State v Brad Cooper 4-8-2011

[SleuthSayer]

It was confirmed by several Nancy used a paper address book.
Her e-mails would be on the nc.rr.com server
Audio recordings? Bet she liked music too.
Image files? Bet she had her girls photos and a nice camera
Video clips? ditto
word documents? She didn't work + she had a computer for those
text meaasges? sure a few, but she preferred voice calls and those communications were traced.

Well darn. Where were you when the detective was wasting his time on writing up a search warrant and wasting some judge's time in considering and granting it? You could have saved the taxpayers some money. :waitasec:

 

[CrimeAddict]

I just made a new fancy thread for weekend sleuthing.. lets start something new and discuss theories, etc in there.. ??

 

[borndem]

I wonder if the jurors picked up on the floor cleaning, or if that just went right over their heads?

:liar: Yep, I caught it. Thx for bringing it up, JTF.

And he said he washed the dishes!!! Did anyone catch that?

 

[less0305]

This just shows how things are becoming jumbled together. The international calls, calls between voicemail systems, etc. had nothing to do with placing a call to himself or spoofing calls from his home number. They were completely different phone systems and the witness read all of the records down to the digits dialed during the call. There was nothing there related to this case at all.

Practice, honing his skills, trying out equipment, figuring out the best way to do what he wanted to do - all in an effort to create an alibi.

 

[sunshine05]

How is it that testimony from 50 some witnesses is not considered any evidence in a case? Or is it that only DNA, fingerprints, a gun or knife and a bloody crime scene is considered evidence?

Cooper threw away or somehow discarded his own shoes, two right shoes of Nancy's, items from the foyer, and he had some technical equipment in his possession that was not found either. On today's deposition Cooper said Nancy had a dozen or so jogging bras and knew exactly which one she was wearing when her body was found, though he said he didn't see her before leaving. I see red flags with all of this pointing straight to Cooper.

First, there has been a lot of talk about the sports bra but we have yet to hear the context of the conversation. What preceded and followed the statement about the color of the bra?

We have heard from 50+ witnesses and amazingly we only have gossip and innuendo to work with. None of the state's experts have provided any concrete evidence to support that the defendant is guilty of this crime. If you feel there is relevant evidence, please state it so we can hash it out because I'm just not seeing it.

I do think it's a good idea to discuss those lingering questions....like I brought up earlier with the blackberry data swipe.

 

[Just the Fax]

Well darn. Where were you when the detective was wasting his time on writing up a search warrant and wasting some judge's time in considering and granting it? You could have saved the taxpayers some money. :waitasec:

Naw.
Have you not seen the standard SW template for cell phones?
Guess you have since you pasted it.

Though requested by CCBI, the ME failed to perform a rape kit on Michelle Young.
Mistake ? Sure it was.
Will it matter at the end of the day? Hell no.

 

[sunshine05]

:liar: Yep, I caught it. Thx for bringing it up, JTF.

And he said he washed the dishes!!! Did anyone catch that?

So what?

 

[LyndyLoo]

Well darn. Where were you when the detective was wasting his time on writing up a search warrant and wasting some judge's time in considering and granting it? You could have saved the taxpayers some money. :waitasec:

Not trying to be obtuse....but much time was lost looking for a missing women..Brad was NOT considered a suspect but a resource of information along with friends to try and find this women who was missing..It wasnt until Nancy was found by a dog walking person July 14th 7PMish..and later ID'd that they knew Nancy was a VICTIM of foul play.....Given that scenerio..They couldnt even start to investigate until July 15th/late in the day..and as ALL Investigations, they always start ruling OUT the inner circle...Unfortunately for Brad he never got cleared of suspicion..and the more they dug into it..the more suspicions they had..and Brad's behaviors certainly didnt show appropriateness.. But understanding Brad's personality many could very well make excuses..PROBLEM..He did just too much prior to her death to exclude him..

I am sorry..but blaming her friends or people who cared about Nancy ( and happen to be the ones who called about Nancy's missing status) is just not koolaid I can swallow...SO FAR I have NOT heard any credible reasonable showings that anyone else (stranger or not) shown to be responsible..Course we have not heard Defense side yet:waitasec:

 

[Just the Fax]

So what?

I guess you believe Brad and Nancy was lying?

 

[sunshine05]

That I agree with. Hindsight is always 20/20. I have to believe that every single person right down to Det. Young himself wishes that he had never tried to look at that phone. He obviously doesn't know cell phones and had no business taking it upon himself to examine it. If he was directed to examine it, the person who gave him that direction should also be kicking himself in the pants. I also don't think that Nancy's cell phone is as significant as the defense would like to make everyone believe. MOO

Plus....he didn't have a search warrant to look at the contents at the time.

 

[SleuthSayer]

That I agree with. Hindsight is always 20/20. I have to believe that every single person right down to Det. Young himself wishes that he had never tried to look at that phone. He obviously doesn't know cell phones and had no business taking it upon himself to examine it. If he was directed to examine it, the person who gave him that direction should also be kicking himself in the pants. I also don't think that Nancy's cell phone is as significant as the defense would like to make everyone believe. MOO

I generally agree with you that it was most likely a bumbling mistake as opposed to something devious that the detective was doing. But, you have to admit, he couldn't have made it look more suspicious had he tried.

I didn't see the detective's testimony, but from what I read on here, he was otherwise very thorough and took meticulous notes of everything that was done, every interview he did, everything he found and where. But then when it came to the phone, he waited a week after talking to the AT&T rep and then just winged it from memory? And then when he got a warning that it was about to erase everything on the device, rather than stepping back and thinking "maybe I should get some help with this before I screw up", he just went ahead and erase it.

I also think it is at least a tiny bit hypocritical for those who are sure that Brad is guilty to be saying "Oh, it's unimporant. There wasn't anything on the phone, etc." What if Brad had done this? What if his story was, "well, I just went from memory" and "when it told me it was going to erase everything on the device, I didn't realize it really meant that". Everyone here would be saying that's absurd and just another of Brad's many lies, there is no way he didn't know that he was erasing everything.

So again, I think it was probably just a poor decision followed by a dumb mistake, but they handed the defense something to make a big stink of. You can't blame the defense for using it.

 

[less0305]

How is it that testimony from 50 some witnesses is not considered any evidence in a case? Or is it that only DNA, fingerprints, a gun or knife and a bloody crime scene is considered evidence?

Cooper threw away or somehow discarded his own shoes, two right shoes of Nancy's, items from the foyer, and he had some technical equipment in his possession that was not found either. On today's deposition Cooper said Nancy had a dozen or so jogging bras and knew exactly which one she was wearing when her body was found, though he said he didn't see her before leaving. I see red flags with all of this pointing straight to Cooper.

You're so right. It's really not complicated at all.

 

[borndem]

Brad not a sociopath? hmmm - I think that there are a LOT of his personality traits listed here and we could pretty easily map many instances of these to each bullet point.

Here is a list of ways to identify a sociopath. This list is from "Profile of a Sociopath". Is is a pretty good list of sociopathic indicators.

* Glibness/Superficial Charm
* Manipulative and Conning
* Grandiose Sense of Self
* Pathological Lying
* Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
* Shallow Emotions
* Incapacity for Love
* Need for Stimulation
* Callousness/Lack of Empathy
* Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
* Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
* Irresponsibility/Unreliability
* Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
* Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
* Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
* Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
* Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
* Authoritarian
* Secretive
* Paranoid
* Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
* Conventional appearance
* Goal of enslavement of their victim(s)
* Exercises despotic control over every aspect of the victim's life
* Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim's affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
* Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim
* Incapable of real human attachment to another
* Unable to feel remorse or guilt
* Narcissism, grandiosity (self-importance not based on achievements)
* May state readily that their goal is to rule the world



http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_do_you_know_if_someone_is_a_sociopath

Excellent -- I can only identify about 3 qualities that BC does show. How can anyone not see this? Thanks.

And to add just these two words,

Ipse dixit. (The thing speaks for itself.)

 

[sunshine05]

I guess you believe Brad and Nancy was lying?

What? I'm not following. I was saying "so what that he was cleaning the floors and washing dishes?"

When my kids were a little younger, I had to watch them constantly. It was convenient to clean in an area where I could still keep a constant eye on them. That is why the cleaning does not seem strange to me.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I generally agree with you that it was most likely a bumbling mistake as opposed to something devious that the detective was doing. But, you have to admit, he couldn't have made it look more suspicious had he tried.

I didn't see the detective's testimony, but from what I read on here, he was otherwise very thorough and took meticulous notes of everything that was done, every interview he did, everything he found and where. But then when it came to the phone, he waited a week after talking to the AT&T rep and then just winged it from memory? And then when he got a warning that it was about to erase everything on the device, rather than stepping back and thinking "maybe I should get some help with this before I screw up", he just went ahead and erase it.

I also think it is at least a tiny bit hypocritical for those who are sure that Brad is guilty to be saying "Oh, it's unimporant. There wasn't anything on the phone, etc." What if Brad had done this? What if his story was, "well, I just went from memory" and "when it told me it was going to erase everything on the device, I didn't realize it really meant that". Everyone here would be saying that's absurd and just another of Brad's many lies, there is no way he didn't know that he was erasing everything.

So again, I think it was probably just a poor decision followed by a dumb mistake, but they handed the defense something to make a big stink of. You can't blame the defense for using it.

BBM to address those two points.

The problem with this detective is that he is definitely not cell phone savvy. He told the rep that the phone was locked. To the tech on the other end that meant "the phone was locked" which deals with the sim card. The detective SHOULD have said that the phone was password protected. Those are two different functions. The rep gave him the instructions that he was asked for and the detective followed those instructions. He screwed up!

If Brad had wiped his phone or his defense team had wiped his phone, I would say pretty much the same thing. There isn't much you would get from that phone that you couldn't get from the records from the phone company.

 

[Just the Fax]

I generally agree with you that it was most likely a bumbling mistake as opposed to something devious that the detective was doing. But, you have to admit, he couldn't have made it look more suspicious had he tried.

I didn't see the detective's testimony, but from what I read on here, he was otherwise very thorough and took meticulous notes of everything that was done, every interview he did, everything he found and where. But then when it came to the phone, he waited a week after talking to the AT&T rep and then just winged it from memory? And then when he got a warning that it was about to erase everything on the device, rather than stepping back and thinking "maybe I should get some help with this before I screw up", he just went ahead and erase it.

I also think it is at least a tiny bit hypocritical for those who are sure that Brad is guilty to be saying "Oh, it's unimporant. There wasn't anything on the phone, etc." What if Brad had done this? What if his story was, "well, I just went from memory" and "when it told me it was going to erase everything on the device, I didn't realize it really meant that". Everyone here would be saying that's absurd and just another of Brad's many lies, there is no way he didn't know that he was erasing everything.

So again, I think it was probably just a poor decision followed by a dumb mistake, but they handed the defense something to make a big stink of. You can't blame the defense for using it.

It's done...erased....it was an accident
No point crying over spilled milk.
I am not willing to overlook a mountain of CE against Brad Cooper and give him a free pass because of a cell phone that had almost zero chance for offering any clues.

 

[SleuthinNC]

Practice, honing his skills, trying out equipment, figuring out the best way to do what he wanted to do - all in an effort to create an alibi.

That just doesn't make sense. None of the activities he was doing with the Cisco phones has anything to do with setting up a remote call or an automated call and it was done after the 6:40 am call was made.

Even checking his voicemail at 6:30 am doesn't seem unreasonable if he was working with people in Ireland. It was nearly noon there.

 

[Cheyenne130]

That just doesn't make sense. None of the activities he was doing with the Cisco phones has anything to do with setting up a remote call or an automated call and it was done after the 6:40 am call was made.

Even checking his voicemail at 6:30 am doesn't seem unreasonable if he was working with people in Ireland. It was nearly noon there.

Do you find it odd that he didn't mention the work that he did that morning in any of the timelines given?

 

[RaleighNC]

That just doesn't make sense. None of the activities he was doing with the Cisco phones has anything to do with setting up a remote call or an automated call and it was done after the 6:40 am call was made.

Even checking his voicemail at 6:30 am doesn't seem unreasonable if he was working with people in Ireland. It was nearly noon there.

But it would have been noon on SATURDAY and my experience is that the Europeans are less likely than the Americans to be working on the weekend. Also - we have no data from Brad that he was working on anything special that Saturday AM. Certainly nothing that would require 4 calls to check voicemail within 16 minutes.

 

[Maja]

How many of you have ever given your two year old daughter a bottle of WARM water and had success with it satisfying her?