2011.05.04 Verdict Watch

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I feel horrible for the women in this forum that have experienced abuse. Your stories are gut wrenching. But I honestly don't see how you relate Nancy's experience prior to July 12th to what you experienced. I would like to leave the events of July 12th out of this because there are people that don't believe he killed her. But prior to July 12th, the only things I see from him that he controlled were finances and the ability for her to take their kids and leave the country. The finances are a bit of a different story since she didn't have a green card and couldn't work. I get that. She didn't have her own money. But there were none of the other signs of abuse that you always hear about. He didn't isolate her from her friends. He didn't isolate her from her family. He didn't hit her. He didn't berate her and destroy her self esteem (at least not that I am aware of). He put her on an allowance (a fairly generous one) and took that passports (actually only wanted to take one). I honestly do not see how that relates to the experiences you ladies have shared on here. Honestly, she relied on her parents for lots of things, including money. If he was truly abusive, could she not have left, with the kids, and had her parents support her until it got worked out? Could she have gone to court to let the court decide if she was allowed to go back to Canada with the kids? They probably would have ruled that she had to since she wasn't a US Citizen and didn't have a green card. There were avenues she could have taken and she didn't. But I simply don't see how it adds up to abuse. Maybe that's because I'm a guy and just don't "get it".
 
What is wrong with me?!?! I have 100 things to do today, yet I am sitting here clicking back and forth between WS"s and ABC. I think I need an intervention!!!!!!!

If you turn up your speakers you will hear if there is action in the courtroom. ABC turns on automatically
 
What is wrong with me?!?! I have 100 things to do today, yet I am sitting here clicking back and forth between WS"s and ABC. I think I need an intervention!!!!!!!

I feel exactly the same!!!! Today was to be my day to get back to my life and I still can't!!!!!!
 
I would have not been a good juror either due to personal experience. It was very difficult for me to watch and pay attention to the documents/trial/arguments and still coming away thinking BC was more than likely culpable but was not proven 100%.

I could go into other more personal things but suffice it to say, divorce does terrible things to people when there is money involved. You really are never divorcing that person you married. Regardless of who initiates the divorce or the why of how it came about, amicable divorces are rare and few between.
12 years later, I can honestly look back and see behaviors on both sides of the fence and only hold myself accountable for some of the acrimony. So, I agree with you, when one is trying to regain control of their life back, defending yourself is very very difficult. The process is debilitating on your person and body, your personality. You do not come out the other side the same. If you add a person in the mix who is vengeful, you open the door to things you never could imagine would happen to you.

Kelly


I would agree 100% if kids are involved. You'll always be co-parents.
 
All I could think when the the jury was complaining that they wanted their lives back was...

"...Nancy would like her life back too, but that will never happen...."
 
All I could think when the the jury was complaining that they wanted their lives back was...

"...Nancy would like her life back too, but that will never happen...."

i so agree madeleine............i was disgusted by that complaint............

i have been a juror and i have been involved in too many trials to count so i know it can be frustrating

but, i did not appreciate their notes............and i bet nancy or brad's family didn't either:maddening:
 
I could not have sat on this jury. I lived with a woman for a very long time who was much older and who chose to take a myriad of things from her life and make me the focus on "fixing" those things. (Unmet childhood needs, terrible abuse by a relative, serious drug abuse, a child put up for adoption, abuse by a previous spouse) I had no idea of them, even three years into our relationship. (Not comparing NC here or BC for that matter)

I lived with things on a daily basis that no person should live with (man or woman) and it heavily affected my self image. I am a very strange personality overall and this all came at a time when that personality was developing (think 23-32 age range and how much people become who they are from what they were long-term).

At the end of it, she flipped it and called me controlling and abusive for wanting to take back control of my portion of my life. (A given that relationships have shared overlaps) It was very hard to even want to defend myself at that point and she knew it and even used that to her benefit/advantage. As you can see, it affects my view of how things roll out in the court system.

Also, there is a case in Hickory right now that I get tears in my eyes and a lump in my throat every time I see photos of the victim because she looks like my young daughter. I could not be a juror there either, BUT, I will bring the pitchforks.

BBM

This is one of the sneakiest and most difficult problems with domestic abuse issues. Whether the abuser is male or female, the dynamic is nearly always the same - the abuser will accuse his or her partner of the very abuse that they themselves are perpetrating. IMO, the best way to get to the truth of the matter is to look for red flags. Domestic abuse is about control. When a person is losing control of the situation is when their behavior is at its worst. For example, they might make that accusation as discussed above. Best way to figure out the truth of who is and who is not abusive? Who wants out versus who is trying to keep control of the situation and the other person.

This is the dynamic I see at work in the BC/NC situation. I've heard all sorts of people "out there" say that NC was abusive to BC. Yelling at him, spending his money. The huge tell-tale sign, however, is that NC is the one who wanted out. She didn't want control of BC, she wanted out. BC is the individual with the control issues, and he cleverly called them "working on the marriage" and has positioned himself to look like a martyr. Its a classic abuser mentality and strategy.
 
I feel horrible for the women in this forum that have experienced abuse. Your stories are gut wrenching. But I honestly don't see how you relate Nancy's experience prior to July 12th to what you experienced. I would like to leave the events of July 12th out of this because there are people that don't believe he killed her. But prior to July 12th, the only things I see from him that he controlled were finances and the ability for her to take their kids and leave the country. The finances are a bit of a different story since she didn't have a green card and couldn't work. I get that. She didn't have her own money. But there were none of the other signs of abuse that you always hear about. He didn't isolate her from her friends. He didn't isolate her from her family. He didn't hit her. He didn't berate her and destroy her self esteem (at least not that I am aware of). He put her on an allowance (a fairly generous one) and took that passports (actually only wanted to take one). I honestly do not see how that relates to the experiences you ladies have shared on here. Honestly, she relied on her parents for lots of things, including money. If he was truly abusive, could she not have left, with the kids, and had her parents support her until it got worked out? Could she have gone to court to let the court decide if she was allowed to go back to Canada with the kids? They probably would have ruled that she had to since she wasn't a US Citizen and didn't have a green card. There were avenues she could have taken and she didn't. But I simply don't see how it adds up to abuse. Maybe that's because I'm a guy and just don't "get it".

FWIW what goes on physchologically behind closed doors, often makes a difference. I agree that there were probably other avenues for everyone involved, or anyone involved in divorce/custody issues. For most mothers, and I can only speak to what I know or discussed with friends, mothers can not handle any thought of losing, living without our children. We can not. We gave life to these little people, held them, cared for them and sometimes our lives revovle around them. For some, careers come later. Immediately during a time when the threats, the stress, the thought of losing children can almost break our physcy. I got up everyday, for my children, I went to work everyday for my children. I tried to give them a life that was as normal as possible on the outside. It was at night when the doors were shut and lights turned off that the demons and the stress became larger than life. You can't think, you can't plan anything. It is constant worry. I had the good sense to find someone to talk to who helped me get out, figure my way out, what resources to use to help me get out. Not everyone goes that route.

I do wonder why NC did not rely on her family more in some areas. They seemed to be the type of people who would do anything and everything. I just have to think that there is the possibility in her own way she was in limbo, not knowing exactly which way to turn because it all came back to the children.

Kelly
 
I've been here for a long time....and, IMO, this case was nothing unique. Pretty much the same as any other "husband/boyfriend kills wife/gf".....defense always claims rush to judgment and police ineptness.

The difference I see is in the threads.
 
Question for all the regular posters here. Do any of you feel you would not have been able to sit on this jury and been objective due to strong personal beliefs or experiences?

For example, a few posters have given some brief updates on another case taking place right now. I had never heard of this case, so I googled it. I couldn't even finish the first news article, I became so upset I was in tears. The two young boys (murder victims) bear a resemblance to my young son. There is no way I could have sat on that jury. I could not have been objective. Too personal for me.

Does anyone feel that way about this trial?


I think this is why jury selection is so critically important. People associate with victims and defendants differently. Ten years ago, there's nothing that would make me cry. Now that I have two young children, I tear up randomly for no real reason. It's interesting that specific moments in our lives shape us in certain ways and create blinders that we don't even know are there.

This is not intended to be critical in the least, so please don't take it that way, but I've always had a hard time wrapping my head around the thought process that a DV victim goes through during his/her ordeal. Why stay in a disruptive environment? That's one of the reasons I've had a hard time connecting with NC in this trial. Granted, the botched closing by the prosecution failed to humanize NC, so that's part of the problem as well.

True story: when I was 9 or 10, I was playing down the street from my house and three neighborhood boys decided to pick a fight. I was pushed several times and finally punched in the face, so I ran home crying. My mother, who had watched the entire event from the front window, responded by scolding me and grounding me because I did not fight back. So I'm well aware that that moment in my life shaped who I am today and that's a message that I've tried to instill in my wife and children.

Now, on the other hand, it's infuriating when someone assumes the persona of being better than someone else, as we almost always see in DV cases. But I haven't been convinced that I've seen that in this trial. I just don't put a lot of stock into the words of NC's friends. Not a fan of gossip.
 
Wonder if BC could rig our phones to ring when the verdict is in? :waitasec:

Impossible. Remember, he can't even check his call logs. Plus, I'm sure he would say that the bailiff tampered with his phone. :phone:
 
Hey all!... Tipping my hat to Jim Groce :

Well the Wake County Court House
Got the townsfolk goin *advertiser censored*-a-hooper,
And if you go down there
You better just beware
Of a man named Bradley Cooper

Now Bradley - he's more trouble,
And he stands ‘bout six foot four;
All the ladies in the town call him Closet Lover.
And the men don’t knock at his door.

He is big, bad, sad ole Brad
Baddest man - made the darn town mad
Badder than ole King Kong,
Meaner than a junkyard dog.

Now Bradley - he's a gambler
So he threw away them clothes,
And he took the passports and the diamond
Denyin’ front of everybody's nose

He's got a CCIE he’s done.
He's got iPad know-how, too.
He's got a cell phone, a modern one
In his pocket just for fun,
And some mica bits in his shoe.

He is big, bad, sad ole Brad
Baddest man – made the darn town mad
Badder than ole King Kong,
Meaner than a junkyard dog.

One night, one Friday Evening,
Bad Brad stayed up and roll’d the dice,
And ‘cross the street they were bar-b-queing,
And oh - his timing was precise!

Well he cast his eyes upon her
And the trouble soon began,
Big Bad Brad learned no lesson about messin',
With his wife cos he was an angry man.

He is big, bad, sad ole Brad
Baddest man – made the darn town mad
Badder than ole King Kong,
Meaner than a junkyard dog.

In the courthouse he took to fightin'
And when they heard him from the floor,
Brad’s story looked like a jigsaw puzzle
With a couple of pieces gone.

Now he’s big, bad, sad ole Brad
Baddest man – made the darn town mad
Badder than ole King Kong,
Meaner than a junkyard dog.

Back to the trenches - watching from the sidelines: great commentary going on. Star12, immense post last night. Very deep and very real. What goes on behind closed doors NO-ONE may assume, guess or ever know. Suffice to say hatred is huge. Makes people do and say the most evil, belittling and hurtful things. Where there is hate, there cannot be love. Where there is no love - there's sheer hell. IMO BC's snooping on NC's emails, second guessing her and being a total cad is enough already. He took it further - as less0305 stated way back - he had all the chance in his deposition to state he saw that location on his laptop via a Google search. He remained in denial and his defense? The CPD tampered / planted or wrongly examined his equipment. The missing router? That's huge. Too many coincidences. FAR too many for BC to get off. The prosecution weren't on trial. BC was (is),

WHO else stood to benefit with NC dead?
WHO else had means, motive and opportunity?

Big bad, sad ole BRAD .... as I opine...

Will check in when the verdict's out. If NG total injustice. Total...
 
I prefer? physical abuse at least the bruises go away and the pain subsides...emotional abuse stays with someone forever!
 
I feel horrible for the women in this forum that have experienced abuse. Your stories are gut wrenching. But I honestly don't see how you relate Nancy's experience prior to July 12th to what you experienced. I would like to leave the events of July 12th out of this because there are people that don't believe he killed her. But prior to July 12th, the only things I see from him that he controlled were finances and the ability for her to take their kids and leave the country. The finances are a bit of a different story since she didn't have a green card and couldn't work. I get that. She didn't have her own money. But there were none of the other signs of abuse that you always hear about. He didn't isolate her from her friends. He didn't isolate her from her family. He didn't hit her. He didn't berate her and destroy her self esteem (at least not that I am aware of). He put her on an allowance (a fairly generous one) and took that passports (actually only wanted to take one). I honestly do not see how that relates to the experiences you ladies have shared on here. Honestly, she relied on her parents for lots of things, including money. If he was truly abusive, could she not have left, with the kids, and had her parents support her until it got worked out? Could she have gone to court to let the court decide if she was allowed to go back to Canada with the kids? They probably would have ruled that she had to since she wasn't a US Citizen and didn't have a green card. There were avenues she could have taken and she didn't. But I simply don't see how it adds up to abuse. Maybe that's because I'm a guy and just don't "get it".

Control & Manipulation, a couple cornerstones of abuse. As are the words said in an effort to break your spirit, break your soul. Brad controlled and manipulated in a cunning fashion. The *best* do it in such a way, where everyone around them doesn't *see* how bad they really are. As for the breaking of spirit and soul, well, isn't that just what Brad's former girlfriend said? Those things are done in private, and they hurt far worse than a fist to the face. I've experienced both. It's the words that remain, after the physical injuries heal. 'You are stupid, you are ugly, your are nothing, you will never be anything because you are useless, ignorant, nobody wants you, I wish you were never born, wish you were dead' etc. Years later, there are very few physical injuries I could document to you now, but the words remain, verbatim. Even the tone of voice still plays in ones head as if it was yesterday. You have no further back to look then what Brad's previous relationship stated here.
 
I think this is why jury selection is so critically important. People associate with victims and defendants differently. Ten years ago, there's nothing that would make me cry. Now that I have two young children, I tear up randomly for no real reason. It's interesting that specific moments in our lives shape us in certain ways and create blinders that we don't even know are there.

This is not intended to be critical in the least, so please don't take it that way, but I've always had a hard time wrapping my head around the thought process that a DV victim goes through during his/her ordeal. Why stay in a disruptive environment? That's one of the reasons I've had a hard time connecting with NC in this trial. Granted, the botched closing by the prosecution failed to humanize NC, so that's part of the problem as well.

True story: when I was 9 or 10, I was playing down the street from my house and three neighborhood boys decided to pick a fight. I was pushed several times and finally punched in the face, so I ran home crying. My mother, who had watched the entire event from the front window, responded by scolding me and grounding me because I did not fight back. So I'm well aware that that moment in my life shaped who I am today and that's a message that I've tried to instill in my wife and children.

Now, on the other hand, it's infuriating when someone assumes the persona of being better than someone else, as we almost always see in DV cases. But I haven't been convinced that I've seen that in this trial. I just don't put a lot of stock into the words of NC's friends. Not a fan of gossip.

I think there are parts I don't see as 'controlling', the allowance is not something I thought was. I could see the financial aspect of doing that. The passport issue was something I could relate to as being controlling, it directly controlled what could have been a threatening situation already, the children. It took the threat a step further. Made it more of an action. IMHO, the children were a big worry for NC. She was able to figure out a plan of action to make money. A plan. When it came to the children, there was no plan. Just constant limbo. You can't leave with the children, you can' get a job to feed them or house them, you can't ask the other to leave, they won't even negotiate terms of a divorce. I relate inthose areas. FWIW, there are still people today, who will say they would not have believed certain things about someone I was divorced. Until it was out in the open and on paper, it was shocking. The turning off the water was controlling IMHO. Another threat to show she could not care for her children. She had very little money, no way to care of her children the way they deserved. BC didn't do that and it affected just her. Again, its not so much the threats that start to tear your mental state apart, its what action you perceives backs up the threat.


Kelly
 
FWIW what goes on physchologically behind closed doors, often makes a difference. I agree that there were probably other avenues for everyone involved, or anyone involved in divorce/custody issues. For most mothers, and I can only speak to what I know or discussed with friends, mothers can not handle any thought of losing, living without our children. We can not. We gave life to these little people, held them, cared for them and sometimes our lives revovle around them. For some, careers come later. Immediately during a time when the threats, the stress, the thought of losing children can almost break our physcy. I got up everyday, for my children, I went to work everyday for my children. I tried to give them a life that was as normal as possible on the outside. It was at night when the doors were shut and lights turned off that the demons and the stress became larger than life. You can't think, you can't plan anything. It is constant worry. I had the good sense to find someone to talk to who helped me get out, figure my way out, what resources to use to help me get out. Not everyone goes that route.

I do wonder why NC did not rely on her family more in some areas. They seemed to be the type of people who would do anything and everything. I just have to think that there is the possibility in her own way she was in limbo, not knowing exactly which way to turn because it all came back to the children.

Kelly

I truly believe that she did not fear for her life.
 
I've been here since something like 2004 - never seen anything like this thread/trial (not even the Scott Peterson trial seemed so ... what is the word I'm looking for, contentious (?). Hope to never see it again. There was surely different here for this one - can't explain it.

Think: gossiping, vindictive, self-serving Lochmere cult
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
69
Guests online
1,717
Total visitors
1,786

Forum statistics

Threads
602,092
Messages
18,134,549
Members
231,231
Latest member
timbo1966
Back
Top