State v Brad Cooper 4-8-2011

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
LyndyLoo said:
I do have to disagree ..I am really really trying to give Brad some credit..however his behaviors throughout their marriage leaves me cold and IF I feel that way..I can only imagine how Nancy felt....What Brad did was NOT because he wouldnt have dont it IMO It is precisely why HE did it...Brad lives within himself..No One else matters..even after Nancy was found he couldnt even attempt to ACT like he cared towards Nancy's family nor anyone else....Brad is what he is..and due to that He DID what he did..and I surely hope he gets held accountable..:rocker:

Ya see, I dont need to have a video of his strangling of Nancy...mainly because I have witnessed enough testimony to date that he DID this..NO other person had the Means, opportunity and ability....His Personaility only explains to me why he would??..I also dont require a witness of him dumping Nancy..So guess, I am one of those folks who need Reasonable Doubt to be proven to me before I would buy his Innocense..I know..I got it backwards..but my life experences has taught me much...so its only my take on it....So dont jump on me.pleeze :truce:.Thanx :seeya:
Click to expand...

The thing about Brad's behavior after Nancy disappeared that bothers me the most is that he never, once, called her family. For some reason, I just can't get past that one issue. And to add the other stuff up on top of it makes it really difficult to like the guy.
 
Kurtz is one happy camper, no matter how this turns out.
He gets the standard indigent $85 rate from the state for how may hours over the past 2 1/2 years?
No doubt, he has made far more than he would have defending his usual DWI's and cocaine possession cases.
However, the huge windfall is the free publicity that he has received. No wonder he pizzed in his panties when he ran to the judge and begged to stay on as approved court appointed council - vs normal salaried public defender.
 
Can we talk about Nancy's erased Blackberry?

BC sent a letter to police requesting that they handle the phone carefully. He and his attorneys really wanted to know what was on that phone. It would have shown information about who she was recently in contact with and possibly supplied some leads in this case.

(The judge did not accept the letter into evidence. I don't understand the reason for that.)

Why, if he was guilty, would he have taken the risk that there could have been something incriminating on that phone? He had nothing to hide. He wanted that information from the phone. I don't trust that CPD deleted all the contents "accidentally". This is why Kurtz mentions the corruption, IMO. The police should have sent the phone to the FBI for analysis, especially since they had no idea how to even unlock it.

IF BC is guilty, why was he trying to retrieve the data from that phone?
 
NCEast said:
The thing about Brad's behavior after Nancy disappeared that bothers me the most is that he never, once, called her family. For some reason, I just can't get past that one issue. And to add the other stuff up on top of it makes it really difficult to like the guy.
Click to expand...

I would be too embarrassed to call them. If I had borrowed all that money, had basically no alibi, no way to catch the killer, nothing....I would go into shock, curl into a fetal position and cry myself to sleep at night save for my child (ren).

I was really, REALLY bothered by what might have been a second degree murder case until I saw the families (briefly) interact in court, in person. AND until I saw Mr. Rentz look over and start to ask Brad about the time line. Also, their Canadian pressers did not point to Brad, but rather memorialized Nancy, as her friends have done so well with the Butterfly Fund.

Also, side note, my custody case keeps getting worse. (I'm getting trashed for a variety of things, and am generally a snarky and rude person because of my true-crime following. I've even been drug through the mud for having been on disability for a short-while. My eyesight required it.)

But, MY INTEREST in true crime became a cornerstone for it all recently. (Until I whipped out my ex's emails bantering back and forth ala all the true crime message boards with me.) Websleuths.com got a nice little mention. (I was genuinely obsessed with the idea of unidentified bodies a few years back as well. It drove me nuts for someone to be put in the ground John/Jane Doe.) Apparently, an interest in a case where a husband potentially strangled the wife was big on their hit list. Isn't that SAD?
 
gorealtors said:
Got a few things to work around for the Young trial, but vacay days are being planned, for sure.:giggle:
Click to expand...


I have gained a pound a week since the Cooper trial began. I need to put an elliptical in front of my computer.
 
Just the Fax said:
Kurtz is one happy camper, no matter how this turns out.
He gets the standard indigent $85 rate from the state for how may hours over the past 2 1/2 years?
No doubt, he has made far more than he would have defending his usual DWI's and cocaine possession cases.
However, the huge windfall is the free publicity that he has received. No wonder he pizzed in his panties when he ran to the judge and begged to stay on as approved court appointed council - vs normal salaried public defender.
Click to expand...

He's a very good lawyer, a smart man. I used to think "how could anyone be a defense lawyer?" How could anyone defend such horrible criminals but now I know, with our flawed legal system, I think many innocent people are wrongly convicted. Just look at the recent SBI corruption that was revealed. I think things have shifted. People need to start paying closer attention now because it could be any one of us. It seems that now it's more about "winning cases" than serving justice.

As much as I hate the biased WRAL articles, I am grateful they are recording this case for us. Just think if we only had their articles to rely on. We would have a totally different opinion of this case (a least some of us would).
 
Originally Posted by DogWood
I was trying to find where the judge said this and listen to it again. WRAL must have edited it out or something?

Anyways, because I was listening to some of it this morning and not watching - Did I just see Cummings stick his tongue out at Trenkle?...:floorlaugh:


Start at 00:53 - freeze the frame around 1:01 or so.
http://www.wral.com/specialreports/n...2/#/vid9412702
--------------------------------------------------------------------
NCEast said:
I went back and watched it--I think Cummings was just doing a scrunchy face. Although I think it would elevate him in my opinion had he actually stuck out his tongue at Trenkle....would show some personality.
I can only imagine how tedious it is for the lawyers to have to sit through this since they have all probably seen and heard this depo several times in the past.
Click to expand...

Oh, I think he did (stick his tongue out, that is)!! I could tell he was doing it while smiling at Trenkle. He was being, drumroll, pleeeze, funny with Trenkle.

Although they are adversaries here, they will face each other again, unless we all die of old age before this thing is over. Plus, it was Trenkle, whose official title is Defender of the State (quite a fine appointment for this attorney), and they are fellow members of the bar and professionals. Ol' Cummings was all but laughing. Makes me chuckle for both of them.
icon7.gif
 
NCEast said:
The thing about Brad's behavior after Nancy disappeared that bothers me the most is that he never, once, called her family. For some reason, I just can't get past that one issue. And to add the other stuff up on top of it makes it really difficult to like the guy.
Click to expand...

I hear ya! I can't get past the flurry of phone calls from 6am-7am that morning, the weird HT visits, the story about the daughter not waking up when the other one is screaming not making any sense, the affairs, the "dumb *advertiser censored**" comment from the realtor, the call to the realtor saying help me find somewhere to live, the mess with bugs in the house and his yellow pillow with bed bugs and then major cleaning and laundry the DAY she goes missing when he never lifted a finger in that house before then, the garage mysteriously being super cleaned out on one side, being mean to his sister in law when she was only trying to help take care of the kids, not looking any friends or family in the eyes when she went missing, the deposition lies, cutting her off from money and hiding passports, not getting a divorce attorney when she already gave him a separation agreement to respond to, reading all her emails from April -July, having the ability to stage a phone call to himself for an alibi on the day his wife happens to go missing and he just happens to be heading to the grocery store to buy tide when she uses All and juice his daughter doesn't even drink.

But no he is not guilty, the passive aggressive behavior of him spackling the walls AFTER she painted them so they could get out of that house and move on with their lives is totally innocent behavior for someone who would never strangle his wife and throw her in a ditch so he wouldn't have to deal with having to give her thousands every month and go back to living in an apartment and losing his status as an iron man computer nerd.



There is more.. but I am getting carpal tunnel over here..
 
sunshine05 said:
He's a very good lawyer, a smart man. I used to think "how could anyone be a defense lawyer?" How could anyone defend such horrible criminals but now I know, with our flawed legal system, I think many innocent people are wrongly convicted. Just look at the recent SBI corruption that was revealed. I think things have shifted. People need to start paying closer attention now because it could be any one of us. It seems that now it's more about "winning cases" than serving justice.

As much as I hate the biased WRAL articles, I am grateful they are recording this case for us. Just think if we only had their articles to rely on. We would have a totally different opinion of this case (a least some of us would).
Click to expand...

That blackberry drives me nuts, Sunshine05. I cannot figure out what the heck might have been in there, but it just feels like it could have a missing puzzle piece. Hell, I'd be happy with BC sending NC nasty text messages while she was at the party or something. But, it's missing from the picture is just plain bonkers.

And I personally tuned out good-looking Mr. Young when he testified about it. I shut down all the rest of his testimony on the Sim card question. He made himself out to not be a "seeker of truth" but a "Barney Fife" in that moment and I know he ain't dumb.
 
johnfear said:
I would be too embarrassed to call them. If I had borrowed all that money, had basically no alibi, no way to catch the killer, nothing....I would go into shock, curl into a fetal position and cry myself to sleep at night save for my child (ren).

I was really, REALLY bothered by what might have been a second degree murder case until I saw the families (briefly) interact in court, in person. AND until I saw Mr. Rentz look over and start to ask Brad about the time line. Also, their Canadian pressers did not point to Brad, but rather memorialized Nancy, as her friends have done so well with the Butterfly Fund.

Also, side note, my custody case keeps getting worse. (I'm getting trashed for a variety of things, and am generally a snarky and rude person because of my true-crime following. I've even been drug through the mud for having been on disability for a short-while. My eyesight required it.)

But, MY INTEREST in true crime became a cornerstone for it all recently. (Until I whipped out my ex's emails bantering back and forth ala all the true crime message boards with me.) Websleuths.com got a nice little mention. (I was genuinely obsessed with the idea of unidentified bodies a few years back as well. It drove me nuts for someone to be put in the ground John/Jane Doe.) Apparently, an interest in a case where a husband potentially strangled the wife was big on their hit list. Isn't that SAD?
Click to expand...

I am very sorry about your custody case. I honestly don't think I could have lived through one. I hope everything will work out eventually.....but I know how difficult it must be. Just try to keep your sense of humor.
I have been a true crime addict since 1969 and the Manson murders. I was in a bad place in my life at that time and I'm certain that had I lived in CA at the time I would have been in The Family. I am still fascinated, not so much in a good way, with him. He was a brilliant lunatic, still is.
 
sunshine05 said:
Can we talk about Nancy's erased Blackberry?

BC sent a letter to police requesting that they handle the phone carefully. He and his attorneys really wanted to know what was on that phone. It would have shown information about who she was recently in contact with and possibly supplied some leads in this case.

(The judge did not accept the letter into evidence. I don't understand the reason for that.)

Why, if he was guilty, would he have taken the risk that there could have been something incriminating on that phone? He had nothing to hide. He wanted that information from the phone. I don't trust that CPD deleted all the contents "accidentally". This is why Kurtz mentions the corruption, IMO. The police should have sent the phone to the FBI for analysis, especially since they had no idea how to even unlock it.

IF BC is guilty, why was he trying to retrieve the data from that phone?
Click to expand...

BBM with respect..I think Brad would do something like that because he likely Planted something on it..given his expert abilities, Brad thought it would appear to be something to exhonerate him....I truly think that Brad feels/felt far superior to anyone regarding Puter stuff..Unfortunately, when he locked it..it didnt get opened according to the instructions given by AT&T rep nor the prompts on the phone..So viola..Deleted data..Hummm wonder who researched how to Nuk Data when opened?? Testimony already heard??
Initially Brad maybe sought that info (nuking) for another purpose, but he did have that knowledge base to now program Nancys phone to delete data if opened..

Sorry, I understand that you truly believe Brad is Innocent..however, I Dont think Brad does or did anything unless it would benefit Brad...Maybe we can just agree to disagree..OK? :seeya: :)
 
sunshine05 said:
Can we talk about Nancy's erased Blackberry?

BC sent a letter to police requesting that they handle the phone carefully. He and his attorneys really wanted to know what was on that phone. It would have shown information about who she was recently in contact with and possibly supplied some leads in this case.

(The judge did not accept the letter into evidence. I don't understand the reason for that.)

Why, if he was guilty, would he have taken the risk that there could have been something incriminating on that phone? He had nothing to hide. He wanted that information from the phone. I don't trust that CPD deleted all the contents "accidentally". This is why Kurtz mentions the corruption, IMO. The police should have sent the phone to the FBI for analysis, especially since they had no idea how to even unlock it.

IF BC is guilty, why was he trying to retrieve the data from that phone?
Click to expand...

Well, all of that makes sense.
 
borndem said:
Originally Posted by DogWood
I was trying to find where the judge said this and listen to it again. WRAL must have edited it out or something?

Anyways, because I was listening to some of it this morning and not watching - Did I just see Cummings stick his tongue out at Trenkle?...:floorlaugh:


Start at 00:53 - freeze the frame around 1:01 or so.
http://www.wral.com/specialreports/n...2/#/vid9412702
--------------------------------------------------------------------


Oh, I think he did (stick his tongue out, that is)!! I could tell he was doing it while smiling at Trenkle. He was being, drumroll, pleeeze, funny with Trenkle.

Although they are adversaries here, they will face each other again, unless we all die of old age before this thing is over. Plus, it was Trenkle, whose official title is Defender of the State (quite a fine appointment for this attorney), and they are fellow members of the bar and professionals. Ol' Cummings was all but laughing. Makes me chuckle for both of them.
icon7.gif
Click to expand...

It's a lot like the poison scene in Princess Bride. You know how it ends, but it's so fun to watch the sparring, so you can't skip it.

INCONCEIVABLE! Yuhp, I just compared two attorneys in a highly publicized murder case to fairy tale characters.
 
NCEast said:
The thing about Brad's behavior after Nancy disappeared that bothers me the most is that he never, once, called her family. For some reason, I just can't get past that one issue. And to add the other stuff up on top of it makes it really difficult to like the guy.
Click to expand...

I know it's hard, but try for a minute to put yourself in his place. You recently admitted to your spouse that you did have an affair...he/she told their parents all the details. The marriage gets tense, talk of separation and divorce are happening. Imagine how ashamed and embarrassed you would feel facing them, knowing you hurt their child (from the affair) and that they trusted you? And then they turn up missing? I don't know that I would be able to make that phone call either.
 
LyndyLoo said:
BBM with respect..I think Brad would do something like that because he likely Planted something on it..given his expert abilities, Brad thought it would appear to be something to exhonerate him....I truly think that Brad feels/felt far superior to anyone regarding Puter stuff..Unfortunately, when he locked it..it didnt get opened according to the instructions given by AT&T rep nor the prompts on the phone..So viola..Deleted data..Hummm wonder who researched how to Nuk Data when opened?? Testimony already heard??
Initially Brad maybe sought that info for another purpose, but he did have tha knowledge base to now program Nancys phone to delete data if opened..

Sorry, I understand that you truly believe Brad is Innocent..however, I Dont think Brad does or did anything unless it would benefit Brad...Maybe we can just agree to disagree..OK? :seeya: :)
Click to expand...

I think we don't necessarily think he is Innocent per say, more like either A) not guilty or B) gonna walk.

We all got here okay though, so I think most of us are cool with the back and forth. Thanks for your posts, btw, LL. You too, SS.
 
sunshine05 said:
He's a very good lawyer, a smart man. I used to think "how could anyone be a defense lawyer?" How could anyone defend such horrible criminals but now I know, with our flawed legal system, I think many innocent people are wrongly convicted. Just look at the recent SBI corruption that was revealed. I think things have shifted. People need to start paying closer attention now because it could be any one of us. It seems that now it's more about "winning cases" than serving justice.

As much as I hate the biased WRAL articles, I am grateful they are recording this case for us. Just think if we only had their articles to rely on. We would have a totally different opinion of this case (a least some of us would).
Click to expand...

I agree Kurtz is a good lawyer (as long as his annoying tactics and delivery don't work against his client with the Judge)

Yes, a "flawed legal system" involving past cases w/ the SBI is real.
But, like Duke Lacrosse you mentioned earlier, how is that relevant in this case:waitasec:
Do you subscribe to the N&O by chance?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 188 more.
Total: 1,343 (members: 189, guests: 1,154)

Online statistics

Members online
189
Guests online
1,154
Total visitors
1,343
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
596,530
Messages
18,049,171
Members
230,026
Latest member
oOoJodieoOo
Back
Top