State v Bradley Cooper 4-26-11

[SleuthSayer]

Oh...detergent to wash clothes...not cleaning supplies..per se...like floor cleaner or such.

Hey, maybe that's why JP and NC were nekkid on the sofa. Brad had not done laundry.

 

[otto]

Yes, I so agree. I was under the impression WS was a victim friendly site. This is my first crime discussion here, and I am disappointed at the callous and shallow treatment of the victim.

It is a victim friendly site, but some of the facts; relevant to the investigation, unfortunately reflect negatively on the victim. JP testified that he and Nancy had a conversation about whether he had fathered the youngest child. That reflects poorly on the victim, but it provides an alternate theory of the crime.

 

[cassius]

Who Captain Chatterbox? On the audio I felt like he wasn't telling the truth but rather looking for reaction. Seemed like nervous adrenaline. He tried to use the same upbeat "team player" tone when going over the call records too but you could see the color drain from his face.

body language at certain critical points in the testimony, pulling eyelashes, rubbing face at other critical points...way off the charts.

 

[Tink56]

I'm not sure how Brad was lucky. He's spent the past 2.5 years in jail. He has lost his job, his children, all of his possessions, (intentionally leaving his wife out to avoid comments), and pretty much everything else. He sure is lucky.

He sure is...he's alive...unlike his wife.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

I am new here - as someone said earlier - I also had email problems.

I have a friend and we are as tight as we can be - and we have both discussed how JA called the CPD so quickly. My friend, who knows me like a book, has my back and knows all my secrets - said even she would not have called the police after a few hours. Things come up all the time - an sometimes it is just not possible or feasible to call and let someone know where you are and why. (oh and yes, at one time I was in an abusive relationship - not the "horrible abuse" NC claimed - I was actually BEING abused. My friend stated that at that time during my life - I wouldn't have been out and about - because I was in a REAL controlling and abusive situation.

When I go for a run, it could take 30 minutes or I could be gone hours. Sometimes in the middle of my run I will stop by a friends house for some water and to chat and then continue on. My husband or friends would not be concerned if I was gone 1 hour or even 2 hours. I asked my husband and he said if I wasn't home by the third hour he'd begin worrying a bit, but probably still not enough to call the police.

So, the fact that JA called the police so soon is VERY odd to me. I don't care how close of friends they were. A runner may set out to do a short run and get that burst of energy and go one to do a long run. I do this frequently

 

[johnfear]

It is a victim friendly site, but some of the facts; relevant to the investigation, unfortunately reflect negatively on the victim. JP testified that he and Nancy had a conversation about whether he had fathered the youngest child. That reflects poorly on the victim, but it provides an alternate theory of the crime.

Not only that, wait til RA and JY. I won't be pulling any punches for those two. I can't believe what their defense attorneys are already doing. I'll push the plunger on both of those jokers if the state has a need.

Same with whom ever killed JN.

 

[otto]

Not only that, wait til RA and JY. I won't be pulling any punches for those two. I can't believe what their defense attorneys are already doing. I'll push the plunger on both of those jokers if the state has a need.

Same with whom ever killed JN.

Those are quite different situations, although I have heard "swingers" connected with the Young case.

 

[zenreaper]

Yes, I so agree. I was under the impression WS was a victim friendly site. This is my first crime discussion here, and I am disappointed at the callous and shallow treatment of the victim.

Wouldn't it be reasonable to agree that IF BC didn't do it, then he has lost EVERYTHING, making him the victim as well?

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

Feisty little baiter tonite, eh? I think something has to give.

Either A) He did not kill Nancy, and it is one of those rare moments where coincidence and circumstance collide to create a series of unfortunate events, B) He killed her and did the impossible (basically committed the perfect, calm, cool and collective murder, but fell apart on the backside of it all) or C) we are all (CPD and WCDA collectively with us and the general populous) trying to cram a very large Cro-Magnon looking square into a round hole.

I keep seeing words thrown around about his psychopathy and the ones I am seeing repeated the most are WRONG. (Psychologically speaking, he can't be much more than a narcissist) He can't lie about absolutely everything, yet never say he didn't kill his wife and that be held against him. He didn't strike me as charming or particularly suited to get away with anything (like most sociopaths). He was also trying to do the impossible in his own life (have the wife, the mistress and the woman he kept in the pumpkin) and they were both living a lie. Since none of us live fairy tales, you have to admit this is all fairly normal.

As for some of the circumstantial evidence:

The emails he was snooping into. (Okay, so he got rid of the spoofed phone call and everything except a google map search, but left this? Come on. Also, the first words out of the multiple divorce attorneys mouths were A)don't leave the house and B) nothing is a secret now)

The BS spending habits (Equal responsibility and while it was living above their means, it was fairly "planned overspending" with bonuses, etc kept in mind, knowing they had some safety there and with her parents).

He acted odd in the days beyond her death. (You guys keep tripping all over yourselves here, but I think MOST people would act odd with the death of a spouse. Grief does not have a set of circumstances associated with it, or mannerisms, or reactions. It comes in about five forms that are interchangeable and in the end, all a part of the loss)

He didn't talk to the cops. (Neither would I. Not in those circumstances, not under any circumstances)

He lied. (Cause he's a lying liar who lies. Doesn't making him a killing killer who kills.)

He trashed his wife. (Where? He complained about the spending. He didn't want her to leave with the kids, etc. He went to hire a divorce attorney and bounced the check. He clearly knew about the separation agreement because Alice Stubbs testified he did. It was moving at a snail's pace because SOMETHING was being thought of, not because she wanted to run away.)

She called a realtor and said I want out. (Maybe he left her a message and said: Great, there's some new houses over off Brittaby that will be going in this year and some places off Greenstone Lane I can show you ASAP. Not in testimony, but who cares at this point, right?)

He had scratches and marks. (Show them to me. Show me where someone actually documented it.)

He had straw on the floor of his house. (Seen by whom? Officer Hayes? Did no one bring up during his testimony that he is clearly seen standing OUTSIDE his squad car, on the edge of the road in one of the helicopter videos of the body site? Because it is DEFINITELY him. Maybe he brought the straw in.)

The detectives thought he did it. (Great start. That's there job. Now show me something more than a hunch.)

His family and her neighbors were disappointed with his reaction, etc. (Okay. They were seeing this situation from a variety of viewpoints, but none of them seem to have provided a lot of pointed evidence of abuse at all.)

He was a controlling, manipulative @$$hole. (Okay. He controlled her into staying late at the party the night he allegedly killed her after controlling her into going on vacation with her family? Right. You guys have never met a real controlling before then.)

He didn't clean. He couldn't have. The house was a mess. (It was cluttered. Floor to ceiling. Houses don't get like that overnight. They don't get cleaned up from that in a weekend.)

The CPD can't be involved in a conspiracy. (I don't think they are. Nor do I think the Lochmere clan is. I think they all pointed their fingers collectively at him and looked no further. I think it was less conspiracy, more fustercluck.)

They did a fine job investigating them. (I need the glasses you are watching this trial through because this is a nightmare. Maybe I can use them on the mirror when I wake up tomorrow and I will be a pretty princess in the mirror. Did you HEAR the Pearson interview by Dismukes? I am fairly certain that something was missed there, stopping short of did Pearson do it or not. Who in their right mind rules THAT guy out in a murder investigation just weeks before indicting the other guy with equal opp, etc?)

This witness was bad. This witness was good. That guy lied. That girl lied. (None of them have offered up anything additional. The most convincing evidence (Google Maps) comes from a guy who as nervous as they come about SOMETHING.

He didn't call the police that day she went missing. (So? He probably was thinking he'd "impress" her with his mad cleaning skills. I would not call the police til dark if my spouse went missing unless I was told: If I am not back in 5 minutes, call 911)

He knew about the sports bra. And it's color. (No, he didn't. At least, no two members of the Cary police wrote it down the same way. He gave them options.)

He spoofed the phone call. (This is equally as likely as him having had an accomplice. Neither has been proven or disproven.)

He had the technical know how to __________________. (Did he? Because he left a pretty clear trail from himself to various women, no? He didn't hide the email snoop trail? But he remembered to delete all the spoofing evidence and he remembered to get rid of the google search for the body?)

Cary Police was NOT inept at investigating this case. (Really? I don't know who to point the finger at over there, so I'll point it in the air. This was a terrible way to run a case. Period. Mistakes do happen. And they are accepted. They should not pile up on each other and look like a lingering bag of flaming dog poop on the neighbor's porch.) Several people (SH and MH) reported that they were being good copped/bad copped into "agreeing to certain facts" very early on.

I don't believe Cary Police looked further than JP and BC. Could they have went down the wrong fork in the road? YES. Is that reasonable doubt? YES.

Fantastic. This basically sums it all up for me. He should NOT be convicted based on all of this. Hoping someone from the defense reiterates each and everyone of these points in closing

 

[Tink56]

His "character" (although I think he has none) and his normalcy doesn't play into any of the factors that I find point directly to Brad:
He did not withdraw and/or pay Nancy her allowance on that Friday.
He was the last person to see Nancy alive.
He lied about being asleep and yet was on the computer checking her emails.
He made two odd trips to HT within minutes of each other on the same morning, wearing two different shoes, wearing a zip up jacket zipped to his chin, and long pants on a July hot, humid morning in North Carolina.
He knew exactly what item of clothing Nancy had left on her body when she was found.
He did not call the police when his wife did not return home from a "jog."
He did not call any hospitals or emergency rooms in trying to locate his wife.
He did not answer his cell phone from calls while he was "searching for Nancy.
He did not return a phone call to a police officer even after a voice mail was left when his wife was missing and he was "searching" for his wife.
Items were missing from the home that have never been produced.
The shoes he wore to HT on one of the early morning trips have never been found or produced.
He laundered the dress she wore the night before rather than produce it to the police when they asked for her clothing.
The trunk of his car was so spotlessly clean that not one hair, lint ball, or speck of dirt was found.
His computer has a google search of the very spot his wife's body was found on the day before she went missing.
He had the knowledge, means, and equipment to produce a fake call to his cell phone.
He was found to be in possession of a diamond necklace that his wife never took off.
He did not produce the two right shoes missing from NC's cache of running shoes.
He did not question police as to where his wife was found or by what means his wife was dead.

None of that concerns his normal behavior or his character.

Having an affair with his wife's best friend and lying about it certainly does.
Doing it in the closet while his/her children are steps away certainly does.
Screaming and yelling with his wife in the parking lot of his daughter's school in front of his daughters certainly does.
Not showing one ounce of emotion over the death of the mother of his children certainly does.
Removing your wife from all financial accounts and withdrawing any access to any marital funds without telling her certainly does.
Not paying the utility bills to the point of disconnect and yet not leaving your wife means to do so certainly does.
Following your spouse to the gas station to monitor the amount of gas and money certainly does.
Traveling to foreign countries and flinging it up with a foreign chick certainly does.
Spying on your spouse's email accounts certainly does.

But we've been through all of this before and people can talk until they're blue in the face and it won't change minds either way. I know I will NEVER believe that the entire Cary Police Department framed BC, with the assistance of a grand jury, the FBI, dozens of accommodating friends/relatives who ain't a 'scared of perjury charges and would rather see the children's father go to prison rather than the real killer, the DA's staff, and the judge, and now several of the defense witnesses. No, Brad did this to himself. He did this all by his lonesome - just what he deserves to be for the rest of his natural life - lonesome... no children, no family to visit, and no friends. Such a pathetic loser.

Yep...this is a good summary....Thanks!

I

 

[johnfear]

Those are quite different situations, although I have heard "swingers" connected with the Young case.

I am fairly certain I heard the words "surveillance video" used in connection with JY today. Works for me.

 

[ncsu95]

And that is what the jury will ultimately decide. Nancy has no voice other than the State. How is attacking the victim considered fair here? If the State doesn't prove its case, so be it. If they're convinced they have the right person than in their minds justice will not have been served. This is ultimately about finding justice for Nancy. She is not on trial.

Who is attacking the victim? As I've posted before, her actions directly led to BCs actions (prior to July 12th...not talking about murder here) and BCs actions directly led to her actions. Since his actions up to July 12th are on trial, it is only fair to discuss her actions during the same time since they are related to his actions. No one is bashing NC.

 

[gracielee]

When I go for a run, it could take 30 minutes or I could be gone hours. Sometimes in the middle of my run I will stop by a friends house for some water and to chat and then continue on. My husband or friends would not be concerned if I was gone 1 hour or even 2 hours. I asked my husband and he said if I wasn't home by the third hour he'd begin worrying a bit, but probably still not enough to call the police.

So, the fact that JA called the police so soon is VERY odd to me. I don't care how close of friends they were. A runner may set out to do a short run and get that burst of energy and go one to do a long run. I do this frequently

And yet none of nancy's friends ever called the cops before. and this one day when they did call, they were right. Nancy was dead. She wasn't coming home. Nancy ran regularly, and nobody ever called the cops before. The one lone time they called the cops, bingo, nancy was DEAD. And the friends were right. something was very VERY wrong. When Krista called Brad, she knew he did something to her sister. She rented a car and started driving to Cary immediately. And when Nancy's dad got the call, he turned to his wife and said 'this isn't going to have a positive ending.' They all knew. And they were all right.

 

[unc70]

Mania or drugs (on the audio) IYO?

IMO The latter. I kept thinking that all during that second tape. He also mentioned drugs when describing M. I don't remember that subject coming up in prior testimony, although I missed some of the earlier witnesses and have not had time yet to listen to their testimony.

Wander how many tapes we will hear, including ones from the prosecution witnesses. Those could be interesting.

ETA: With Voyeuristic Intentions

 

[RoughlyCollie]

As a single Dad, not knowing where next month's utility bills are coming from, you will forgive me if I have trouble seeing a "Bills paid, $300 a week allowance, driving a BMW, not having to work, nice house, nice friends, frequent parties" life as "bad"...

The picture was a nice one that hid a loveless and lonely marriage.

 

[RoughlyCollie]

A loveless and lonely marriage that she was willing to tolerate because of the financial and material gains she was making during it. NOTHING stopped her from LEAVING. Say six months to a year ago, when things were not as bad, "Hey Brad, I wanna go see my parents, they said they would pay for the flight, can I go?" You really think he would say no? He bever did before. And once she was there with the kids (as who would care for them while she was gone? So taking the kids was a given).

But, of course, she gives up the pool membership, the BMW, the nice clothes and the money.

That is a good point about NC being able to leave earlier. However, it could very well be that she wanted to stay married for the sake of the children, and tried to make a satisfying life for herself, despite having an unsatisfactory marriage. I would find it very difficult to deprive my children of their original family even if I were unhappy to be married to my husband.

I have wondered why finding out about BC's affair with HM would have precipitated her wanting to end the marriage, when she had extra-marital encounters too.

This leads me to wonder if BC's affair with HM is a red herring and there was some other catalyst, unrelated to BC's behavior and personality, that caused NC to want a divorce. Of course, it could be that that affair, along with the betrayal by both friend and husband, was the last straw for her.

At this point, after having followed this case very closely over the years and having listened to the trial testimony, I could not vote to convict BC were I on the jury. My gut feeling is that he is innocent -- the problem with my gut feeling is that I don't know him personally, so I don't trust it. I strongly believe that the BC we have seen portrayed in the media, on videos, by NC's friends and his friends and coworkers, etc., does not form a complete picture of the person he is. Therefore, any conclusions I draw could be wrong.

The other problem with my gut feeling is that I am not very good at telling when people are lying, unless they make it obvious or unless, in complicated situations, the details percolate awhile in my mind until all the puzzle pieces fall into place.

Intellectually, I think it is equally likely that BC killed NC and that he did not. I hope that if he is factually guilty, he is convicted, and if he is factually innocent, he is acquitted. That's the best I can do at this point, as wimpy as it sounds.

 

[Bottle Cap]

Its interesting to me that some folks have a problem with BDI'ers, feeling that they're operating off gut instincts. I'm a BDI'er and I'm operating off a preponderance of CE. I'll not list it, as other posters have done it numerous times. If Brad were in some other profession this case would be impossible. If there were no affidavit from a previous girlfriend attesting to his behavior when she left him, if there were some evidence of a human emotion; if there were a physical description of another suspect, or even a consistent physical description of a vehicle; if all those closest to her were not convinced.

I don't care that everybody slept with everybody else. I'm in agreement with another poster that if the defense had a shred of a case, they'd not be making insinuations about the who the father of the victim's child is, her character, or the character of those who seek justice for her. I'm of the opinion that the CPD is in a far better place to determine what is possible in an investigation and what is not. Lots of experts here who can do their job better than they can, and am wondering when all these career changes are going to take place. (To wit, tire tracks and footprints: unless you physically went to the site and observed the ground, you have no idea if this was feasible or if they tried.)

Another observation is that some people think all BDI'ers work off gut feelings. Oddly, these are the same people who have a bad "gut" feeling and who's "hinky meters" are set off by JP. Those of us BDI'ers who are looking at the CE against BC maybe would like an additional amount of CE against JP rather than those pesky gut feelings we keep getting sneered at over.

Thank you and good morning!

 

[cody100]

Fantastic. This basically sums it all up for me. He should NOT be convicted based on all of this. Hoping someone from the defense reiterates each and everyone of these points in closing

I agree completely. A very objective look at this case.

 

[BrownRice]

He sure is...he's alive...unlike his wife.

Well it's debatable if he considers this alive - esp if it's the rest of his life.

 

[cassius]

And yet none of nancy's friends ever called the cops before. and this one day when they did call, they were right. Nancy was dead. She wasn't coming home. Nancy ran regularly, and nobody ever called the cops before. The one lone time they called the cops, bingo, nancy was DEAD. And the friends were right. something was very VERY wrong. When Krista called Brad, she knew he did something to her sister. She rented a car and started driving to Cary immediately. And when Nancy's dad got the call, he turned to his wife and said 'this isn't going to have a positive ending.' They all knew. And they were all right.

That is interesting indeed. Who was it that called the cops again exactly? Isn't it also convenient that the one time JA calls the cops after only a few hours and accuses BC of being involved in something that Nancy was actually dead?