Search results

the person that post was intended for does.

Please, explain then since you were apparently there and know more than I.

Not according to her family...they saved it in their own email as BRAD AND NANCY COOPER not Nancy or Nanner or even Nan. as for the eye witness accounts...it was two different people talking about two different accounts and events and neither one said that Brad said or did anything abusive...

^^^^thats why they NORMALLY dont allow here-say but for SOME reason this judge decided to allow it.

^^he worked as a VOIP expert...what are you trying to say? they already said that he didnt have ANYTHING on the evidence list that could be used to automate a call.

all of that is here-say about her getting in fights with him and what not.

She could have logged on at a friends if she stopped by and was hiding there...you dont have to be at your house to see email you know? he could have been emailing in case she ran away...in case he thought she may check it. she could have been out and about with one of her flings she obviously...

no where in the autopsy report does he ever say that. and yea...the pros has been using the 'throw it on the wall and see if it sticks' approach. not until AFTER the defense cross examined them to tell the whole story.

I dont care if the girl was asleep or not as stated by Brad. IF THE DAUGHTER SAID TO A NEIGHBOR THAT SHE SAW HER MOM WHY WASNT SHE INTERVIEWED? US v. Bagley and if she was interviewed WHERE is the transcript of that? did the pros with hold it? brady v. maryland dont overlook the...

coroner said the body was too decomposed to tell if any sexual assault had occurred. <modsnip> :)

i dont trust @wral tweeting. they have tweeted the wrong thing on more than one occasion or left out parts of the defenses cross and what not. they are NOT the tweet to read if you want an unbiased explanation of the court proceedings.

The fact that the 4 year old MADE comments is admissable. They(the pros) wont even acknowledge that an interview occured...and if it didnt occur, WHY didnt CPD interview her after their neighbor told them the daugther commented on seeing her mother that morning she disappeared. Either they...

not really... especially when the information that is included is as relevant as in this case. this judge is a terrible terrible one, i foresee a mistrial or dismissal honestly.

The prosection has deliberately kept information from the defense. brady v. maryland states full disclosure of ALL files should be available. There was an interview with Brad's daughter that the defense has yet to see any records of along with numerous other things. they are in direct...

brady v. maryland

why is everyone assuming it is a male?

anything that showed he had no idea...maybe he thought she had taken off for Canada as she threatened or that he thought she may check her email at a friends and had ANYTHING in there that showed he cared or was trying to do something to find his missing wife. it just seems odd that the pros...

well if its in the pros favor then why did they leave it out? may have actually been helpful to Brad and they just decided to leave it out...im sure it may come out in defenses cross tomorrow. and thats what i guessed...sorry.

so he didnt KNOW if they had sex or even kissed...here-say? basically she shows up with a guy that isnt her husband at her sisters wedding and everything is just meant to be peachy? she heard it from others...not Brad. she exaggerated it they said iirc

They never extracted DNA they said.