PARENTS KILLED AMBER ALERT ISSUED FOR 13-YEAR-OLD DAUGHTER
---
POLICE NEED PUBLIC'S HELP IN FINDING MISSING AND PREGNANT KIERRA COLES

Custody Hearing - Scheduled for 10/16

Discussion in 'Nancy Cooper' started by SleuthyGal, Oct 15, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SleuthyGal

    SleuthyGal Former Member

    Messages:
    4,078
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Since Chico has requested individual threads for topics at least twice today... no time like the present to follow her instructions.

    It would be nice to discuss the issues affecting tomorrow's scheduled custody hearing, which should be a biggie, unless all parties meet privately and hash out another temporary arrangement like they did on July 25th.

    What do you think are the odds that tomorrow will be a private arrangement between the parties and will not involve the judge?
     
  2. Anderson

    Anderson New Member

    Messages:
    526
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I just wrote this for the general thread and it was closed as I tried to submit:

    Wow. Pretty significant development today! I have read through most of the posts, but not all. I suspect that this was probably covered. I see that many posters have suggested that this may be a case of mistaken identity. That is possible. I remember learning about witness accounts not being very reliable. Perhaps LE has already discounted this witness account, but perhaps it is still part of their investigation. IDK.

    As you know, I don't know much about these things, but it seems to me that this woman's sighting was recorded by LE. It also seems to me that this information would be part of their investigation, so in a way it is not surprising that there is a witness(seemingly unconfirmed) that we don't know about. LE is not sharing information related to their investigation.

    There may be other witnesses that have possibly passed on information to LE. I would imagine that is the case. Who knows what we will learn? Some witness accounts will be credible and some of them will not.

    THE FOLLOWING EXAMPLES ARE NOT REAL AND DO NOT EXIST TO MY KNOWLEDGE: It is possible that there were witnesses that saw BC driving down the road just after 4 am, NC being dragged into bushes at aroung 8am, BC taking something out of his trunk and then being spotted and driving off at about 5:30 am, NC having breakfast with a friend at JJive at around 9am, BC getting his car washed at around 1pm, NC coming home after the BBQ at around 3am, BC buying more tide at 1:30pm . . . . . You get the idea.

    The point is that we really don't know what information is going to come out. Will we ever know all of the details of the investigation? I gather from RC's comment that there will be a detective witness tomorrow. Who knows what will come out there? I suspect that it will be very interesting.
     
  3. ncsu95

    ncsu95 Active Member

    Messages:
    3,436
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I was thinking before this list affidavit that the Judge would probably extend the temporary custody. She did indicate today that the decision is still for temporary custody. My opinion is still that he deserves to have the kids with him until such time as he is charged with her murder. I'm interested to see what the judge has to say about the latest affidavit. It definitely adds doubt to the whole thing.
     
  4. jumpstreet

    jumpstreet New Member

    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Great post. Bottom line... there remains a ton more that we don't know, that what we do... despite all the custody-hearing driven information out there.
     
  5. jmflu

    jmflu New Member

    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Does anyone know what time they go to court?
     
  6. raisincharlie

    raisincharlie Racing Doesn't Lie

    Messages:
    16,856
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    With the potential of Detective Daniels taking the stand and Brad himself being required to take the stand - I believe there will be a continuance of the Rentz's maintaining custody and this will be once again decided between the parties and out of the judge's oversight.

    K & B and Sandlin/Davidian were given the perfect save face out today when the judge did indeed quash the subpeona's for the investigation records.
     
  7. SleuthyGal

    SleuthyGal Former Member

    Messages:
    4,078
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm betting they will likely settle on a new/extended temp custody arrangement like they did on July 25th.
     
  8. rwesafe

    rwesafe New Member

    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's a good question....I would imagine with todays witness both sides strategizing as hard as they can.
     
  9. Anderson

    Anderson New Member

    Messages:
    526
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I hadn't thought of that. Yes, the perfect save face out. It will be very interesting to see what happens tomorrow.
     
  10. Anderson

    Anderson New Member

    Messages:
    526
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You are meeting M and SG on the court steps at 9am. I want a full report!:)
     
  11. raisincharlie

    raisincharlie Racing Doesn't Lie

    Messages:
    16,856
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Indeed it will be interesting Anderson :)
     
  12. jumpstreet

    jumpstreet New Member

    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Question: Is tomorrows' hearing (in theory) intended to determine permanent custody?
    I thought 'yes'. I thought that the August hearing was going to do that, but the parties themselves met (outside of court), and decided a temporary arrangement.

    Certainly tomorrow, the parties may themselves meet (outside of court), and renew the temporary arrangement. If they don't though, could the judge herself just renew the temporary one (that the parties opted for earlier), without giving a reason? Wouldn't she need some basis for it (if she were ordering it over objection of one party or the other)?

    Seems like today, she was quoted as saying the hearing tomorrow was to decide temporary custody. If true, I guess I missed when it became a hearing to decide temporary custody vs permanent. If it's only to decide temporary custody... when is the hearing to decide permanent custody?

    Let's say BC wants the kids returned, but the judge says "wait another 3 months"... wouldn't she need to give a basis? The obvious basis would be "so we can see if you are arrested by then" of course. However, surely there's some reasonable limit to how long a custody judge could keep a non-named suspect or non-named POI in a 'holding-pattern' when it comes to his children.

    All this is with the assumption that the parties don't agree out of court. If they don't, then what reasons might the judge offer to renew the temporary arrangement, and for how long. [ Why not make it 5 years... just to give LE plenty of time? ]
     
  13. rwesafe

    rwesafe New Member

    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I don't recall if it was already said or not, but I wonder if the judge will base any of her decision on the psych evaluation that he had...if it is even complete, IIRC, it was not final last week during the depositions?
     
  14. SleuthyGal

    SleuthyGal Former Member

    Messages:
    4,078
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    tomorrow is for determination of temporary custody.
     
  15. jumpstreet

    jumpstreet New Member

    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What does that mean exactly? (Sorry (and thankfully I guess) - don't fully understand how custody battles work).

    Under what circumstances are 'temporary custody' typically awarded?
    Why wouldn't tomorrow's hearing be to decide permanent custody?
    Does that mean that even after tomorrow, there will need to be another hearing to decide permanent custody?
     
  16. Bob&Bob

    Bob&Bob New Member

    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I just don't understand how the custody judge is going to be
    deciding about the elephant in the room. IF BC isn't guilty
    it doesn't seem like the justice system is serving him very well.
    If you google Judge Deborah Sasser it looks like she's been wrong before.
     
  17. jmflu

    jmflu New Member

    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gosh, that's a dangerous road to go down. No one is perfect, even judges. All we can speak to is their integrity.
     
  18. Bob&Bob

    Bob&Bob New Member

    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So if someone isn't a person of interest, hasn't been charged, what's the basis for a Judge for the child custody case to looking at the elephant in the room?
    I don't think that the elephant is something she is
    supposed to be concerned with.
     
  19. jumpstreet

    jumpstreet New Member

    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Agreed. If the parties don't decide themselves to settle it out of court (probably the judge is hoping desperately for that this evening!), then it will be very interesting to see how the elephant is handled.
     
  20. jmflu

    jmflu New Member

    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I can't claim to know the law here. It just seems that if she weren't allowed to be doing what she is doing, someone would have prevented her from doing it.

    Do we really expect a judge to determine custody for these children without considering WHY she has to determine it in the first place??
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice