State v Bradley Cooper 04/11/11

[SleuthinNC]

Well, JTF, you may be right on not coming up by state, but how do you know it never happened, out of curiosity? BTW, I never said it happened, I am merely trying to have a nice discussion about what was in the writ.

I believe the interview did happen or the response to the writ would have been more along the lines of "No interview took place" rather than, you will never know unless we decide to tell you.

 

[Just the Fax]

Dream?

 

[SleuthinNC]

The child telling CM that she saw her mother wearing black shorts and a white t-shirt that morning may be true. The problem is that according to the timeline given by Brad, the oldest child B did not wake up until 8:30. Also according to Brad, Nancy dressed downstairs so she wasn't seen in her running clothes by anyone in the house. So now you are left with a number of possibilities as to how B got it in her head that she saw her mother that morning but according to everthing Brad said, it didn't happen.

BC also said NC yelled upstairs for a T-Shirt, child could have been at top of stairs and seen NC, then child goes back to bed since early morning runs by mom was business as usual.

 

[cody100]

So now B was downstairs and saw what her mom was wearing before 7AM? Reckon she was sleepwalking :waitasec:

I have no idea whether B was even awake, JTF. Neither do you. However, in a prior discussion we thought it was K who said that. Also the question was how she saw her mom if she were upstairs. I simply pointed out a possibility.

 

[cityslick]

The child telling CM that she saw her mother wearing black shorts and a white t-shirt that morning may be true. The problem is that according to the timeline given by Brad, the oldest child B did not wake up until 8:30. Also according to Brad, Nancy dressed downstairs so she wasn't seen in her running clothes by anyone in the house. So now you are left with a number of possibilities as to how B got it in her head that she saw her mother that morning but according to everthing Brad said, it didn't happen.

I agree with you for the most part, the only thing that leaves the door slightly open is he doesn't know if the child woke up briefly during the time he was out at HT. Sure it's highly unlikely, but there is was a gap in time where he was unaware what was going on in the house.

 

[CyberPro]

I suppose the discussions should continue on this thread until court starts, but here is the one for the 12th.

State v. Bradley Cooper 4-12-2011 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

 

[less0305]

The media ran a story when this first came about, in '09 I think and I'm positive it listed a 10:30PM call that he would have received that night. I thought this would be the "smoking gun" and really about the only thing he lied about in his depo. (aside from we now know, his relationship w/the French girl). So is it true, there was no 10:30PM call? What are we supposed to believe set him into a rage that night? He had known about the separation agreement since April, right?

Also, what you're describing about how civil he was in his emails goes along with what I brought up the other day, how he never trashed her to anyone. He never said a negative thing about her to anyone. (as far as we have seen). This just does not seem like someone who would commit murder.

And why does it have to be that something set him into a rage. I believe the murder was pre-planned, and he lie in wait for Nancy to come home. Rage? Maybe not. I think he's just cold blooded with no emotions and could just choke the life out of her and turn around and call his work VM like it was just another day at the office. But if you insist on there having to be something that set him into rage - perhaps he started an argument with Nan when she got home and she smacked the doo-doo out of him - possibly rage then?

 

[Cheyenne130]

BC also said NC yelled upstairs for a T-Shirt, child could have been at top of stairs and seen NC, then child goes back to bed since early morning runs by mom was business as usual.

It is more likely based on all the information given that the oldest child never saw her and either pulled out a memory from another day, dreamt it or had the suggestion given to her. Something like, "Remember when you saw mommy this morning in her black shorts and white shirt getting ready to go for a run?"

 

[cityslick]

I think what gets confusing on this forum sometimes is some people post speculation as fact and then that get's argued over and over. Because there is no lock down evidence (so far) that proves something definitely did or did not happen, most of what we can go on is speculation.

Just a friendly morning service reminder.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I agree with you for the most part, the only thing that leaves the door slightly open is he doesn't know if the child woke up briefly during the time he was out at HT. Sure it's highly unlikely, but there is was a gap in time where he was unaware what was going on in the house.

That would be a possibility but according to Brad, Nancy was still in the sleeping shirt when he returned from the store the second time. It's also not anything that I have ever experienced, having a four year old get up on any morning and go back to bed unless the child was VERY sick.

 

[cody100]

If it happened, Brad lied cause he said she was in bed asleep.

But B may have awakened with all of the commotion, walked out, saw her mom and went back to bed. BC may not have known that she woke up since he was probably busy working with K and on the computer. Kids do get up and down, particularly at that age. I am not saying it happened that way, but who knows. My opinion is she told that to the neighbor. Where she got that idea, I don't know.

 

[cityslick]

That would be a possibility but according to Brad, Nancy was still in the sleeping shirt when he returned from the store the second time. It's also not anything that I have ever experienced, having a four year old get up on any morning and go back to bed unless the child was VERY sick.

When I say wake up, I don't mean actually get out of bed. It's possible that NC went into the room to check on her, she opened her eyes briefly, then went back to bed. Again, I put the caveat highly unlikely because I don't think this happened either, but if it did it's not something that BC would know about.

I bring this scenario up because I have seen it before with my child (who is around the same age as the oldest child).

 

[sunshine05]

The child telling CM that she saw her mother wearing black shorts and a white t-shirt that morning may be true. The problem is that according to the timeline given by Brad, the oldest child B did not wake up until 8:30. Also according to Brad, Nancy dressed downstairs so she wasn't seen in her running clothes by anyone in the house. So now you are left with a number of possibilities as to how B got it in her head that she saw her mother that morning but according to everthing Brad said, it didn't happen.

She could have ran upstairs to brush her teeth and the kid saw her.

 

[cody100]

I think what gets confusing on this forum sometimes is some people post speculation as fact and then that get's argued over and over. Because there is no lock down evidence (so far) that proves something definitely did or did not happen, most of what we can go on is speculation.

Just a friendly morning service reminder.

Well, I emphasized in my first post that this was not being offered as fact but as information seen in the writ and other places. I personally thought it was clear that this was not a proven fact, like so much of this case.

 

[cody100]

She could have ran upstairs to brush her teeth and the kid saw her.

Morning sunshine. Good thought. There are a number of possibilities, none proven of course as fact.

 

[Tipstaff]

This mornings N & O (local paper) states that there is receipts on the computer for a Sony laptop computer that has never been recovered/located in the Cooper home.
Do we know this already?

 

[sunshine05]

But B may have awakened with all of the commotion, walked out, saw her mom and went back to bed. BC may not have known that she woke up since he was probably busy working with K and on the computer. Kids do get up and down, particularly at that age. I am not saying it happened that way, but who knows. My opinion is she told that to the neighbor. Where she got that idea, I don't know.

And the neighbor wrote a very negative affidavit about BC in the custody case so it's not as if she would have been trying to clear him.

I just think that if the child told anyone that, anything that could have been important in this case, it should have been pursued. They could have had a psychologist question the child. It should have happened right away too while it was fresh in her mind.

 

[lib's mom]

She could have ran upstairs to brush her teeth and the kid saw her.

But according to Brad, Nancy put on her running clothes downstairs and left. She never came upstairs in her running clothes.

 

[ncsu95]

:silenced: .Ah-hah! ... I'm tellin on ya, cody, s'gainst the law!

Seriously: do you honestly, in your heart of hearts, believe that all of BC's multi-tasking, from the night before (emails) and then the wee hours on the morning NC goes missing, was genuine, innocent and feasible?

One incident, perhaps (IMO) may be unusually acceptable. But not all of that driving around, phone activity, kids unsettled, Nancy asking for more stuff - plus facing all the laundry when he was going to play tennis?

Then later is discovered lying about when he went to sleep - but was actually reading NC's forwarded emails (unbeknown to her).

All looks perfectly acceptable? Just askin

I'm not sure he lied about when he went to bed. It was posted from someone that went to court yesterday that the emails were accessed with the blackjack phone and not a home computer. So he very well could have been in bed with his 2 daughters and used his phone to check the emails.

And they were both doing laundry that morning...and laundry isn't a continuous process. It's not like he couldn't put a load in the dryer and then go play tennis.

 

[cityslick]

But according to Brad, Nancy put on her running clothes downstairs and left. She never came upstairs in her running clothes.

Is it being claimed that she saw her in a white shirt and black shorts? Is it out of the realm of impossibility that she was wearing what she wore to bed (one of his white shirts and black shorts?)