April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Brad was a serial cheater...... whether on his own wife or with someone else's spouse.
 
He had an affair with the French lady and it was proven through circumstantial evidence.


It absolutely was not. The friend from the MBA program could attest to only serious flirting. Even when the prosecution was trying to get him to say that he saw the two were behind closed doors at times he said he did not know.
 
Can you please point out these other possibilities? Thanks.

Too many to list..... but for one example of how detailed they were in following up leads .....I believe they even followed up on some soiled toilet paper in the park or something.
 
Too many to list..... but for one example of how detailed they were in following up leads .....I believe they even followed up on some soiled toilet paper in the park or something.

Yeah, so much better to follow up on soiled toilet paper than the blackberry or witnesses who may or may not have seen Nancy.
 
I'm not aware of a "someone" spoken about on this board and not elsewhere. In fact I haven't even heard all of the potential "someones" named in the motion to compel document discussed on this board.

All the "someones" I have seen discussed here have been mentioned in testimony during this trial.

JP, BW and the guy from Fl have all been discussed by witnesses on the stand.

NJinCary posted previously that she feels Nancy's friends may know of someone that she was involved with but did not mention it to LE. I would think that they did mention this "someone", IF there was one. However, if he exists, he was not considered a suspect. Personally, I've seen nothing to indicate this "someone" exists anywhere either.
 
Can you please point out these other possibilities? Thanks.

Well, I think they sent somebody to check out the columbian gang who killed nicole brown simpson, I believe I heard they've been searching every golf course up the Eastern Seaboard, and I think they've even got somebody on that brown/white/light red/pink van also involved in the murder of Laci Peterson.
 
LOL, I know that had to be sarcasm. Here's the book, you can read the cover and decide for yourself.

http://www.paperbackswap.com/Love-Lies-Amanda-Lamb/book/0425241483/

I think it probably isn't the best judgment on the part of WRAL to have her reporting on this case. It does however explain some of the WRAL articles and headlines.

A true story about a husband with a secret? I think the book is premature. In fact, I read a bit of the link that UNC70 posted and really wonder what is going on with this prosecution. It looks to me like the prosecution desperately wants to win their case, but at the same time I'm not convinced that the prosecution has been honest and fair.

Here is the link for anyone else that hasn't read this document: http://www.wral.com/asset/news/news_briefs/2011/02/17/9132146/coopermotion.PDF
 
It absolutely was not. The friend from the MBA program could attest to only serious flirting. Even when the prosecution was trying to get him to say that he saw the two were behind closed doors at times he said he did not know.

I can assure you the jurors will make the inference of what happened behind closed doors.
 
How do you know they didn't look at any other suspects? Normal procedure would be to look into/investigate all possible suspects and rule them out. They couldn't rule Brad out. I can't see them publicizing anyone else they considered a suspect. That would probably open them up to a lawsuit based on the sue happy mentality of a lot of people these days.

Because, according to the eyewitnesses that claim they saw NC jogging, the CDP was negligent in following up with them in a timely manner. They had BC tailed from the minute NC went missing. These eyewitnesses felt that the police failed to follow up with them appropriately. You are correct:
normal procedure wouled be to look into/ investigage all possible suspects". But, in my opinion, I agree with Kurtz - the CDP were inept in dealing with this crime
 
A true story about a husband with a secret? I think the book is premature. In fact, I read a bit of the link that UNC70 posted and really wonder what is going on with this prosecution. It looks to me like the prosecution desperately wants to win their case, but at the same time I'm not convinced that the prosecution has been honest and fair.

Here is the link for anyone else that hasn't read this document: http://www.wral.com/asset/news/news_briefs/2011/02/17/9132146/coopermotion.PDF

I agree that document is a very eye-opening read.
 
I caught that yesterday too. I put it in the same category as using Facebook to try and discredit JW. Of course, it worked for some people on here.

With JW, I thought it was a dirty move, but it did succeed in placing doubt on his credibility. What happened with the friend that is a child psychologist was also a dirty move. When the prosecution resorts to dirty moves, I'm inclined to think that's all they have in terms of discrediting good testimony.
 
Because, according to the eyewitnesses that claim they saw NC jogging, the CDP was negligent in following up with them in a timely manner. They had BC tailed from the minute NC went missing. These eyewitnesses felt that the police failed to follow up with them appropriately. You are correct:
normal procedure wouled be to look into/ investigage all possible suspects". But, in my opinion, I agree with Kurtz - the CDP were inept in dealing with this crime

Again, I'm left with the question: following up with the tipsters would have gotten them exactly what, above and beyond what they already had?
 
Well, I think they sent somebody to check out the columbian gang who killed nicole brown simpson, I believe I heard they've been searching every golf course up the Eastern Seaboard, and I think they've even got somebody on that brown/white/light red/pink van also involved in the murder of Laci Peterson.


You have no answer because reason tells you that if the lead detective sits on the witness stand and says no, we didn't have any other suspects, then maybe they did focus solely on BC. And if the police chief calls a press conference two days after NC is found to state that this was not a random crime, then yes, they probably eliminated everyone else from the beginning. But please by all means make inane references to things that have nothing to do with this case instead of answering the question.
 
You have no answer because reason tells you that if the lead detective sits on the witness stand and says no, we didn't have any other suspects, then maybe they did focus solely on BC. And if the police chief calls a press conference two days after NC is found to state that this was not a random crime, then yes, they probably eliminated everyone else from the beginning. But please by all means make inane references to things that have nothing to do with this case instead of answering the question.

Who, exactly, should have been their other suspect? A man in Florida? A man in Canada? You have to have a person in order for there to be a suspect.
 
HM, his bosses wife, and girl in France. He admitted the first two affairs. The girl in France.....seen holding hands, had emails after returning to U.S. Not a big leap that it was an affair too. Nancy suspected as much also.

Sorry I forgot about his bosse's wife. My bad. However, there is nothing stating that he and the woman in France had a sexual affair. I guess, though, the same could be said for NC with the man in Florida she was conversing with and JP, whom she was naked on her couch with. Why is it okay for NC to have had affairs but not BC. Afterall, she started these indiscretions soon after they got married.
 
Because, according to the eyewitnesses that claim they saw NC jogging, the CDP was negligent in following up with them in a timely manner. They had BC tailed from the minute NC went missing. These eyewitnesses felt that the police failed to follow up with them appropriately. You are correct:
normal procedure wouled be to look into/ investigage all possible suspects". But, in my opinion, I agree with Kurtz - the CDP were inept in dealing with this crime

What the witnesses considered a "timely manner" and what the CPD did, based on everything involved, is probably different. I don't think it makes the CPD inept. I think we've seen the eyewitness testimony this week is not that compelling. I don't think the jurors are going to give it a lot of credibility. IMO!!

When the weather is good, I see Nancy Cooper look alikes on a daily basis in both Lochmere and on Kildaire Farm Road. Especially now that the Kildaire Farm Road section from Lochmere to Penny has been completed. A lot of runners are running from the Kildaire through the greenway over to Regency.
 
Why do so many of you automatically feel that all of the eyewitnesses that claim they saw NC were wrong? How do you know? That is a big assumption to make that ALL of them were incorrect. Is it just because them seeing NC doesn't fit with you theory that BC definitely killed her? Isn't it a strong possibility that ALL of these witnesses were correct in what they saw? Afterall we are not talking about only 1 eyewitnesses, but more than 1. I find it odd that they would ALL be wrong.

The bug evidence suggested that Nancy died while she was still at the party, but if people overlook that little mistake, and at the same time believe that the early morning phone calls were spoofed (even though there is no proof), then it's easy to conclude that all the witnesses were wrong.
 
Who, exactly, should have been their other suspect? A man in Florida? A man in Canada? You have to have a person in order for there to be a suspect.

For all intents and purposes, when the police chief called her press conference, she eliminated that this could have been a stranger on stranger crime. I do not think that is wise for anyone, especially those in the community in which she serves. And it doesn't leave you with confidence that they were not going to go the distance to stick this crime on BC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
145
Guests online
1,288
Total visitors
1,433

Forum statistics

Threads
602,154
Messages
18,135,751
Members
231,254
Latest member
chrisy24
Back
Top