credit/debit card. I would not. Maybe he is thinking she will buy more then she needs if she has the credit/debit card to spend freely. If he knows her well enough to know she changes her mind, then I can see him protesting on the paint. Paint is not cheap and depending on the color, is not refundable. I think she dug them in such a financial hole, that he would mad at her wanting to buy anything he deemed "optional".

 

[jmflu]

As far as the neck scratches go, no I do not think that the detective is lying. Your inference is that he could only get those scratches during a struggle with Nancy. Is that the only way a man could get scratches on his neck? They might have been from Nancy's murder, or they might not be related to the murder at all. The scratches are just a data point; they may point towards guilt, or they might not. Shadow

You can defend him day and night on everything that seems to point to guilt. In fact many have tried to do that. But that's the problem. Individual actions may not seem to lead you to think he is guilty.

But you have to look at everything as a WHOLE. It's quite damning.

I am of the belief that it is only a matter of time.

 

[reddress58]

Maybe they had fresh paint all over them and had to be removed.....

Given that Brad said Nancy left the house on foot to run, what chain of events do you believe transpired from that point on resulting in JA murdering Nancy? Just curious. Since you have insinuated JA could possibly be the perp by suggesting Nancy's clothes may be missing due to paint stains, I think it is reasonable for me to ask you what has led you to this conclusion.

 

[raisincharlie]

Another excellent observation, and a very important clue IMHO. It means that there was indeed a call from Nancy's cell to Brad's cell during the 6:40 AM time frame. The police are focused on these call(s) because they point to only one of three possible inferences:

1) Brad called himself with Nancy's phone. Indicating his guilt.
2) An accomplice of Brad called him using Nancy's phone. Also indicating his guilt.
3) Or Nancy was still alive at around 6:40 AM on the 12th of July. Indicating his innocence or another possible another perp?

If the police could prove either one or two, then they would then have some real proof of Brad's guilt. If the police could prove number three, then would it tend to be an inference of Brad's innocence, and somebody as yet unidentified possible guilt. Can we construct a scenario of Brad killing Nancy after 6:40 AM on the 12th? More thoughts to ponder?????

Thanks....

I'm not sure what to make of Mr. Hiller's comments to be honest. According to Brad's affidavits, he got this phone for Nancy so would it be reasonable to assume the billing and name on the account would be his ? Seems to me it would be based on his affidavits - he says he paid all the bills as well.

With that said and with what Mr. Hiller has said about LE asking him if he made phone calls on Nancy's phone it is unclear if LE was asking him if he physically had Nancy's phone and made calls from it or if when he returned phone calls to Brad he made calls to Nancy's phone number. Mr. Hiller states Brad called him that morning first - he also references that he checked caller ID at 1004 and returned a call to Brad.

What we do know was Nancy's phone was found in the Cooper house. So this remains unclear to me exactly what Mr. Hiller means with respect to what LE is asking him. It seems to me he indicates his three conversations with LE about phone calls relates to the phone calls made between him and Brad concerning their tennis plans. In which case it seems LE is more concerned with TOD than anything else.

 

[RaleighNC]

Another excellent observation, and a very important clue IMHO. It means that there was indeed a call from Nancy's cell to Brad's cell during the 6:40 AM time frame. The police are focused on these call(s) because they point to only one of three possible inferences:

1) Brad called himself with Nancy's phone. Indicating his guilt.
2) An accomplice of Brad called him using Nancy's phone. Also indicating his guilt.
3) Or Nancy was still alive at around 6:40 AM on the 12th of July. Indicating his innocence or another possible another perp?

If the police could prove either one or two, then they would then have some real proof of Brad's guilt. If the police could prove number three, then would it tend to be an inference of Brad's innocence, and somebody as yet unidentified possible guilt. Can we construct a scenario of Brad killing Nancy after 6:40 AM on the 12th? More thoughts to ponder?????

Thanks....

I don't think it's possible that there was a murder AFTER 6:40 AM. If Nancy supposedly went running at 7 AM (that was the time Brad said, right?) then she'd have been seen by SOMEONE in all the canvassing that the Cary PD did with fliers, etc. She'd also have had on clothes when she was found, I believe. (Were any of her shoes missing??? I think that's why LE took her running shoes - to prove she didn't go running because she wasn't missing any shoes and she wasn't found wearing any. No one runs barefoot in Cary...) And - it would have meant that her cell phone should have been with her - because I simply cannot imagine that a person that is in the midst of a divorce, obviously keeping in touch with friends, worried about her children (esp if there was a problem that morning at 4 AM), etc does not run with a phone. The phone seems to be becoming more integral to the case. It was not just a phone, but perhaps contained emails, text messages, information, etc. it was locked (?) to keep Brad's eyes out of it -was that due to people in her address book? (I still contend there was another relationship here that will surface eventually) Why would you then LEAVE IT AT HOME? Her phone played a big role in her life and was her lifeline of communication (so it is appearing) so her being removed from it makes no sense.

If anyone can come up with a scenario - I am all ears -but I can't picture one where she's murdered after 6:40 AM.

 

[ncnative]

RaleighNC, I have wondered if the athletic shoes taken by LE were men's or women's. I can't remember them saying anything other than the color and type of shoes.

If I were going to the extreme to kill someone and dump them, I'd think to at least make it look convincing. (Unless the killer had been under the influence of drugs/alcohol). Maybe the killer ran out of time for some reason: daylight was encroaching, people in the household were about to wake up, panic, needed to clean up at home from the mess of death, or other reasons?

 

[RaleighNC]

ncnative:

My gut feeling is that this was a heat of the moment type thing. The "thinking" came after the body being dumped. I believe that he tried to weave a story about the run, the clothing, the trips to the store, the cleaning, everything - AFTER he had disposed of the body. I think that once he knew what he had done, he had to get rid of her - because the risk was just too great that the children would see / hear something and daylight was approaching. Any minute she remained in the house, the odds of him being caught with the body increase exponentially. I also don't believe that anyone keeps a dead body around for one minute longer than is possible unless they are "experienced".

His changing story about what she was wearing - i.e. shorts and tshirt vs the "I really didn't see her when she left" points to alterations based on how he knew they would find her (IMO) and as he thinks about things, he weaves a more complicated scenario or answers based on what would "look more realistic".

Ultimately, I believe that this will be his undoing - remembering the story he's woven.

 

[SleuthyGal]

AND, any of BC's friends who have filed support affidavits are automatically labeled co-conspirators or accomplices. This forum first latched onto SH as an accomplice, and now in light of MH's affidavit, he has been labeled an accomplice; both with no more evidence than that they filed affidavits from the offices of BC's lawyers.

I added the bolding. I personally have never thought (and still don't) SH participated in anyway in this crime. The forum at large does not believe this, though there may be some individuals who do believe this. As for MH I have no clue why he's being investigated and why CPD thinks he may have either used NC's phone or called NC's phone on 7/12. They didn't specify this in their SWs and the articles published on WRAL and N&O are written in such a way that you don't know exactly what the cops are asserting. It's confusing is what it is.

Until I see/read about some actual evidence, I don't have an opinion if there was a 2nd person involved or not. I'm leaning towards not unless I see something concrete.

 

[SleuthyGal]

He cut her off from the credit cards because of her "spending habits". I can see him not wanting to hand over his credit/debit card. I would not. Maybe he is thinking she will buy more then she needs if she has the credit/debit card to spend freely. If he knows her well enough to know she changes her mind, then I can see him protesting on the paint. Paint is not cheap and depending on the color, is not refundable. I think she dug them in such a financial hole, that he would mad at her wanting to buy anything he deemed "optional".

I wouldn't hand over a credit card either if I was in a situation in which debt had been accrued--to the tune of more than could be paid off in one month. No way. Me no likey paying interest charges if I can avoid it. I would use a cash-based system (ala Dave Ramsey) or a cash/debit card in which a certain amount is placed on the card and you can't overspend past the amount of the card.

I think they both dug themselves in a financial hole from what I can determine with the little info we are privy to. They were married and financially were a 'team' if not in spirit, at least by law. I doubt their debt issues came from full tanks of gas or paint samples. Costs to do these running and Ironmen competitions, keeping up with the neighbors, buying pricey artwork and other things are what added to their debt. They are both culpable for accruing debt, IMHO.

 

[Roy23]

As far as control is concerned, you see it from both Nancy and Brad. That is assuming what their friends say are true. I think Nancy did have a spending problem. Brad wanted to teach her a lesson. Nancy bragged about withholding sex. That is also a form of control. Complaining and running down your husband is also a form of abuse.

Lets face it. They were in a horrible marriage and tried to hurt each other. I certainly think a lot was going on in their little "Melrose Place" world. I also believe that is most likely Brad that killed her but they still have to prove it. It is not up to anybody to prove Brad's innocence.

 

[jmflu]

Nancy bragged about withholding sex. That is also a form of abuse.

I don't think so. Maybe a form of control, but not abuse.

 

[RaleighNC]

It's passive aggressive. And I agree - not abuse, but control.

They seemed adept at pushing each others buttons.

 

[SleuthyGal]

They seemed adept at pushing each others buttons.

Oh heck yeah they sure did!

 

[Roy23]

I don't think so. Maybe a form of control, but not abuse.

Actually, you are right. I meant to say control there. My bad.

 

[jmflu]

Actually, you are right. I meant to say control there. My bad.

Although, some men might find it abusive and I did not know if you were one!!! LOL :crazy:

 

[Roy23]

Although, some men might find it abusive and I did not know if you were one!!! LOL :crazy:

:Banane35:

 

[piedmont]

Hello All-I've been lurking a long time and wanted to be part of things now.

Does anyone else find it hard to understand how NC and BC could be in hate mode, arguing all day, on the brink of divorce-yet they are going to a barbecue together on Friday nite and planning on having people over for games on Saturday nite? I can't get a grip on that type of relationship.