April 29 weekend of Sleuthiness

[otto]

I haven't gone back to re-hear/watch this testimony, but I found Fran's post that does not agree with this....This was posted on the day of the testimony by Fran...


Has anyone listened to the info again?

The medical examiner said 7 AM was possible. The bug guy placed the time of death as early as 11 PM on July 11.

 

[ncsu95]

Do we really know where he was at this time?? This is what the police said....The call at 6:05 and the call at 6:34 were misses so he had to go home and reset something....I really don't know what he did or when....however I think he had the knowledge and skill and the equipment to spoof the call at 6:40!!

He didn't have time to go home after the 6:34 call. He was in the HT parking lot at 6:40.

 

[sunshine05]

IMO JA has been through enough, imagine losing your best friend. I think people need to put themselves in her position. I really hope she doesn't read in here

What if BC is innocent and has been sitting in prison for 2+ years because of her lies to police? Her stories created the foundation of the state's case. If you remember the state's opening.

 

[ncsu95]

Uh, I'll plead the 5th on that last question. And you are not allowed to see my garage. :silenced:

I'm right there with you. I probably have 7 pairs of running shoes in my garage.

 

[Cheyenne130]

He didn't need to because he is innocent.

It wasn't just the phone call. If it was, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

It was the made-up painting plans, the ducks and sticks, detergent brand, always wears all diamonds, never runs alone, always tells her when she runs with someone else, telling others not to talk to police because she is handling it, pointing to VOIP knowledge of BC on her affidavit, knowing her cell phone was in her car at the time of the call to the police, having meeting with the others so they could "sync" their affidavits, calling CD to tell her to write a negative affidavit on BC. Am I missing anything.

I don't understand how one can NOT be suspicious of this person.

Because some of your claims are "he said/she said" claims. Who is telling the truth? The ducks? Maybe they were there on Friday. Do you know who put them in the box? We know the brown duck was on the refrigerator the evening of July 12th. How did it end up with the others? Was she lying when she said Brad had VoIP knowledge? Do you know that Nancy didn't always wear her diamonds? (She is wearing that necklace in the video, BTW.) Who testified to this "meeting"? You are stating things definitely not in evidence. MOO

 

[sunshine05]

I have said time and time and time again - people here are making arguments that Brad didn't even make for himself. Brad never once insinuated that anyone they knew could possibly be behind Nancy's death. Never! No, he went with the jogging murderer and had to stick with it. Had he used his little pointed forehead, he would have dressed NC in old shorts and a tee shirt and put a paint roller in her hand, then dumped her somewhere over by JA's house - apparently here, he would have had a home run.

He told NC's mom that they were lying (the "friends").

 

[bloghooligan]

Are BC/HM's tennis plans disputed? Didn't NC know about (and agree to) the tennis plans?

 

[SleuthinNC]

Do you believe that is a common M.O. of killers? They call the police to immediately point the finger at someone else because that will keep the suspicion off of them. (Dang! Why didn't Brad think of that!)

I think it is common to deflect the suspicion from themselves and yes it is not uncommon for killers to do. I think more typically it is a random person that is pointed to or a fictional person but the idea is the same.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I just went back and listened to Butts testimony.

On direct he said that NC's TOD was consistent with when she was reported missing. Cummings had him clarify that TOD could be 12 hours before to 12 hours after her being reported missing (mid-morning on 7/12).

On cross, defense got Butts to agree that there was nothing inconsistent with NC TOD being 3, 4 or 5 hours after she reportedly left to go jogging at 7am.

Butts also agreed with the defense on cross that it takes the body 4-6 hours to completely empty the stomach (as was NC's) after a large meal.

His testimony with respect to vomiting said that vomiting would explain the empty stomach but that there was no evidence of her vomiting/not vomiting.

The BAC was .06 and could have been caused by normal body decomp. Too many factors in how the body processes caffiene.

The caffiene id'd in the autopsy could have been comsumed 7/11 or 7/12.

There was no BAC. There was no blood to test.

 

[Just the Fax]

When does Fry testify? He is unavailable Monday, correct?

 

[sunshine05]

Because some of your claims are "he said/she said" claims. Who is telling the truth? The ducks? Maybe they were there on Friday. Do you know who put them in the box? We know the brown duck was on the refrigerator the evening of July 12th. How did it end up with the others? Was she lying when she said Brad had VoIP knowledge? Do you know that Nancy didn't always wear her diamonds? (She is wearing that necklace in the video, BTW.) Who testified to this "meeting"? You are stating things definitely not in evidence. MOO

I'm not going to argue with you about this. But it does surprise me that people aren't suspicious of all of her things that have been debunked in court. Everyone's different I suppose.

 

[otto]

When does Fry testify? He is unavailable Monday, correct?

Tuesday

 

[Cheyenne130]

I'm not going to argue with you about this. But it does surprise me that people aren't suspicious of all of her things that have been debunked in court. Everyone's different I suppose.

I guess it depends on your definition of "debunked".

 

[SleuthinNC]

He didn't need to because he is innocent.

It wasn't just the phone call. If it was, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

It was the made-up painting plans, the ducks and sticks, detergent brand, always wears all diamonds, never runs alone, always tells her when she runs with someone else, telling others not to talk to police because she is handling it, pointing to VOIP knowledge of BC on her affidavit, knowing her cell phone was in her car at the time of the call to the police, having meeting with the others so they could "sync" their affidavits, calling CD to tell her to write a negative affidavit on BC. Am I missing anything.

I don't understand how one can NOT be suspicious of this person.

Not to mention alerting the ADA that somebody on the jury may have been not following the judges instructions regarding discussion of the case. Hard to believe that piece of information hasn't gotten back to the jurors. Doubt it won any prosecution points.

 

[bloghooligan]

There was no BAC. There was no blood to test.

In Butts' testimony he refers to the alcohol in BAC terms -- whether the test was of blood or not, he may have had to convert his results but he definitely referred to the level of alcohol as BAC of .06.

eta - to be more precise Butts said they found 60 milligrams of alcohol & if that were a blood sample it would be the equivalent of .06. Reference his testimony at 37.30 minutes on the WRAL site.

 

[otto]

I guess it depends on your definition of "debunked".

Would you say it's fair to say that she used words like "always" and "never" when perhaps she should have said "usually"? We heard a mechanical engineer that knew Nancy from the time she moved into the neighborhood testify that she ran with Nancy, and it was not unusual for Nancy to run alone.

 

[Cheyenne130]

In Butts' testimony he refers to the alcohol in BAC terms -- whether the test was of blood or not, he may have had to convert his results but he definitely referred to the level of alcohol as BAC of .06.

Actually I do not believe he did because the "B" in BAC is Blood. It is Blood Alcohol Content. He didn't have any blood to test. He tested some fluid I believe in or near the lung. He gave the alcohol content of the fluid which is not the same as BAC.

 

[Just the Fax]

In Butts' testimony he refers to the alcohol in BAC terms -- whether the test was of blood or not, he may have had to convert his results but he definitely referred to the level of alcohol as BAC of .06.

He used the cavity fluid....blood and other fluids.

 

[SleuthinNC]

Because some of your claims are "he said/she said" claims. Who is telling the truth? The ducks? Maybe they were there on Friday. Do you know who put them in the box? We know the brown duck was on the refrigerator the evening of July 12th. How did it end up with the others? Was she lying when she said Brad had VoIP knowledge? Do you know that Nancy didn't always wear her diamonds? (She is wearing that necklace in the video, BTW.) Who testified to this "meeting"? You are stating things definitely not in evidence. MOO

JA testified that the people submitting affidavits had several meetings.

 

[less0305]

Not to mention alerting the ADA that somebody on the jury may have been not following the judges instructions regarding discussion of the case. Hard to believe that piece of information hasn't gotten back to the jurors. Doubt it won any prosecution points.

And that makes her a murderer? Wow.