State v Bradley Cooper 03-30-2011

[CuriousDad]

I think you need to view his deposition tape to answer this. Brad testified, in a sworn deposition, that the last time he saw nancy that morning, she was dressed in one of his tee shirts. He said, (on tape, you can listen and watch him), that he never saw her in any clothes than that tee shirt that day. He took Katie upstairs with him to surf the web, and nancy left the house. He said all he ever saw her in that morning was his white tee shirt. If you haven't viewed the tapes, you should. Most of the answers to questions being asked are NOT from prior to the 15th of July. Most of the answers to these questions are given by Brad, on Oct. 2, 2008. He had nearly three months to mull over his answers.

That's partially my point - people seem to be confusing his answers to questions and when they came, how he should react when is wife is murdered, when he doesn't even know that yet. Didn't know about the t shirt, but that doesn't change my point. He still would not describe what he had put on her, with 3 days to "mull over his answers". And if he did surf the internet, it will be on the computer. We've killed this spooked call, even though some are still holding out for more experts - DY said Cisco said its not possible. What more do you need??

Like I've said before, the Brad did crowd is getting nervous - call didn't work, just will have checking emails to confirm that she'd probably talked more with lawyers. The pros would never let the jury get nervous like that. They would have led off with the smoking gun, and then built the case around and up to that. Therefore, (I'll be as certain as some of you are), the smoking gun will more likely be a child's cap gun, leaving the jury with more holes to fill to connect the dots.

 

[ncsu95]

Well, I am glad the ADA cleared that up on re-direct and showed what the weather was like and that Kurtz was wasting his time talking about mud that didn't exist in the entire triangle for that week... dry and hot.. why would there be mud.. wasting more time..

I was glad they cleared that up to. Because why else would BC need to dispose of his shoes?

 

[CyberPro]

Yepper..that what we call a "Rolling Code" which you must enter the number on the fob at the time of trying to enter or log on to give security..I have a fob for work internet purposes..Medical Records accesses..Cant be too careful :rocker:

This is a computer security technique called Two Factor Authentication. You generally have to enter something you know, like your user name and/or a partial password + the authentication code on the fob. This Two Factor is Something you know + Something you have.

 

[babelphissh]

Do you do this while laying in the crack of two twin beds pushed together with a two year old on one side and a four year old on the other side?

Brilliant! That's the first thing I thought when I saw that photo...sleeping in the crack, yeah, right..

 

[CuriousDad]

I was glad they cleared that up to. Because why else would BC need to dispose of his shoes?

That's pretty funny. Dusty ground doesn't leave any footprints, either. But you know what this means? That 47" spread on the tires? Someone pulled up to that dump site after that downpour on Monday morning. To check and see if the body was still there? Had a small trailer full of lawn clippings to dump (illegally), saw the body, got freaked and left? Either way, someone visited that site before she was found the next day, and didn't report it.

 

[222NCMom]

Not all of us, clearly. Most people would jump to answer their phone if their spouse were missing. I guess you are representing a very minute segment of the populace.

I guess it depends on how long he was missing for me to jump. A few hours, I'm not going to be thinking police and having neighbors trampling the grass. For all I know he could have seen a neighbor, gone in to help him with some computer issues or something, and time went by. Most of the time nothing is wrong if someone is gone a few hours. So no, I'm not thinking police until maybe right around that time, but not panicky yet, and I'm a worrier. I would be calling neighbors, friends, doing some serious thinking about missing something he said.

One thing I keep thinking about is maybe BC thought NC was meeting up with someone, another man, she was irritated and didn't care what he thought anymore, let him keep up with the kids while she's out this time. He thinks maybe she lost track of time, something happened, whatever, and so he was hoping to find her and tell her to go home and get rid of the crowd. Maybe he was embarrassed that she would be found in a situation with someone else and just wanted it all to be low key. He may have been more concerned about appearances, his looking like a fool while she's out having fun, than anything if their marraige was loveless now.

If he didn't do it, I don't think her being dead even crossed his mind at this point. It was just too soon, too early, still too many explanations to where she could be. My opinion.

 

[CrimeAddict]

That's pretty funny. Dusty ground doesn't leave any footprints, either. But you know what this means? That 47" spread on the tires? Someone pulled up to that dump site after that downpour on Monday morning. To check and see if the body was still there? Had a small trailer full of lawn clippings to dump (illegally), saw the body, got freaked and left? Either way, someone visited that site before she was found the next day, and didn't report it.

Or someone was backing up in the cul-de-sac and didn't even pay attention to anything because of the rain, etc.. they just were turning around.

 

[CuriousDad]

Or someone was backing up in the cul-de-sac and didn't even pay attention to anything because of the rain, etc.. they just were turning around.

I could even turn my big ole truck around in that circle w/o leaving the pavement. I really think the tracks had to have been from a small utility trailer, and maybe they were turning the trailer around in the culdesac and ran off. I was picturing the tracks to be tanget to the circle though, like they pulled in straight with a very small car (Smart Car?) or backed in a trailer. I guess whoever it was might not have seen the body, but someone was there after the morning rain. If I were LE, I'd be finding out who, and why they didn't report a body.

 

[macd]

All the evidence I've seen reported in the news has been (very strong) circumstantial evidence. But, I've been expecting a smoking gun from computer forensic evidence. Something like Brad's google search records including "how to hide a body" or a syslog record from his computer indicating the modem called his cell phone. Is anyone still expecting a smoking gun to be revealed from the technology front?

 

[CyberPro]

I agree that if you were out looking for someone, if it was your wife or just anyone you happened to be out looking for because they were not somewhere they should have been, or had been gone for a while you would answer ANY call that rang. If you pick up a voice mail from LE, you are going to return that call ASAP.

The length of time someone has to be missing can be a two-edged sword. I recall a case from Cary from a long while back (probably 20 years or more) where a woman went to the Cary Village Mall (now Cary Town Center). Her husband called because she had not returned in 30 minutes. I always thought this was a suspiciously short period of time to be worried about someone who had gone to the mall. Maybe if they had not returned in 30 days I might have gotten suspicious :innocent:.

They worked that Missing Persons case for quite a while, and were looking pretty hard. Even interviewed someone I know because he worked at the same place and was from the same town, although there was a lot of separation in their ages and he did not know her at all. I never heard the outcome of that case, but suspected that she must have left on her own, but abduction is possible. AFIK they have never located her.

So, 30 minutes of missing is likely so short as to be suspicious.

How long is too long? How much is Just Right? Depends on the person and their history. If she was "gone for a run" I would think this was 2 hours or less.

 

[gracielee]

Thanks for the heads up on last nights post from Brad's ex. All the posts I've read from people who knew Brad before he moved to the states, all say the same thing. Describe Brad with the same adjectives. Amazing. It doesn't appear he's changed at all. What a shame Nancy wasn't able to save herself.

 

[gracielee]

I agree that if you were out looking for someone, if it was your wife or just anyone you happened to be out looking for because they were not somewhere they should have been, or had been gone for a while you would answer ANY call that rang. If you pick up a voice mail from LE, you are going to return that call ASAP.

The length of time someone has to be missing can be a two-edged sword. I recall a case from Cary from a long while back (probably 20 years or more) where a woman went to the Cary Village Mall (now Cary Town Center). Her husband called because she had not returned in 30 minutes. I always thought this was a suspiciously short period of time to be worried about someone who had gone to the mall. Maybe if they had not returned in 30 days I might have gotten suspicious :innocent:.

They worked that Missing Persons case for quite a while, and were looking pretty hard. Even interviewed someone I know because he worked at the same place and was from the same town, although there was a lot of separation in their ages and he did not know her at all. I never heard the outcome of that case, but suspected that she must have left on her own, but abduction is possible. AFIK they have never located her.

So, 30 minutes of missing is likely so short as to be suspicious.

How long is too long? How much is Just Right? Depends on the person and their history. If she was "gone for a run" I would think this was 2 hours or less.

I think a lot of it has to do with the missing person. JMO. Even with my own kids, some were a lot more responsible, reliable than others. Two of them were NEVER late for curfew, EVER. If they weren't home on time, I would know something was really wrong. One, not so much. She'd always try to edge the time a bit longer. Some people are extremely reliable. When I worked, my coworkers knew if I was late something was wrong. Even 5 minutes late. One day I had an accident on the way to work, was approx. 45 minutes late, and everyone knew something was wrong. when I finally arrived, people were about to send out a search party for me. Because I was NEVER late.

 

[222NCMom]

Do you do this while laying in the crack of two twin beds pushed together with a two year old on one side and a four year old on the other side?

yes, and two dogs, two cats and a husband. No, seriously, what I"m saying is I do wake up usually after about 2 or 3 hours and many times will look at my iphone email or ipad. I'm trying to break the habit but I can see even on top of the crack having my iphone in there too and messing with it after waking.

 

[222NCMom]

This has probably been addressed in the past so someone may know the answer.

I imagine, if BC murdered NC, he purposely left the body where it would be discovered in a reasonable amount of time. Even though he acted as if he wasn't interested in her $75000 life insurance, it would pay a lot of bills, but I'm sure its not payable without a body until 7 years or so. Isn't that how the life insurance works?

Also, would their being Canadians effect how the lack of a will plays out? In North Carolina if you die without a will it's not a good thing. I know that he claims she did not have one, but that could easily surface when this is over. But, would they adhere to NC law or Canadian?Without a will, I believe NC would require all monies, after a certain small amount, be split between the spouse and Children. Would it have to go into a trust? If there aren't children, I believe it's between the spouse and the descendents parents. My facts are a little foggy. In this case, with a trial and all, there won't be money left anyway, but if it hadn't gone this direction.....

So, have yall chatted about this before and what was the outcome on the estate? Canadian or North Carolina law? Of course, foul play by the spouse voids all. Just curious ...

 

[gracielee]

This has probably been addressed in the past so someone may know the answer.

I imagine, if BC murdered NC, he purposely left the body where it would be discovered in a reasonable amount of time. Even though he acted as if he wasn't interested in her $75000 life insurance, it would pay a lot of bills, but I'm sure its not payable without a body until 7 years or so. Isn't that how the life insurance works?

Also, would their being Canadians effect how the lack of a will plays out? In North Carolina if you die without a will it's not a good thing. I know that he claims she did not have one, but that could easily surface when this is over. But, would they adhere to NC law or Canadian?Without a will, I believe NC would require all monies, after a certain small amount, be split between the spouse and Children. Would it have to go into a trust? If there aren't children, I believe it's between the spouse and the descendents parents. My facts are a little foggy. In this case, with a trial and all, there won't be money left anyway, but if it hadn't gone this direction.....

So, have yall chatted about this before and what was the outcome on the estate? Canadian or North Carolina law? Of course, foul play by the spouse voids all. Just curious ...

Not sure about the lack of a will. I'd assume since the property and debts are in N.C., N.C. law would apply. But that's just a guess. In the case of the coopers, it didn't appear they had any assets to speak of anyway. Brad's 401K is in his name, as are his stock options, etc. He testified to that at the depostion hearings. And her life insurance was through Cisco Systems, so I'm sure he would have listed himself as the beneficiary. As for life insurance, that wouldn't pay out without a body.

 

[Tipstaff]

I have to add this - How in the world was BC to know that the call he didn't answer from some random 919-*advertiser censored*-xxxx number was a policeman calling him on Sat afternoon? People keep saying why didn't he answer that call. His BB is not that smart, to post the caller's name, and occupation. Now that would be a cool feature. He's busy tending kids, maybe out of the car, phone is in car, obviously his mind is racing, guilty or not. I miss calls all the time. LE calls back, leaves message. He doesn't return call right away. Maybe kids are sleeping in the car, phone is on silence, doesn't realize there's a message until 10 mins or so later when he picks up the phone and looks at it.

I just see that it doesn't matter what he did, or what his response was, many on here are going to paint that action as proof of guilt. I thought sleuths were open minded, free thinking people.

Consciencenous of Guilt - he knew Nancy would not be calling. If he knew she was truly missing she could have been calling from a borrowed phone, a passerby saw her lying over the roadside, the police had found her. He was not expecting a call finding Nancy. JMO

 

[CaryCanuck]

All the evidence I've seen reported in the news has been (very strong) circumstantial evidence. But, I've been expecting a smoking gun from computer forensic evidence. Something like Brad's google search records including "how to hide a body" or a syslog record from his computer indicating the modem called his cell phone. Is anyone still expecting a smoking gun to be revealed from the technology front?

I am because Det Young stated that he had been told the FBI had found evidence to indicate Brad killed Nancy.

 

[kellyroll]

I have to add this - How in the world was BC to know that the call he didn't answer from some random 919-*advertiser censored*-xxxx number was a policeman calling him on Sat afternoon? People keep saying why didn't he answer that call. His BB is not that smart, to post the caller's name, and occupation. Now that would be a cool feature. He's busy tending kids, maybe out of the car, phone is in car, obviously his mind is racing, guilty or not. I miss calls all the time. LE calls back, leaves message. He doesn't return call right away. Maybe kids are sleeping in the car, phone is on silence, doesn't realize there's a message until 10 mins or so later when he picks up the phone and looks at it.

I just see that it doesn't matter what he did, or what his response was, many on here are going to paint that action as proof of guilt. I thought sleuths were open minded, free thinking people.

We know that Off. Hayes left a VM for BC at approximately 2:30 on the 12th. I'm willing to buy that BC had his hands full that day, hitting the gym (which seems like an odd thing to do when one's wife might be missing), but the thing that stood out for me on this testimony is that BC accessed his VM at 2:55 and spent 212 secs listening to it. That's a long time to listen to one message. An error on the records? Maybe. Or, evidence that BC was very interested in hearing that VM, perhaps replaying it several times. Nevertheless, he does not call the police back. IMO, if you have time to hang out listening to VMs and texting, you have time to return a call. :twocents:

 

[Cheyenne130]

We know that Off. Hayes left a VM for BC at approximately 2:30 on the 12th. I'm willing to buy that BC had his hands full that day, hitting the gym (which seems like an odd thing to do when one's wife might be missing), but the thing that stood out for me on this testimony is that BC accessed his VM at 2:55 and spent 212 secs listening to it. That's a long time to listen to one message. An error on the records? Maybe. Or, evidence that BC was very interested in hearing that VM, perhaps replaying it several times. Nevertheless, he does not call the police back. IMO, if you have time to hang out listening to VMs and texting, you have time to return a call. :twocents:

He went to the fitness center to look for Nancy. That seems like an odd place to look since she didn't take the car but she could have gone with someone else. I am curious to see who all he called to try to find her. I don't remember DD saying anything about getting a call and I would think that would be one of the first people since she had been there the night before.

 

[less0305]

I have to add this - How in the world was BC to know that the call he didn't answer from some random 919-*advertiser censored*-xxxx number was a policeman calling him on Sat afternoon? People keep saying why didn't he answer that call. His BB is not that smart, to post the caller's name, and occupation. Now that would be a cool feature. He's busy tending kids, maybe out of the car, phone is in car, obviously his mind is racing, guilty or not. I miss calls all the time. LE calls back, leaves message. He doesn't return call right away. Maybe kids are sleeping in the car, phone is on silence, doesn't realize there's a message until 10 mins or so later when he picks up the phone and looks at it.

I just see that it doesn't matter what he did, or what his response was, many on here are going to paint that action as proof of guilt. I thought sleuths were open minded, free thinking people.

So if your wife didn't come home from a run and you've been checking with friends or friends have been checking with you - and you KNOW she doesn't have her own cell phone, you're out traipsing around with two kids in tow and you get an unknown call - the first thing you don't think of is it may be a hospital, it may be Nancy calling from a cell phone of a passer by who stopped to help her with an injury - or God forbid, she passed out somewhere after having alcohol and only 4 hours of sleep and no food before going out to run. You wouldn't answer the phone? Really? That's incredulous to me. And then to retrieve the message from a police officer and NOT return the call. And people wonder why the police focused on Bradley. Not to mention he goes back home, walks in his house - not calling her name because she might just have shown back up, not looking upstairs if she had come home... no, he just sits politely at the table and hangs his guilty head. I'm open minded - but there's a certain point where if it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck - it's a duck, man. :banghead: