April 8th wknd of Sleuthing

[Maja]

I found an interesting link ..the article (part1) was done by someone who investigated Intimate Partner Murders...If you read this and compare the symptomolgy here, there are some very astute observations...Its termed as the "Eraser Killer" Havent seen part 2..
What Makes Eraser Killers Different (Part I)http://marileestrong.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-makes-eraser-killers-different.html

snippet~~


• He is generally intelligent, though he also greatly overestimates his talents. He believes he is smarter and better than the rest of us, certainly smarter than the police and more deserving in all ways than his victim. He often has considerable familiarity with the law and how police work. He may have read up on these matters diligently to help him with his plan. Or he may have used his unusual ability for absorbing things around him, observing with the cold eye of a lizard in the desert how other predators kill and get away with it, because getting away with murder is his goal.
• To achieve that goal he may follow one of two distinct strategies. Either he can erase the victim’s body by destroying it entirely or secreting it where it won’t be found, or, he can rearrange the crime or stage a wholly false scenario to erase all connection between himself and any criminal act. Either way, he appears to remain free and clear of any involvement in a his act

Amazing!

Actually, the part about "cold eye of a lizard" really got me. For the past week I would look at BC in the videos and see an image of a lizard. I would even see a red forked tongue coming out of his mouth in my mind. Thought it was odd. Then I read this and it just came together. Yikes!!!

 

[news247]

there is a copy of the email from NC's atty (alice) that was forwarded to brad by nancy back in april, '08 w/the initial separation agreement:

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/loca...E-mail_to_Cooper_with_separatin_agreement.pdf

it just confuses me when ppl say that brad had to be 'stealing' if you will, nancy's email - of course he knew about the agreement contents - even nancy was telling her friends that then is when he decided to not let her leave b/c he didn't want to pay the money.

i believe she forwarded the agreement and email to him, exactly as shown in the exhibit.

maybe i am just misunderstanding some of the posts.

 

[news247]

I'm pretty sure Lynn Prather was the female attorney that represented him for the custody case and depositions. She specializes in family law at Kurtz and Blum.

you are correct:

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/07/23/3257396/Motion_to_disclose_information.pdf

 

[news247]

Depends on who you ask. If you ask BA he would say the separation was put on hold because NC was waiting to get her Green Card.

BA discussed that fact in his depo - items 6 and 7.

so - the inference i draw from his sworn statement is that NC told the same reason to her friends (at least JA and BA) as BC stated. yet, i have read many posts (here and on other boards), accusing BC of lying about this fact.


http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/07/23/3258895/1216912148-Plaintiff_affidavits2.pdf

 

[gracielee]

I do have to head out for the rest of the night But just feel I need to share with with you all!! It is off Topic..But really in truly I have been :floorlaugh: watching my furbaby ( ailing 13 YR old Jack Russell) who just came alive like I havent seen for years!! He caught sight of a mouse, that ran behind a huge piece of furniture and he is snorting, huffing and puffing, one end to the other..yikes backand forth back and forth, posing with one paw up..even hitting the door stop.."boiiing boinnng"..,,turning every shoe in my closet upside down..Yikes I sure wish I had a video camera..I havent seen his cute tail so curled up nor his ears so perked for years!! :shocked2::rolling::skip::clap:

Sorry, Just thought I would share that..It is just amazing to see when all Ive watched is a lumping around pooch!!

Good night, Hope to catchup in the morning..We are starting at 930AM, Correct??fftobed:

Great description! We love our furbabies at this house. :great:

 

[gracielee]

there is a copy of the email from NC's atty (alice) that was forwarded to brad by nancy back in april, '08 w/the initial separation agreement:

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/loca...E-mail_to_Cooper_with_separatin_agreement.pdf

it just confuses me when ppl say that brad had to be 'stealing' if you will, nancy's email - of course he knew about the agreement contents - even nancy was telling her friends that then is when he decided to not let her leave b/c he didn't want to pay the money.

i believe she forwarded the agreement and email to him, exactly as shown in the exhibit.

maybe i am just misunderstanding some of the posts.

IIRC, didn't Kurtz admit in his opening statement that Brad had rigged their RR account to send him CC's of all of Nancy's mail? I'd feel mighty violated if I knew somebody was 'cc-ing' all my private email to their address. Regardless of what I may or may not have willingly shared. We know Brad put the kabash on the move to Canada after Stubbs sent Nancy a rough draft of a separation agreement. Sent it to Nancy's *private* email address, as 'attorney client' correspondence.

 

[news247]

Kurtz already showed his hand by introducing the water bill. By doing so, he conceded the last word to the jury at closing. No doubt Kurtz will roll out a full case and trot out multiple witnesses, as well as hired telecommunications and computer experts to rebut the state's technical evidence.

you are probably correct - but if it was me (especially since i am not a legal expert, haha) - i'm not sure i wouldn't just leave it alone - at this point - the final word from the cisco expert, was that BC did NOT have the proper equipment to manipulate the phone calls. he did have access to the 'f' whatever card which was ordered through cisco - but even if he had the card at home (of which there is no proof) - he did not have a router that would work with the card.

however, the pros. may be coming forth with more information/witnesses about this before they rest their case - so everything may change.

 

[news247]

And the Dr. Gould psyc exam he took it upon himself to arrange. I think that was another $12,000. And then had to have it done all over with the agreed upon dr.

why wouldn't a 2nd opinion be necessary? should he just say - oh, ok - since the psyc hired by NC's parents stated that i'm not a fit parent - let's just go along w/what he/she determined?

it's no different at all (IMO) than the pros. and the defense always lining up their own separate experts - happens in every trial.

 

[news247]

IIRC, didn't Kurtz admit in his opening statement that Brad had rigged their RR account to send him CC's of all of Nancy's mail? I'd feel mighty violated if I knew somebody was 'cc-ing' all my private email to their address. Regardless of what I may or may not have willingly shared. We know Brad put the kabash on the move to Canada after Stubbs sent Nancy a rough draft of a separation agreement. Sent it to Nancy's *private* email address, as 'attorney client' correspondence.

you might very well be correct - i wasn't able to listen to his opening statement.

however - if brad WAS doing that w/the email - then why was it sent to NC by AS on 4/15/08 - and not to BC until 4/18/08?

did he have some way to delay the sending/forwarding also?

ETA: i wish the header info had been included in that copy of the email

 

[news247]

His response to that was just odd --

All they said was that a body had been found. "a body" --

Did he ask, "Where? Was It Nancy?" -- No he did not.

Did he ask, "Could it be my wife?" -- No, he did not.

Odd. Don't you thing the LEO's would think that a bit odd?

isn't that when he supposedly offered up the info about nancy "usually' running in the black and red top?

maybe that was his way of asking if the body could be nancy's?

 

[news247]

lol i just made 40 bazillion posts, so i guess i am finished talking

once again - i really enjoy reading all of ya'll's posts here and appreciate those who post snippits of the testimony - i am not able to listen to the trial, so depend on you guys, a couple of other message boards and the news websites to feed my obsession - so, thanks again!

 

[news247]

well - i do have one more comment/question

one of the posters here - i cannot remember who it was, sorry (!) brought up
the differences in MM's statements in the custody hearings for NC's side vs BC's side, so i went back and read them - TOTAL turn around - i found it hard to believe that the same person made both statements!

for NC: http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/07/23/3258895/1216912148-Plaintiff_affidavits2.pdf
(also interesting is his wife's (CM) depo)

for BC:

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/loca...davits_from_Brad_Cooper's_family,_friends.pdf

 

[cody100]

isn't that when he supposedly offered up the info about nancy "usually' running in the black and red top?
maybe that was his way of asking if the body could be nancy's?

My thoughts exactly on his comments. Taken out of context, it could be interpretted as odd, but in with her comments, it might not be.

 

[Star12]

why wouldn't a 2nd opinion be necessary? should he just say - oh, ok - since the psyc hired by NC's parents stated that i'm not a fit parent - let's just go along w/what he/she determined?

it's no different at all (IMO) than the pros. and the defense always lining up their own separate experts - happens in every trial.

The point was that the discussion was about the amount of money BC had spent on legal fees etc.

However, BC had hired a psychologist for the eval on his own, which was rejected - a different psyc had been requested and Gould's eval rejected because BC took it upon himself to arrange and pay for the eval, which could have been tainted by bias.

 

[cody100]

well - i do have one more comment/question

one of the posters here - i cannot remember who it was, sorry (!) brought up
the differences in MM's statements in the custody hearings for NC's side vs BC's side, so i went back and read them - TOTAL turn around - i found it hard to believe that the same person made both statements!

for NC: http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/07/23/3258895/1216912148-Plaintiff_affidavits2.pdf
(also interesting is his wife's (CM) depo)

for BC:

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/loca...davits_from_Brad_Cooper's_family,_friends.pdf

I couldn't agree with you more. Talk about completely different stories out of the same person's mouth. And, they were one day apart. Thanks for bringing that up again.

 

[PolkSaladAnnie]

@CrimeAddict - thanks for the shout-out a couple pages back. Appreciated. Glad you started a generic "weekend-chat" thread where us lurkers had an opportunity to jump in willy-nilly - and not go O/T on the trial day threads. So much to talk about and bring up in between. :seeya:

@LindyLoo - gosh, thanks for posting those excerpts on intimate relationships in spousal murders. So very interesting reading in full. Hatred, possessiveness (or ego) and revenge are lethal emotional triggers in some people, eh?

@borndem - you wrote: His response to that was just odd --

All they said was that a body had been found. "a body" --

Did he ask, "Where? Was It Nancy?" -- No he did not.

Did he ask, "Could it be my wife?" -- No, he did not.

Odd. Don't you thing the LEO's would think that a bit odd?

The bold, above, is mine. Indeed: my thoughts exactly. as a complete aside: my ex-landlord drove my ex-neighbor so up the wall to the point where it became a joke that they'd kill each other the next time they met. Acidic, nasty; very ugly stuff going on. However, when my ex-L/lord's wife died, that same neighbor, despite their acrimonious differences, did avail his house, lawn, etc for the spill-over of the wake - and maintained the L/L's garden for a week until the dust settled. He was sincerely sad for his enemy's loss (and they eventually kinda buried the hatchet - to a degree). The mother of BC's own flesh and blood goes missing/found brutally murdered and he does, (offers, asks or explains) ... zip, zero, zilch. Just cannot get my head around that. Doesn't directly prove guilt - more so what he probably has to hide.

@Jilly - O/T: Hi there - great to be in synch since "the old days" and definitely look forward to wading-in when May's jury selection comes around apropos JY's trial. That verdict, I personally opine and predict, is going to be a :woohoo: moment! Thought the day would never come!

@JustTheFax - your providing and therefore reminding us of detail, clips & facts - is astounding and has helped me stay lazy (LOL) and not go back and check, myself. Tku so much.

@all - SODDI's, BCDI, and :fence: - great reading all sides! Seeya'll later.

Polk.

 

[PolkSaladAnnie]

The point was that the discussion was about the amount of money BC had spent on legal fees etc.

However, BC had hired a psychologist for the eval on his own, which was rejected - a different psyc had been requested and Gould's eval rejected because BC took it upon himself to arrange and pay for the eval, which could have been tainted by bias.

Hi Star12. I agree this may look biased; however (and I'm definitely not a SODDI, lol) wouldn't the same be said about a bias on NC's side? How then, would (or should) an independent or neutral psychologist be hired? Via a court? A family counseling center? Just purely interested - not arguing your post.

 

[PolkSaladAnnie]

My thoughts exactly on his comments. Taken out of context, it could be interpretted as odd, but in with her comments, it might not be.

Hi again, cody. Didn't Brad, when NC's body was discovered, immediately state something along the lines of "Nancy didn't run there...?". IMO, he distanced Nancy from that scene.

Interestingly enough, it was that very comment made by BC, by the way and IMOO, that made me feel or wonder if the discovery-location was actually BC's intended ... final location. However, as JA was alarmed and called CPD so early on in the day, well within the 24hrs "official missing person" time, he was unable to return to that site and hide her elsewhere - if not rid NC from discovery forever? He was under the spotlight from noon July 12 and had no option but to stay put and keep his alibi going.

My thoughts run this way because he did such a magnificent job of completely hiding or destroying everything else (his clothes, VoIP card, her 2 odd shoes, etc). Maybe - just maybe - BC was all set to relocate NC under cover of dusk/evening ... and was foiled. Just an extended thought I'm putting out there.

 

[PolkSaladAnnie]

"Circumstantial evidence is evidence in which an inference is required to connect it to a conclusion of fact. By contrast, direct evidence supports the truth of an assertion directly—i.e., without need for any additional evidence or the intervening inference.

On its own, it is the nature of circumstantial evidence for more than one explanation to still be possible. Inference from one piece of circumstantial evidence may not guarantee accuracy. Circumstantial evidence usually accumulates into a collection, so that the pieces then become corroborating evidence. Together, they may more strongly support one particular inference over another. An explanation involving circumstantial evidence becomes more valid as proof of a fact when the alternative explanations have been ruled out."

Hi Jilly. Ehem ... I'm just pulling a neat little "Just The Fax" edit style - in red - LOL. Those 2 sentences alone, to me, may be summarized in 2 words: ... pure L*O*G*I*C.

JMHO

 

[PolkSaladAnnie]

A poster made a long list of compelling CE in this case.
Perhaps someone can repost it for sunshine?

This was a great request ... would also love to read that post; have no idea where/when this was posted.

Just bumping up JTF's post for a friendly reminder to that poster.