State v Bradley Cooper 4-28-2011

[gracielee]

That is likely, but the children are US citizens.

Neither of their parents are U.S. citizens, nor their guardians, nor their grandparents on both sides. And they are also Canadian citizens. Everyone else involved in this is Canadian. My money is on the Canadian Judicial System taking over.

 

[ncsu95]

Correct. A timestamp of 1/1/70 means that the timestamp field is 0. (Again, which in my world would be 'invalid'.)

Thanks. What column are they associated with? I see 4 columns but can't read the header.

 

[gracielee]

Brad loves Katie, so I am hoping if/when he is found NG that he will in no way want to know if he isn't her bio father. It won't erase the time he spent with her, loved her, played with her, feed her, etc. I just wish he was allowed to stand up in court and say "leave my kids out of this" but I not sure if he would be held in contempt or some other unfavorable charge.

His lawyers answer to him. If he wanted the children 'left out of it', it would be done. The fact that he hasn't done so speaks volumes IMO. It has been Kurtz & Ko that have brought this issue up.

 

[gracielee]

I had my ears pierced when I was in the 7th grade....a long time ago. Last year I was really quite sick and rarely left home and didn't wear any jewelry at all. My holes grew up. I cannot get a pair of earrings in either ear, hurts badly when I try. Received a gorgeous pair of 1.50 kt diamond studs (total) for my anniversary last year and have never worn them.

Something like that happened to me some years ago. I went ahead and poked those holes open again. Ouch. But I was determined, and now I keep earrings in. Don't want to have to do that again, no way. :banghead:

 

[Tink56]

I don't think NCs cycle really matters here. The real question is if KC was born on or near her due date. If she was, then the likely conception was on or near 10/31/2005.

Considering that the mother had a chronic condition, I am not confident in stating a particular date as the on or near date of conception. It's one of those things on which I'm willing to agree to disagree and move on.

 

[90210zipRDU]

We need a photography forensic analyst to come here and break down the pixels for us. That way they can tell us that pixel 999845, 999846, 999764 and 984634 are positive RGB, therefore must be the necklace.

Since she's looking in a different direction in each of the photos, I used the shoulders as a reference point. I don't see a necklace where the circle is, or anywhere else.

The necklace in the picture on the left hangs just below her neck where it goes up from her chest. The spot someone has circled in the harris teeter video that they THINK is the diamond is a good 4 inches lower than that spot on her neck, I mean that spot is s down on part of her BREAST for goodness sake. Look I think the guy did it but she is NOT wearing a necklace to Harris Teeter. Move on.

 

[cassius]

Uh huh, tell that to the Canadians.

I guess you're right then. I'll leave it alone.

 

[ncsu95]

Thanks. What column are they associated with? I see 4 columns but can't read the header.

still not sure what the columns represent. But since the first column has 2012 timestamps, I'm wondering if the second is the Unix time associated with determining the experiation time (or whatever that first column is).

 

[gracielee]

I don't think NCs cycle really matters here. The real question is if KC was born on or near her due date. If she was, then the likely conception was on or near 10/31/2005.

You are the father of two young daughters, would you want their parentage discussed on an online group? this can and will be googled someday. It is of no consequence and no one's business IMO. I don't think anyone here believes anyone but brad or random stranger is the perpetrator, so can we please leave innocent children out of this.

 

[otto]

It won't be immediate and it really shouldn't. Looking at the children's best interests, there needs to be a phased in reconciliation. Brad will need to adjust to being free and the children spent some formative years not knowing him. They will need a lot of counseling and time to re-establish their relationship. Also, the Rentzes still have a claim to at least visitation with the children, and I think that should be granted, assuming they were good care givers and did not action in violation of the court order in regards to discussions about BC or NC. I trust the Rentzes handled this appropriately, I'm more skeptical about KM.

Now, if BC were to move back to Canada, then jurisdiction should rightfully so be transferred, as there would no longer be any parties to the action in North Carolina. But so long as BC stays in North Carolina, jurisdiction stays in NC. And I also believe that Canada is a signatory the Hague Convention, so should they refuse to cooperate with North Carolina courts, BC would have remedies available through their international child abduction compacts.

I don't know how Canadian courts deal with custody, so I couldn't even begin to advise BC on the best forum to deal with this. It's apparent the Judge in the custody matter didn't like BC to begin with and I'm not sure how she'd react with egg on her face. She will be the judge in any future proceedings, assuming she's still on the bench, although I'd imagine a motion to recuse would be filed.

Canadian law would most likely look at what is in the best interests of the children. The first hurdle would be the fact that they lived with Nancy's sister for 3 years, and the question would be whether there is anything wrong with that environment. If it is a good environment, there would probably be some hesitation in changing the custody. I would expect something along the lines of very generous visitation for a period of time, and once Brad was established, the question of custody transfer would be possible, but not a sure thing. However, it would most likely mean that Brad would have to live in Ottawa. In NC, wouldn't the order most likely be reversed with a 3-6 month transition period?

 

[CentralAlberta]

The necklace in the picture on the left hangs just below her neck where it goes up from her chest. The spot someone has circled in the harris teeter video that they THINK is the diamond is a good 4 inches lower than that spot on her neck, I mean that spot is s down on part of her BREAST for goodness sake. Look I think the guy did it but she is NOT wearing a necklace to Harris Teeter. Move on.

First off, I want to thank all you regular posters and watchers/listeners to the court videos. I have had my eyes opened to many things from all the BDI supporters and the SODDI supporters. I really do not appreciate the occasional posters who come on and rip apart and call anyone involved in this case names. Also, this is not the place to argue about the little girl's father especially when there is a chance that someday she may be interested in all the going ons of this case and read these posts. I ask you to ask yourself how you would feel if she were your daughter/granddaughter. Are these the things you would want her to read about herself??

THe HT picture is larger than the other picture. As a result the necklace will be lower than on the other picture. If you look at it in reference to the tops of NC's armpits, it lines up exactly where it should be. I looked at these pictures on my big TV (Sony Bravia XBR) and the necklace is there.

Back to lurking.

 

[otto]

Uh huh, tell that to the Canadians.

I think that Canadian law also respects that a custody case has to be pursued in the jurisdiction where the action was initiated. I don't think that Canadian law would hijack a custody case.

 

[johnfear]

Was there any explanation provided about what the nature of the invalidity of the timestamps was? I noticed something mildly interesting on one of my laptops. I checked my TIF and there are a number of files with 1/1/1970 dates, which I would consider to be invalid. Interestingly, all of those come from Google. See attached.

Operating system mismatch can cause this. Usually corrects itself after being updated.

 

[ncsu95]

First off, I want to thank all you regular posters and watchers/listeners to the court videos. I have had my eyes opened to many things from all the BDI supporters and the SODDI supporters. I really do not appreciate the occasional posters who come on and rip apart and call anyone involved in this case names. Also, this is not the place to argue about the little girl's father especially when there is a chance that someday she may be interested in all the going ons of this case and read these posts. I ask you to ask yourself how you would feel if she were your daughter/granddaughter. Are these the things you would want her to read about herself??

THe HT picture is larger than the other picture. As a result the necklace will be lower than on the other picture. If you look at it in reference to the tops of NC's armpits, it lines up exactly where it should be. I looked at these pictures on my big TV (Sony Bravia XBR) and the necklace is there.

Back to lurking.

So it will be okay for them to read all the posts about how much they hated each other, or how he was a horrible dad that didn't care about them...only about money....or all the theories about how he murdered their mom. All that will be okay for them. But if they read a post about their mom having sex with another man around the time she was conceived will just be too much for her? Sorry, I simply don't understand the argument that we shouldn't discuss it because they might read these posts one day. There are FAR worse things they will read in here about their parents than the question of paternity. And again, it's part of the trial. They won't have to read these posts....they will probably read the details of the trial. They will see the testimony of JP and the questions about paternity there. If you don't want to participate in that conversation, you certainly don't have to. I respect your right not to. But please don't come in here with "they might read this one day" as a reason to not discuss valid trial testimony.

Now the bashing of the Rentz family earlier (someone calling them evil) should absolutely not be allowed. It was uncalled for and way out of bounds and I certainly hope we don't see any more of that.

 

[gracielee]

I think that Canadian law also respects that a custody case has to be pursued in the jurisdiction where the action was initiated. I don't think that Canadian law would hijack a custody case.

I would think that would apply when one of the parents is from a different country. when all involved are Canadian citizens, I doubt it very much.

 

[Salem]

The children are not up for discussion! They may not be named, there are to be NO photos posted of them and any parentage issues are to be left in the court room.

TIA,

Salem

 

[Lori59]

I just looked at the two pictures of the necklace on Nancy. My thoughts are that the picture on the left has way better lighting, yet the chain of the necklace is still vague on certain areas....as far as the picture on the right, Nancy appears to be bending over..making the necklace hang lower. I think she is wearing a necklace in both pictures. JMO

 

[WolfpackWoman]

Regarding the Invalid Timestamp issue, Kurtz and Masucci stated yesterday, while showing the graphs, that no files with a creation date before June 23 had invalid timestamps. They made a point to say that included all of the system files that reflected 2001 or 1970 dates for instance. Then there were no invalid timestamps until that week in July that Nancy went missing. The invalid timestamps were ones that literally said "invalid" or had crazy in the future dates like 2897, etc.

 

[SleuthinNC]

So we have quacked the case of the missing ducks but what is the significance of the sticks?

We know there was a broken hyoid bone and a line on the neck but not a distinct ligature mark. Could a stick or something similar have been used to commit the crime?

 

[cassius]

I would think that would apply when one of the parents is from a different country. when all involved are Canadian citizens, I doubt it very much.

Sometimes you just can't go off of feelings, you actually have to look at the laws as well as, in this case, treaties between two nations.