April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
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.

I don't agree with any affairs. I do think Brad had a history of affairs and the last one with the girl in France, on whatever level it was, is more relevant for me. It is just another example of his state of mind leading up to the murder. JMO.
 
They did look into other possibilities. And I agree, BC was the only suspect and I believe he killed NC.

Refresh my memory. What other possibilities did they look into? I don't remember any. As a matter of fact, on the 16th (2 days after NC's body was found) the CDP made a statement that this was not a random act of violence. If they truly followed through with other possibilities (and especially since they had no concrete evidence on BC), how did the accurately follow through with any other leads?

While BC may or may not be guilty - I do not know. However, I do know that the CDP used very poor judgement in dealing with this crime.
 
He had an affair with the French lady and it was proven through circumstantial evidence.

Where? Can you point me to this evidence. I only saw emails sent back and forth and a pic of them holding hands. Where is the evidence concretely showing they had an affair?
 
He had an affair with the French lady and it was proven through circumstantial evidence.

It was? I watched every bit of that testimony and all I saw were flirtatious emails and a really strange examination of a witness that the prosecution wasn't expecting. Considering she was in France and he was in the US for all the emails, I think they prove nothing. And honestly, I don't really care if he had an affair with the French lady or not. The emails were inappropriate. But whether he did or didn't makes no difference in the murder trial.
 
Refresh my memory. What other possibilities did they look into? I don't remember any. As a matter of fact, on the 16th (2 days after NC's body was found) the CDP made a statement that this was not a random act of violence. If they truly followed through with other possibilities (and especially since they had no concrete evidence on BC), how did the accurately follow through with any other leads?

While BC may or may not be guilty - I do not know. However, I do know that the CDP used very poor judgement in dealing with this crime.

For me, according to testimony, I am comfortable with the job the police did as far as investigating NC as a missing person and then as a murder victim. I think they looked at the evidence in the house, evidence at Cisco, talked to friends and family, followed leads of the community and came to the opinion that Brad killed his wife. I am not trying to convince anyone to think as I do, just my opinion.
 
They didn't 'only look at him'. They hauled their collective a$$e$ across the golf course following psychics. They questioned all the friends, neighbors, acquaintances, etc. But as det. teddy said, 'when you take away everything else, this was/is a DOMESTIC SITUATION. All the doors kept leading back to home, brad, the last person to see her alive. The only one who never bothered to check in with the cops to ask questions. "hey, what's the latest on my missing wife, any news yet on the 'mother of my little girls who are here crying their eyes out for their momma?' And after her body was found, 'hey, I didn't kill my wife, but I want to find out who did just as badly as you do.....' I hope if I or anyone I know is ever on trial, or is the victim of a crime, that those people both investigating and the eventual jurors, will use some common sense in their investigation and deliberations. Like I said before, those loved ones who are innocent, can't be kept away from investigations. Those who are guilty, those who already know what happened, stay as far away as possible. MOO and the opinions of many others who've followed crime for decades.


Do you feel that they accurately followed up with the eyewitnesses that claim they saw NC running that morning, in a timely manner?
 
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?

Maybe not being hyper-focused on BC from the first conversations with JA might have meant they might have looked at her cell phone earlier. Struck me as strange not to at least look at it when she was first missing. That would have allowed them check for indications of any plans not known to BC. Instead, the CPD waited a long time before erasing her phone.

Certainly after her body was found, looking at her cell phone should have been at the top of their list.
 
It was? I watched every bit of that testimony and all I saw were flirtatious emails and a really strange examination of a witness that the prosecution wasn't expecting. Considering she was in France and he was in the US for all the emails, I think they prove nothing. And honestly, I don't really care if he had an affair with the French lady or not. The emails were inappropriate. But whether he did or didn't makes no difference in the murder trial.

Didn't he tell her he had looked at possible job openings in France? She was looking at job openings here? I think the jury may feel it makes a difference.
 
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.

Now this post needed a smilie. Gracielee, you have a blessed weekend. I'm about to impose my own time-out for the weekend. :seeya:
 
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.

So the moral of the story for LE is, when you have a suspect you're dead solid on and no other credible leads, you better pull some people off of a serious investigation and send them out to grub up a couple of Hispanic guys...or wrangle yourself up a neighbor...somebody, anybody. ??

Following leads is all well and good, but the leads have to actually conclude somewhere. Nancy running down RZ's street doesn't conclude with a person. Nancy running down Kildaire Farm Rd. doesn't conclude with a person. Those thing conclude with abstract theories involving a couple of different color vans and no description of a suspect.
 
Didn't he tell her he had looked at possible job openings in France? She was looking at job openings here? I think the jury may feel it makes a difference.


Honestly, I don't know the relationship he had with her and really don't care. I don't think it makes any difference at all to deciding if he killed NC or not.
 
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.

This was all done while they were SEARCHING for NC during the missing persons case, NOT when they were looking into other possibilities, other than BC, in whom may have murdered her.

But, since there are too many to list, how about listing just 1 or 2 that shows what other leads the CDP followed up on, other than BC
 
I agree that document is a very eye-opening read.

Page 62 (as UNC70 mentioned) is the place to start reading to learn about the extent of NC's extra-marital affairs. I didn't know that police were referring witnesses to Alice Stubbs, and I find that problematic. After learning about the extent of the affairs, I'm a little stunned that infidelity was so important that it was used as an excuse to file for divorce. In fact, it comes off as an excuse, and not a reason.
 
Honestly, I don't know the relationship he had with her and really don't care. I don't think it makes any difference at all to deciding if he killed NC or not.

It's another piece of CE that just keeps adding to the pile. With so many women on the jury, it'll probably be considered.
 
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.

Yes, I do believe NC was involved with someone else. Just my personal opinion. And, yes - I believe her friends new about it. And, yes - I believe her friends covered it up for her. And I also believe that this will be brought out in the open with the defense brings up witnesses when continuing to present their case. In fact, some of the prosecutions' witnesses have gotten supeonas from the defense to testify again. Should be interesting.
 
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?

An appearance that they actually looked at all alternatives in the death.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
83
Guests online
2,259
Total visitors
2,342

Forum statistics

Threads
599,864
Messages
18,100,369
Members
230,942
Latest member
Patturelli
Back
Top