Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #25

[jmflu]

NCN...I think some of the things you have stated recently have inflamed a reaction. Honestly, my girls have hundreds of pictures with themselves & friends like DD posted. They are hugged up with their friends.

The reason is because they are trying to all fit in the picture. Many times they want closeups and the only way to do this is HUG up.

As for LOTS of drinking...I have to disagree with you. The photo has 7 girls at a table and 7 drinks...the other 7 drinks are WATER. Most of the pictures with a drink are from the 'girls weekend.' Possibly the same drink same time all the photo's were taken.

The photo with her sisters at the beach she is ~hugged up~ and has a glass of wine, but also WATER. Canadians are big on wine and she is no different it appears, but I do not see LOTS of drinking at all.

I totally read her post a different way... I thought she was posting that there as NO WAY that JA would have been involved in NC's murder because they were just too close!!

 

[jmflu]

I guess that I think that the only difference worth discussing is what it relevant to the case. I may be wrong, but I thought that was also embedded in his question/comment. I have no value judgement on the affairs at all.

And I think the only reason he asked was because the "difference" inflamed some people.

Perhaps we were getting off track, but this board has always been verrrrry detail-oriented!!

 

[cygnusx1]

My point was that he seemed to be asking why would one type of affair be more offensive than another. So I was thinking you were going to answer that.

Doesn't matter to me what you post, I always find it interesting!

No, my question was, if taken completely out of this context (the murder), were the pictures in which BC appears with his friends (some of them female) on his site any more/less innocent than the pictures of NC with her friends?

 

[jmflu]

No, my question was, if taken completely out of this context (the murder), were the pictures in which BC appears with his friends (some of them female) on his site any more/less innocent than the pictures of NC with her friends?

Ohhhhhhhhhh.... I'm so glad you showed up to explain that! Thanks!

(Personal opinion, yes there's a difference. Pics of him and the guys... no. But he didn't even have NC or the kids on his site.)

 

[Roy23]

I am now going to read all the posts from after I went to bed last night. It seems I have inflamed some people? On message boards, it is very hard to read in "tone", as well as easy to skim, misinterpret and make a hasty bashing of someone else's "perceived" ideas. I will read the posts and comment.

However, I do remember that some people thought I was "calling" JA out for having an affair. NO. All of this began with someone posting a link to DDs blog. Well, I've always had the imorial and the DD blog Art2mis, but don't always read it. SO, I went to mom's link, read a reply that someone had written to DD, saying that "some of the people in our group" (meaning that circle of friends of NC, etc.) had had affairs, two of them." That does not say whether or whom the two were, whether they were one of the group (whether it was a male or female of the group) that went outside the group or had an affair w/someone inside the group.

I don't give a happy rip who got hot with whom in an affair. But the comments I made seemed to be read by "someone else" as saying that *I* thought JA had an affair with Nancy, or Hiller had one with whomever or whatever else people's minds spinned and then blew out here on WS.

Here's what I was trying to say: OK, wonder who those two separate people were? BECAUSE, WHEN LOOKING AT A MURDER, THERE ARE INCIDENTS THAT CAN INFLAME A MURDERER TOWARD THAT MURDER. And then there was the latest aff by Hiller with his remarks, which spurred all of us to interact upon what could it mean?

So, I deduced, COULD any of these affairs have been entertwined into any of the NC murder? Could there have been a piece of that "two people known to have had affairs in the group" entertwined in this case? When affairs happen and become known there is lots of gossip, jealousy and rage depending upon whom is involved. I just took the admission of "two affairs within the group" as another clue to LOOK INTO, as as to what could incite rage, murder, etc.

Well, hell...we don't know. But I was putting it out there. I also put out there that any one of them could have been involved with someone of the same sex, because, yes...that happens too. It's just another "what if". I am not the only one who has said that before here. I am not "bashing" NC or JA or anyone. Get over yourselves, please, if you are part of that.

My thoughts on this are no different than someone else saying, "Well, I KNOW for a fact that BC was here at (wherever) on video." Or, "That is a pole lamp in that brown paper bag", or "Nancy was probably run over by BC in the garage" or "NC was jogging on the side of Holly Springs Rd., then someone took her, killed her and left her on the side of a new development."

It is getting ridiculous. I try to read posts, not skim. Though I do skim at times. But before I bash someone else and call them a basher, I do try to think.

Obviously last night I wasn't thinking clearly when I called Cambridge subdivision out for being Camden Forest. I fixed that error. Geez.

This entire murder is solved already in two people's heads and hearts: the murderer's and Nancy's. Maybe LE's. The rest is not out yet.

Just like with the Civil War. There was not ONE cause leading up to that war of countryman against countryman. There were many issues leading up to it. It took one incident to incite the big explosion into an all out war, with many underlying issues entertwined.

I am suggesting my underlying ideas on WS. I don't believe it requires a separate thread any more than Harris Teeter, BC's affairs, or custody issues have with this case. The road to justice is long and arduous with many side trips toward the destination.

As well, the board is beginning to appear "territorial and heirarchical" among some of the posters. It's everyone's board. We can all co-exist, disagree and discuss underlying issues that we think may have affected or led up to the final blow: murder of NC. It's kind of obvious to me about the WHO DONE IT, in my mind, but I like to know what and all types of issues lead from point A, of being happily married, to point B of affairs, financial discord, lies, (what else?), and finally, a murder.

Anything is possible as we have seen in Nancy's murder. The fact that THAT would ever have happened like what we are seeing is proof that truth (whatever that may be) is stranger than fiction.

I, unfortunately, agree with a lot that you are saying here. It is okay to label Brad as whatever and anyone who supports his version of events is an accomplice to murder. Someone who everyone believes is suggesting that some infidelity is going on. So maybe it was Nancy and maybe not. Imagine if your spouse died and you were innocent but you are being taken through the ringer, called a murderer by everyone, can't see your kids. Maybe Brad is guilty but there is a chance that he is not.

I just hope that LE will finally find out about the LTF alibi and the earlier HT purchases so we can get this case over with.

 

[momto3kids]

I totally read her post a different way... I thought she was posting that there as NO WAY that JA would have been involved in NC's murder because they were just too close!!

Don't jump on me folks, but I have lots of the pics of Nancy with her friends in my head, online, etc. Nancy and Jessica were really tight from what I see in pics of them. Always hugging, (well, all of her friends were always in huggy pics with Nancy, so that's just how Nancy was, I guess) trips to this and that girlie getaway, some to other states, LOTS of drinking going on in pics...I could swear that Jessica, Clea and Nancy were glued together. Now, I'm just not that huggy all the time, but maybe some people are. Nor do I like to spend that much time with friends and neighbors, but that's just me. I crave solitude.

But, maybe, and it's a big maybe...maybe there was someone in the group who had it going on with Nancy. I'm thinking male or female. That's only a big fat guess. And, something in my gut saying this. I've always said that there's more than we know going on here, and lots more to come out of the closet. Still, BC is my main suspect for Nancy's murderer.


NCN doesn't specify or single out JA, except stating they were tight.
She is speaking about the entire group.
She also labels LOTS of drinking going on.
She does say possibly someone had it going on with NC.
It appears NCN is insinuating female because she is talking about the girlie weekends, hugging, etc.

Again, I think this is what has inflammed some other members. If you will notice I NEVER commented on it except my previous post 30 minutes ago.

 

[ncnative]

Well, like I said...

I give up.

Forget about it.

I already explained myself.

Also, I have in my possession many more pics than you have seen, that aren't on the Internet, of NC and her friends that only showed how much they liked to drink and party, NOTHING SCANDALOUS. And when I say, "...maybe there was someone in THE GROUP THAT HAD IT GOING ON WITH/FOR NANCY", THE GROUP is everyone in her circle of friends, not just any one picture or ANY picture. It all came from the response on the Diana Duncan website where someone responded to DD saying that "...some of the group members [meaning all of their friends in a group, not just women] had had affairs...two of them..." I'll try and post that so everyone will figure it out for themselves.

MOM, all I'm saying is that you had a post with DD's link in it, to which I went and found DD's link, and on that link was a response from someone in "THE GROUP" saying the above...... I am not at issue with you about ANYthing.

Like I said. Forget it. Reading into web messages brings on stuff like...this crap.

 

[Anderson]

Also, I have in my possession many more pics than you have seen, that aren't on the Internet, of NC and her friends

Hi NCN,

JMFLU started a thread on sexual conduct that I have suggested be changed to social context or relationships. That may help!! Your comments always help to dig deeper, and your opinions are important. Everyone contributes something!!

You had mentioned the pics before and said that you would post some of the birthday memorial material. I hope you will!! JMFLU's thread may be a good spot for it.

Were you able to send the birthday messages to NC's family?

 

[Anderson]

NCN doesn't specify or single out JA, except stating they were tight.
She is speaking about the entire group.
She also labels LOTS of drinking going on.
She does say possibly someone had it going on with NC.
It appears NCN is insinuating female because she is talking about the girlie weekends, hugging, etc.

Again, I think this is what has inflammed some other members. If you will notice I NEVER commented on it except my previous post 30 minutes ago.

I do think that SG turned out to be right about starting another thread, which JMFLU just started. I think that will help enormously!!

Talk to you later, Mom

 

[momto3kids]

I do think that SG turned out to be right about starting another thread, which JMFLU just started. I think that will help enormously!!

Talk to you later, Mom

I agree. Like I was saying, when it comes to religion, race or sexual orientation it sometimes strikes a cord. SG had a great suggestion to begin a seperate thread about it.

 

[ncnative]

I found these posts, but no date these were posted. It appears DD doesn't deny the affidavits suspicions about who did this.

Jen states... I don't know whether the affadavits's suspicions about who ended her life are accurate are not-- I sincerely hope not for the sake of those two beautiful little girls.

art2mis answers..."every blog post" -- well, I wouldn't believe half of what you read in the press or the blog posts, but then again I'm hiding from alot of it. I'm just too close and too much of it hurts --- the truth and the lies and the wild speculations.

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=31717822&postID=6895562363785548874

Here's one of the links. The other link to imorial website is directly after this post, I believe. I can't figure out how to go back, find it, then quote it along with the blogger.com one above.

Anyway, it appears that the comment about "two members of the group [of friends...not specific as to whom they are, but meaning the NC group of friends, etc.]...that comment appears to have been removed from the site.

I can figure why.

 

[Anderson]

I agree. Like I was saying, when it comes to religion, race or sexual orientation it sometimes strikes a cord. SG had a great suggestion to begin a seperate thread about it.

Yes, I read your earlier post and I agree with that. JMFLU's thread will provide a home for this important aspect of the case discussion.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Now you can see why I am focusing on the aspects of the murder case that are more substantive and are aligned with what the detectives are looking at.

A partying/boozing/swinging/partner swapping rathole is a common one--it became one of the central defense themes in the Danielle Van Dam murder case in 2002; it was also attempted in the OJ Simpson murder case, among others. However, the courts will limit these areas in a criminal trial if there isn't proof of something.

 

[jmflu]

A partying/boozing/swinging/partner swapping rathole is a common one...

I never saw it as all that. Personally.

 

[momto3kids]

Anyway, it appears that the comment about "two members of the group [of friends...not specific as to whom they are, but meaning the NC group of friends, etc.]...that comment appears to have been removed from the site.

I can figure why.

If it is removed then it appears NC friends are still reading the threads.
We saw this also happen with MM site about the business card he had designed.

 

[SleuthyGal]

I never saw it as all that. Personally.

It never just starts right there, but in prior cases it has taken on a life of its own (and pushed vigorously by the defense) and devolves to a fairly standard theme. You will probably see the defense in this case attempt the same maneuver because they don't have anything else to try.

They will ultimately fail, but I predict they'll try. And of course there is a certain % of the public who are not able to use higher brain functions to see through transparent smokescreens, so they will eat this stuff up. Defense attorneys know this. It's probably in their foundational study book, "The Big Dummies 101 Guide to Defense."

 

[raisincharlie]

Now you can see why I am focusing on the aspects of the murder case that are more substantive and are aligned with what the detectives are looking at.

A partying/boozing/swinging/partner swapping rathole is a common one--it became one of the central defense themes in the Danielle Van Dam murder case in 2002; it was also attempted in the OJ Simpson murder case, among others. However, the courts will limit these areas in a criminal trial if there isn't proof of something.

Good reasons not to go there - unless the murderer actually confesses and tells what their state of mind was at the time, motive will always be uncertain. The best one can do is determine if motive exists and move on otherwise it is but one argument after another. :crazy:

 

[SleuthyGal]

Good reasons not to go there - unless the murderer actually confesses and tells what their state of mind was at the time, motive will always be uncertain. The best one can do is determine if motive exists and move on otherwise it is but one argument after another. :crazy:

Absolutely. I'm much more interested in the stuff that actually gets convictions when it's available--forensics, etc, etc.

 

[momto3kids]

Since MH affidavit surfaced yesterday, it appears this is going to get worse before it gets better.

As expected this case is pulling in NC & BC family and friends. The he said/she said because this involves many people, places and times.

First and foremost my heart goes out to Bella & Katie as well as NC family. But I have to follow this secondly with NC friends, but more so JA. BC and now MH are directly targeting her. It is going to become more brutal on her I am afraid.

Why? She knew NC better than anyone? She called LE before BC was ready to get them involved? Is BC jealous of JA because NC confided in her and not him? Does he feel his reputation has been ruined so it is time to ruin hers? I don't know the answer.

What I do know is this...it is going to be a mental challenge for her, physically drain her, be a financial cost, not to mention time consuming. Sad, but true.

This is why people say they don't want to get involved. Just a tip of the iceburg of what she is going to be up against. IMO we are beginning to see what BC put NC thru, by taking JA on. I am happy she has the close friends to help her thru this with the exception of NC who is now dead.

I said from day one...JA holds the key. That is beginning to prove true. I hope she comes back and is able to slam BC and his dog & pony (K&B) show up against the wall with info she might just have against BC. She doesn't have to supply it for a custody case, but it will be wonderful in the criminal case to have in her back pocket.

I don't know if JA knows any more than she stated in her affidavit, but I sure hope so.

How many more so called friends is BC going to dig out of the woodwork? I'm sure he is trying. I hope he comes up short.

I have to ask, "what does going after JA have to do with BC custody case?"

As someone mentioned, none of NC friends have done an amended affidavit, but BC for some reason are adding or changing theirs. Wonder why :waitasec:

 

[ncmomof2boys]

Here's one of the links.
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=31717822&postID=6895562363785548874
The other link to imorial website is directly after this post, I believe. I can't figure out how to go back, find it, then quote it along with the blogger.com one above.

Anyway, it appears that the comment about "two members of the group [of friends...not specific as to whom they are, but meaning the NC group of friends, etc.]...that comment appears to have been removed from the site.

I can figure why.

It is actually still there. It is at the end of the first paragraph of the comment left by Jen. I will copy/paste it here.

"I now realize that when you told me more than a year ago that two of the people in your group of friends were having an affair that it was Brad, wasn't it?."