State v Bradley Cooper 03/31/11

[sunshine05]

I don't consider that to be a lie. I think she just "knew" like so many here thought they "knew" that all diamond stud earrings are screw backs. Mine are and I assumed all were as well. If you think about it, how would she know that those earrings were screw backs when NC never took them off?

I knew someone would argue with me about this. Okay, think what you want but she changed her written statement to reflect her knowledge that they were screwback earrings. That, to me is a lie. She didn't know that, couldn't even explain how she knew that.

 

[jmflu]

I knew someone would argue with me about this. Okay, think what you want but she changed her written statement to reflect her knowledge that they were screwback earrings. That, to me is a lie. She didn't know that, couldn't even explain how she knew that.

Have you come to any similar conclusions about BC at all?

 

[gracielee]

Her testimony was the best I have seen. She was completely believable, she was absolutely her best friend, they hung out almost every day and talked several times a day. Just this one small thing about the earrings will not have the jury believe she is making things up, there is nothing outrageous to her testimony they shouldn't believe.

What get's me is, numerous people who knew Nancy well, panicked when they couldn't get hold of her by phone. When she didn't show up when she was supposed to show up. All these people knew Nancy for a year plus. Yet none of them ever panicked before. None of them ever called the police before. On this particular day, when Nancy didn't answer her phone, didn't keep scheduled appointments with them, they panicked, and they were RIGHT. Nancy was dead. It wasn't a wild goose chase. They were all RIGHT. Nancy never did call, never checked in, in fact Nancy was dead before any of them even knew she was missing. All Nancy's *friends*, except her husband, KNEW something was very VERY wrong. And they were all very VERY right about it too.

 

[johnfear]

Yup, and everything else she said was a lie. It's all part of the FON conspiracy. I wonder if there will be similar trashing of the Friends of Michelle when that trial starts.

Nope. There's actual evidence in that case. It was presented to the Grand Jury and everything. And, it makes way more sense than this mess.

Since you guys keep saying: Just wait, it's coming...and we're all on fairly nice grounds chat-wise here. Let's give the defense an actual shot (and of course, the State resting is coming) before we start intermingling the obvious with the convoluted.

And yes, I believe when "those other cases" come about, (if they go to trial) they will take about twenty minutes to win everyone over to the "Guilty" side. This case is a mess....those other two are slam dunks.

But...you guys are confusing the heartbreak of the loss of a loved one (as with HP) with guilt. And I at least want to hear if the defense can get past all the madness and come up with something plausible (because I have a feeling the state is piling on more of the same because that's all they have).

 

[Cheyenne130]

I knew someone would argue with me about this. Okay, think what you want but she changed her written statement to reflect her knowledge that they were screwback earrings. That, to me is a lie. She didn't know that, couldn't even explain how she knew that.

What did you think about the defense attorneys putting a picture of NC on their website claiming it was proof that she didn't always wear the necklace when the other friend proved to them that she did in fact have the necklace on in that picture? That to me is a lie.

 

[gracielee]

Just curious, because I wasn't here at the time, but did most people think Scott Peterson was guilty?

 

[jmflu]

Nope. There's actual evidence in that case. It was presented to the Grand Jury and everything. And, it makes way more sense than this mess.

Since you guys keep saying: Just wait, it's coming...and we're all on fairly nice grounds chat-wise here. Let's give the defense an actual shot (and of course, the State resting is coming) before we start intermingling the obvious with the convoluted.

And yes, I believe when "those other cases" come about, (if they go to trial) they will take about twenty minutes to win everyone over to the "Guilty" side. This case is a mess....those other two are slam dunks.

But...you guys are confusing the heartbreak of the loss of a loved one (as with HP) with guilt. And I at least want to hear if the defense can get past all the madness and come up with something plausible (because I have a feeling the state is piling on more of the same because that's all they have).

What do you feel in your heart, JF? I'm not talking about evidence, I'm curious about your intuition.

 

[gracielee]

Have you come to any similar conclusions about BC at all?

I think he get's a pass on lying. After listening to the desposition tapes all last week-end, one would think Brad would need a crutch to hold up his nose by now. :great:

 

[SleuthyGal]

She couldn't have just been mistaken. It must be that she lied under oath.

Yes that's right, Jmflu. Doncha know that EVERYONE in the case is lying except Brad? EVERY.SINGLE.WITNESS. Any mistaken assumption? Lie. Any fact forgotten? Lie. Every conversation? Lie. The whole police investigation? Lies. Incompetent lies at that! Det McDreamy? Cute. But yep, still a liar. All the evidence? Lies. The judge? corrupt. The court reporter? Yep, must be a liar.

Only Brad can be believed because Brad, of course, always tells the truth. Even when his own statements contradict one another from affidavit to deposition, Brad is merely confused. Or he just forgot. But no, not lying. Brad never lies. Ever. Brad farts rainbows and brings unicorns to all the children everywhere. And lollipops too.

Allllll these people are just out to 'get him.' It's one big conspiracy!

 

[jmflu]

Yes that's right, Jmflu. Doncha know that EVERYONE in the case is lying except Brad? EVERY.SINGLE.WITNESS. Any mistaken assumption? Lie. Any fact forgotten? Lie. Every conversation? Lie. The whole police investigation? Lies. Incompetent lies at that! All the evidence? Lies. The judge? corrupt. The court reporter? Yep, must be a liar.

Only Brad can be believed because Brad, of course, always tells the truth. Even when his own statements contradict one another from affidavit to deposition, Brad is merely confused. Or he just forgot. But no, not lying. Brad never lies. Ever.

Allllll these people are just out to 'get him.' It's one big conspiracy!

That's what I thought!!!

 

[sunshine05]

What did you think about the defense attorneys putting a picture of NC on their website claiming it was proof that she didn't always wear the necklace when the other friend proved to them that she did in fact have the necklace on in that picture? That to me is a lie.

I didn't get to see that part, but I did catch the part where Kurtz brought up the emails with photo attachments from HP TO Adam (yes, they were on a first name basis) Dismukes requesting from Jennifer all photos of NC from 10/07 (when she purchased the necklace) up to the time of her death. She specifically requested *only* photos with her wearing the necklace. Is everyone here okay with that too?

 

[johnfear]

What get's me is, numerous people who knew Nancy well, panicked when they couldn't get hold of her by phone. When she didn't show up when she was supposed to show up. All these people knew Nancy for a year plus. Yet none of them ever panicked before. None of them ever called the police before. On this particular day, when Nancy didn't answer her phone, didn't keep scheduled appointments with them, they panicked, and they were RIGHT. Nancy was dead. It wasn't a wild goose chase. They were all RIGHT. Nancy never did call, never checked in, in fact Nancy was dead before any of them even knew she was missing. All Nancy's *friends*, except her husband, KNEW something was very VERY wrong. And they were all very VERY right about it too.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and borrow from some of the scuttle I've heard. Gracielee, you bring up an awesome point here. Why was THIS Saturday different?

She's been on vacation. I remember getting a really good feeling about even the worst times with my ex-wife on vacation. (It was a very volatile balance between us after about four years of marriage) I remember thinking I could handle the emotional roller coaster and make it work for the kids. I remember coming up with lots of alternate ways to deal with things when I was away from her, or with her on vacation. I felt like a kid again.

What if Nancy did that? She felt good. She had a plan. When she came home from Vacation, she had an alternative to having to put up with Brad's bullpucky?

What if the Pearson stuff is true? And Nancy didn't go jogging that morning, but Brad (the idiot/jackass/manipulator) thought she did? What if she walked to the end of the block and met a guy to say: Hey, I'm in a helluva spot. I can't deal with my husband. I need to get some support from you on this one. (Maybe it was the rumored Baby-daddy. Maybe it was just someone she had been talking to) What if THIS is the person who for whatever reason, snapped on her?

Women, in divorce situations like this...do they ever chat each other up about potential new love interests or old flames renewed? Maybe that's the odd thing for me that they all know. Maybe they all knew that Mike Hiller was setting up Tennis that morning with Brad to make sure he was busy and JA and NC set up the paint session to "cover for this". Didn't JA state she had to take the kids to the pool mid-morning? I think it was 10:30 or something.

Maybe they all expected her to report in on that. And that's what makes everything so odd. Because they don't know if that meeting went down or not. They don't know if she got caught sneaking out to meet a man and Brad snapped on her or if the guy that was labeled as potentially the father of one of the children snapped at the idea of child support or being dragged into it all.

I am stealing from several other poster's more well-laid ideas here.

But here's my major problem with all of this. You guys are going to tell me that there were THIS many warning signs ahead of this and NOT A SOUL dared to step in and keep it from happening? I don't buy it. Not for a second.

You guys keep saying "These are great friends" "I can't believe they are tearing down such wonderful friends".

I don't think they are good friends. I think they suck. I think that they were just petty enough to let it play out and keep details on it, but no one had the stones to do a thing about it. The only ones I hold completely faultless are the family folks in Canada. There was NOTHING they could do. (If Brad killed her)

But, these snide little folks who are getting on the stand (all of them) and shaking and pointing their fingers and crying and saying they knew he did it and they saw it leading up to it and it's GOT to be him are the saddest, poorest, creepiest excuses for witnesses that I have seen in a very long time.

Why? Because they did NOTHING and then casually (sometimes heartbreakingly) sit their in hindsight and act as thought they knew all along.

I don't trust any of them but Nancy's mom. The rest are wallowing in guilt or making it up as they go.

 

[Lori59]

Did Brad give Nancy the earrings?? They didn't have a screw back..if they were expensive they should have..maybe that's why he left them and only took off her necklace! Oh yes I did... To discount ALL of HP testimony because of what "backs" she said was on the earrings is just ridiculous to me IMO. To go away from her whole testimony and focus only on that one item....which really does not go to establish anything about who killed her IMO is astounding. She talked in detail about the life Nancy was living which many other witnesses have also established. What backs that were on Nancy's earrings?? I really don't care.

 

[RoughlyCollie]

Back to the earrings again. Perhaps they were CZ and Nancy didn't know it.

I knew someone once who had the most beautiful engagement ring I have ever seen in my life. When she divorced, she tried to sell the ring and found out it was CZ. The setting was worthy of the diamonds she thought it held. Boy, was she hopping mad.

OTOH, my husband prefers quality diamonds that are small (3/4-1 karat). I am more gaudy than that, and when we were engaged, I asked for a 3-4 karat CZ solitaire in a 14 or 18 karat gold setting. He was horrified, and I received a real diamond, complete with papers about how wonderful it was -- it was graded every way possible.

I was not hopping mad, of course, but I sure didn't get my bargain gaudy fix!

Now finally to my point. Would it make a difference if the earrings were CZ? Could the killer have left them there, knowing they were practically worthless, but taken the diamond necklace because it was worth a pretty penny?

 

[borndem]

Thinking about the testimony that Nancy at one time said she wanted to move out of the Lochmere house because of the fact that Brad had sex in the house....think it was HP testimony. Occurred before the Canada move plans. Said that they had looked at other houses in Carey. Did I get this right? Just thinking it would be great if they have a witness who knows they had looked at the neighborhood where her body was found which would give Brad 1st hand knowledge of the neighborhood. Fingers crossed...

As long as when they were viewing the new Fielding Drive property, BC wasn't thinking, "Honey, you could be here for the rest of your life."

 

[jmflu]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and borrow from some of the scuttle I've heard. Gracielee, you bring up an awesome point here. Why was THIS Saturday different?

She's been on vacation. I remember getting a really good feeling about even the worst times with my ex-wife on vacation. (It was a very volatile balance between us after about four years of marriage) I remember thinking I could handle the emotional roller coaster and make it work for the kids. I remember coming up with lots of alternate ways to deal with things when I was away from her, or with her on vacation. I felt like a kid again.

What if Nancy did that? She felt good. She had a plan. When she came home from Vacation, she had an alternative to having to put up with Brad's bullpucky?

What if the Pearson stuff is true? And Nancy didn't go jogging that morning, but Brad (the idiot/jackass/manipulator) thought she did? What if she walked to the end of the block and met a guy to say: Hey, I'm in a helluva spot. I can't deal with my husband. I need to get some support from you on this one. (Maybe it was the rumored Baby-daddy. Maybe it was just someone she had been talking to) What if THIS is the person who for whatever reason, snapped on her?

Women, in divorce situations like this...do they ever chat each other up about potential new love interests or old flames renewed? Maybe that's the odd thing for me that they all know. Maybe they all knew that Mike Hiller was setting up Tennis that morning with Brad to make sure he was busy and JA and NC set up the paint session to "cover for this". Didn't JA state she had to take the kids to the pool mid-morning? I think it was 10:30 or something.

Maybe they all expected her to report in on that. And that's what makes everything so odd. Because they don't know if that meeting went down or not. They don't know if she got caught sneaking out to meet a man and Brad snapped on her or if the guy that was labeled as potentially the father of one of the children snapped at the idea of child support or being dragged into it all.

I am stealing from several other poster's more well-laid ideas here.

But here's my major problem with all of this. You guys are going to tell me that there were THIS many warning signs ahead of this and NOT A SOUL dared to step in and keep it from happening? I don't buy it. Not for a second.

You guys keep saying "These are great friends" "I can't believe they are tearing down such wonderful friends".

I don't think they are good friends. I think they suck. I think that they were just petty enough to let it play out and keep details on it, but no one had the stones to do a thing about it. The only ones I hold completely faultless are the family folks in Canada. There was NOTHING they could do. (If Brad killed her)

But, these snide little folks who are getting on the stand (all of them) and shaking and pointing their fingers and crying and saying they knew he did it and they saw it leading up to it and it's GOT to be him are the saddest, poorest, creepiest excuses for witnesses that I have seen in a very long time.

Why? Because they did NOTHING and then casually (sometimes heartbreakingly) sit their in hindsight and act as thought they knew all along.

I don't trust any of them but Nancy's mom. The rest are wallowing in guilt or making it up as they go.

WOW.

That limb you went out on Johnfear...I see nothing but thin air under you...no tree.

Well, now I know what's in your heart so you don't have to answer that question.

Unbelievable.

 

[SleuthyGal]

JohnFear, you trust Nancy's mom. I hope you extend the same courtesy to her father too.

The Rentz family believes (I'd say they know but I'm assuming) that the murderer of their daughter is Brad.

No grieving parent wants to have to believe, let alone face, the horrid thought that their son-in-law murdered their daughter. One would imagine they would hope it WAS someone else, because the pain increases exponentially that someone you trusted and loved took the life of your precious child.

And yet they believe/know. Think they might know something we, the general public, don't yet know, that hasn't been testified to yet? I'd say yes.

You said you trust Nancy's mom, Donna. Donna knows Brad killed Nancy. Trust THAT!

 

[gracielee]

Nope. There's actual evidence in that case. It was presented to the Grand Jury and everything. And, it makes way more sense than this mess.

Since you guys keep saying: Just wait, it's coming...and we're all on fairly nice grounds chat-wise here. Let's give the defense an actual shot (and of course, the State resting is coming) before we start intermingling the obvious with the convoluted.

And yes, I believe when "those other cases" come about, (if they go to trial) they will take about twenty minutes to win everyone over to the "Guilty" side. This case is a mess....those other two are slam dunks.

But...you guys are confusing the heartbreak of the loss of a loved one (as with HP) with guilt. And I at least want to hear if the defense can get past all the madness and come up with something plausible (because I have a feeling the state is piling on more of the same because that's all they have).

Although I haven't heard all the evidence in either case, the fact that Brad Cooper used such extreme control over Nancy, I have to take that into account as strong circumstantial evidence IMO. From all the statistics we hear and read, a woman's most vulnerable time is when she is attempting to leave, as Nancy was. When Nancy didn't show up Saturday morning, so many people immediately knew something was terribly wrong. People who knew the circumstances first hand, knew both people, all came to the same conclusion. Unlike Scott Peterson, where everyone around him supported him. Laci's family, friends, etc. Not so with Brad. And as I said before, those posts I've read here from people from Brad's past, all describe him with the same flavour of words. The people from Brad's past discribe him the same way as people from his present. My heart hurts for Nancy's obvious loneliness, her daytime friends and her nighttime friends. Places in her heart that should have been filled by her relationship with her *best* friend. JMO

 

[222NCMom]

:maddening:

I knew someone would argue with me about this. Okay, think what you want but she changed her written statement to reflect her knowledge that they were screwback earrings. That, to me is a lie. She didn't know that, couldn't even explain how she knew that.

Sorry, completely off topic from this but didn't she say NC wanted to live in her neighborhood or had looked there? I'm no stalker, but if I looked it up correctly those homes are over $550000. I can't see how she could even entertain that idea if the water was being cut off where they were already living in a much less expensive neighborhood ( I think). There is some saying about buying too much home for the money you have but I can't remember it. House Poor?

The one thing that concerns me about most of the friends testimonies is that they are too similar. At first I thought this lady seemed different and had different things to say but then I started hearing some of the same phrases I believe. I think it was her. It was like programmed catch phrases that came from some of them. It just seemed that way to me. P

 

[gritguy]

For me there are two questions, and they are quite different. First, who killed Nancy? Second, is the prosecution proving its case against Brad Cooper?

Addressing the second, as that's what's going on now, and if they succeed they therefore settle the first question, here's my rundown to date:

In favor of the prosecution:

Motive: He certainly had one: the removal of a negative relationship and looming financial burden.

Opportunity: He had the time between her return from the party til her friend became suspicious to murder her and dispose of her body.

Inclination: He was noted at least by several of Nancy’s friends to have hostility toward her, in terms of anger and controlling behavior, including monitoring e-mails and possibly telephone calls. He was also noted to have no inclination to honor marital vows, and the rupture of his marriage could, on Nancy’s application which she intended to make, cost him a great deal of money and at least the majority of the custody of his children.

Evidence (so far): He lied to Nancy’s friend about her having gone running with a specific friend - what possible reason is there to do this other than buy time. During this time he did an extraordinary amount of cleaning around the house, even making a special – and separate – trip to HT for detergent very early in the morning before that call and which apparently he did need asap. When his wife’s body was found, he asked specifically about the particular item and color of clothing that turned out to be the only article of clothing on her body. He is the only person who was known to be near her around time of death who 1) lied about her plans 2) went out in a vehicle 3) cleaned the area she was last known to be (home) and articles of clothing and 4) had some knowledge of what she would have on at the find site. By logic, someone did it, and those pieces of the puzzle paint a picture of him and no one else.

In favor of defense (not all of this evidence yet in play and who knows if it will or if they have other):

There is evidence that Nancy sometimes jogged from her house. There is evidence that Nancy was jogging the day she was murdered. There is evidence that Nancy was jogging and possibly caught the attention of a van with two men in it. There is evidence that someone called from the Cooper house early morning before the run, while Brad was nearing HT for the errand, and Brad testifies it was Nancy. There has been no evidence to show that call was spoofed as was speculated by those wanting to believe in Brad’s guilt. There is also evidence that the garage was open early morning, which Brad would not have left in such a condition if he were placing a body in a trunk or out to dump it with his children at home alone. Caffeine was found in Nancy’s body. The evidence indicates she did not drink a caffeinated beverage at the party the night before but yet by practice drank coffee before running.

Brad has no history of violence, and despite having been the subject of negative opinions of several of Nancy’s friends, he was supported by other neighbors.

Police destroyed evidence, including any and all data on Nancy’s telephone, which would possibly have shed light on her plans. Police failed to seriously consider eyewitnesses who responded to their question as to whether anyone had seen Nancy jogging.

At the site the body was found, any and all evidence found at the scene had no connection to Brad, including at least tire tracks, a cigarette butt, and maybe footprints.

Granted, I may have stated some things wrong, but those are my current impressions of the state of the case.

Given that, I think the prosecution is on shaky ground and hopefully they can shore up their case if indeed they have the right man.

As someone local to this, I was highly confident they arrested the right person. Highly confident in my opinion that carried no consequences. Now, I'd like to know more about that call from home to his cell and about these other witnesses before I regain my former confidence, though it still seems to me odds are he did it.