State v Bradley Cooper 3-21-2011

[otto]

So far there is zero evidence of a sexual assault. That makes it even worse for the husband that has all the means, motive and opportunity.

The theory that Brad took her jewelry doesn't sound like much either. If Brad supposedly took the necklace because it's worth something, then why not the earrings? Either the earrings weren't worth much, or Brad didn't take her jewelry.

 

[otto]

Except...he didn't.

Right. No one took the earrings. If they were valuable, and Brad was taking Nancy's diamonds after murdering her, why did he leave the earrings? I think the earrings are meaningless. They are probably not worth much. If they're worth a lot, then it clears Brad in terms of taking her diamonds.

 

[SleuthyGal]

The theory that Brad took her jewelry doesn't sound like much either. If Brad supposedly took the necklace because it's worth something, then why not the earrings? Either the earrings weren't worth much, or Brad didn't take her jewelry.

How do we know he didn't TRY? Most diamond earrings have screw backs on them so that the earring doesn't randomly fall off. It takes effort to get screw back earrings off. He may have tried to get one off, found he couldn't, realized he didn't have time, and decided to forget about it. Note that one earring was loose enough that the CCBI agent was concerned it would fall off. Sounds like someone tried to take it off but then gave up.

 

[Just the Fax]

I'm still on the fence with this case. I've tried to view it without the Nancy Divorce Friends/Family/WRAL press speculation, he this and that and the other.....

The sports bra found rolled under leads me to believe she put it on, someone else tried to put it on. I wear many of these contraptions. They are tight, snugly etc. Putting them on rolls one way, pulling them off rolls the other

The other earring being found/had is significant to me. It leads me to believe this was not a random crime. I know CPD announced it wasn't, yet, hearing they have both of her earrings changes my perspective about a random/perp/ stalker immensely.

This poor woman was caught off guard, in a place she felt safe. Either in her home or somewhere else.

So the sports bra was rolled under per CCBI. Does that suggest someone else likely dressed her in the bra? I guess I see if it was actually pushed up over her breasts, it would naturally roll in the opposite fashion.
If there is anything to this, they need to provide a demonstration or elaborate.

 

[jmflu]

The theory that Brad took her jewelry doesn't sound like much either. If Brad supposedly took the necklace because it's worth something, then why not the earrings? Either the earrings weren't worth much, or Brad didn't take her jewelry.

Or he tool the necklace because he spent *his* money on it, not the earrings.

Or it got in the way of his hands.

 

[Cheyenne130]

The theory that Brad took her jewelry doesn't sound like much either. If Brad supposedly took the necklace because it's worth something, then why not the earrings? Either the earrings weren't worth much, or Brad didn't take her jewelry.

I do not believe he took the necklace because it is worth something. My guess is that the chain broke. I don't know if that is evidence because he may have swapped the chain with something else that wasn't broken. That's a guess on my part. I don't see him taking the time to take the necklace off. There would be no point unless it was personal because of the significance of the "gift". Items we will never know. If the chain on the necklace was determined to be broken it would be significant. If not, it's a wash.

 

[SleuthyGal]

So the sports bra was rolled under per CCBI. Does that suggest someone else likely dressed her in the bra? I guess I see if it was actually pushed up over her breasts, it would naturally roll in the opposite fashion.
If there is anything to this, they need to provide a demonstration or elaborate.

Oh I think it most certainly does suggest such a thing. If someone attacked her (after she had put the sports bra on correctly), the sports bra would roll up to get in the position in which it was found. It was being put ON her, hence the rolling in the opposite direction (i.e. rolled under). Someone dressed Nancy in that sports bra and was unable to get the thing on her properly (IMHO).

 

[otto]

How do we know he didn't TRY? Most diamond earrings have screw backs on them so that the earring doesn't randomly fall off. It takes effort to get screw back earrings off. He may have tried to get one off, found he couldn't, realized he didn't have time, and decided to forget about it. Note that one earring was loose enough that the CCBI agent was concerned it would fall off. Sounds like someone tried to take it off but then gave up.

One earring was falling off at the scene and it was removed to keep it from getting lost. I would bet that a guy with a couple of university degrees could figure out how to remove earrings without too much trouble. I'm not prepared to believe that Brad took the necklace but left earrings because he couldn't figure out how they worked or didn't have time. Either he wanted the diamonds or didn't.

 

[Just the Fax]

Oh I think it most certainly does suggest such a thing. If someone attacked her (after she had put the sports bra on correctly), the sports bra would roll up to get in the position in which it was found. It was being put ON her, hence the rolling in the opposite direction (i.e. rolled under). Someone dressed Nancy in that sports bra and was unable to get the thing on her properly (IMHO).

Cummings needs to bring in a manikin and demonstrate that to the jury.
Seeing is believing.

 

[otto]

I do not believe he took the necklace because it is worth something. My guess is that the chain broke. I don't know if that is evidence because he may have swapped the chain with something else that wasn't broken. That's a guess on my part. I don't see him taking the time to take the necklace off. There would be no point unless it was personal because of the significance of the "gift". Items we will never know. If the chain on the necklace was determined to be broken it would be significant. If not, it's a wash.

We certainly haven't heard that the chain was broken. If Brad was stealing it from Nancy, why did he leave it in such an obvious spot. Surely he knew that he would be a suspect. I don't think the earrings mean anything, and I don't think we will ever know if Nancy always wore the necklace, sometimes wore it, or wore it except when running.

 

[Cheyenne130]

We certainly haven't heard that the chain was broken. If Brad was stealing it from Nancy, why did he leave it in such an obvious spot. Surely he knew that he would be a suspect. I don't think the earrings mean anything, and I don't think we will ever know if Nancy always wore the necklace, sometimes wore it, or wore it except when running.

My guess is that the necklace was broken during the struggle/strangulation. I don't think it was intentional to remove the necklace and leave the earrings. It was a result of the activity that resulted in the murder.

ETA: My premise is based on the fact that the necklace was found in a drawer. A broken chain could easily be swapped out with an unbroken chain in the 48 hours before the necklace was discoverd/turned over to the police.

 

[jmflu]

One earring was falling off at the scene and it was removed to keep it from getting lost. I would bet that a guy with a couple of university degrees could figure out how to remove earrings without too much trouble. I'm not prepared to believe that Brad took the necklace but left earrings because he couldn't figure out how they worked or didn't have time. Either he wanted the diamonds or didn't.

Any theories as to why her necklace was in his drawer?

 

[ncsu95]

I agree and I almost added that.

"Sexual assault, interrupted" doesn't make sense because I don't think an attacker would take off her shoes and socks before her bra. ( And if interrupted, take the shoes and socks with? ?)

In that same manner, why wouldn't BC fully dress her in running clothes?

 

[Cheyenne130]

In that same manner, why wouldn't BC fully dress her in running clothes?

Too much time. After fighting the sports bra on her, I'm sure that would have been evident.

 

[jmflu]

I just read today's WRAL article. They said Mrs. Rentz saw Brad at a church vigil for the first time after the murder. I didn't realize he had attended any vigils.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I just read today's WRAL article. They said Mrs. Rentz saw Brad at a church vigil for the first time after the murder. I didn't realize he had attended any vigils.

I'm not positive (NUMEROUS distractions today!) but I believe that it was a gathering to search but they found out that a body believed to be Nancy was found and it changed to an impromptu memorial. Brad showed up and she approached him and was immediately concerned based on his reaction to her. That's what I got in the midst of trying to listen.

 

[Lori59]

Catching up on the thread...defense wouldn't like me on the jury. All the post, interesting, yet I am surprised, as the things that stayed with me from the testimony was the video of the crime scene and the mother's heartbreaking testimony. She was so credible to me....her gut feelings mixed with her often rambling memories of Nancy. As I go to sleep tonight...I think of the sad state Nancy was in, not working with young children, a husband that cheated in their marriage, controlled her income....she must have felt that she was trapped in an angry divorce. Recipe for murder.

 

[otto]

Any theories as to why her necklace was in his drawer?

None ... except that married couples, especially passive aggressive ones, do things that make no sense to outsiders. The neighborhood women believed they understood Nancy's marriage, but I doubt they did. Nancy and Brad were up and down. One day they're agreeing that Nancy should borrow money to pay a lawyer because they're selling the house, the next day they're getting Nancy a green card and staying in the house. Did Nancy habitually leave her necklace in the desk because after 10 years of marriage that's where she always left it when she went for a run, or was that the first time it was there? Who knows.

 

[otto]

I just read today's WRAL article. They said Mrs. Rentz saw Brad at a church vigil for the first time after the murder. I didn't realize he had attended any vigils.

That's certainly what everyone has said until now.

 

[jilly]

For Brad, its all about Brad, always has been aparently. He had no sympathy for Mrs. Rentz, his wife, the fact the children no longer have a mother. One problem down...cya time. Disgusting.

I know.

No sympathy, no empathy and one self-centered s,o.b. Some have said that he was very smart but I say book smart only. He's slipped up here somewhere.
If he does get off, there's no doubt in my mind he will try and get his children back for one reason. To rip them away from Nancy's family because from what I've read, he's also vindictive and selfish. He will give no consideration to the fact that they're better off with Nancy's sister and their grandparents.