It's possible, of course, but they also have a lot invested in their innocence, if they are innocent.
Brad Cooper: Appeal info
- Thread starter jrb0124
- Start date
- Status
It's possible, of course, but they also have a lot invested in their innocence, if they are innocent.
If I were in that situation, I wouldn't be worried about being perceived as innocent. My only concern would be avoiding perpetual prison until death. I would probably break and admit to anything to avoid the lengthy affair of life in prison.
Abaroa skated through without the trial, but it's four men that murdered their wives in North Carolina in recent years, not three. Michelle Young was murdered in 2006. November 2. What is the population of NC such that there are 4 spousal homicides in such short intervals? It seems really high.
Michale Peterson will take whatever plea he can to avoid spending his last days in a prison. Abaroa took a plea to minimize his sentence and avoid life in prison. Brad and Jason should give the State an option to avoid the cost of a trial and move forward by pleading to a lesser degree using Alford.
Does Brad come up first? He stands a better chance of an Alford Plea ... because there is no proof that he premeditated the murder, and he's a foreigner that Canada is willing to accept for rehabilitation. The Google search demonstrates that he was not planning murder because he, of all people, would know better than to leave a trace of the search on his computer; the only trial fact that is making him look guilty.
After the screw ups with documenting activity on Nancy's cell phone, I don't think any claims can be made by investigators about intelligence with computer searches. They did not properly secure the cell phone, and they did not properly secure the laptop.
After the screw ups with documenting activity on Nancy's cell phone, I don't think any claims can be made by investigators about intelligence with computer searches. They did not properly secure the cell phone, and they did not properly secure the laptop.
calgary123
Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2008
- Messages
- 228
- Reaction score
- 0
Just as an interesting note, Brad and Nancy both being Canadian, had Brad done this in Canada, the max sentence would have been "life", which in Canada means, you can be paroled at 25 years of sentence. "Life" in NC means life, in Canada, not so.
I'd be OK with a plea that let him out after 25 years. 25 years is a long time to be able to think about what you did, is an adequate deterrent for others, and I don't actually think he's a danger to society in that I don't see him killing again.
I doubt Nancy's family would be upset either, after all, its the system they're used to.
I'd be OK with a plea that let him out after 25 years. 25 years is a long time to be able to think about what you did, is an adequate deterrent for others, and I don't actually think he's a danger to society in that I don't see him killing again.
I doubt Nancy's family would be upset either, after all, its the system they're used to.
Don't forget about the other one near Wake County where the guy tried to also burn down his house. I don't remember the name, but they searched for her for a long time. Curly headed brunette if I remember.
The only thing that would make sense with regards to the google search is that he already knew where he was going to dump the body, but was going through his plan mentally the day before and just pulled it up. It's too short a search to believe he was trying to find a place.....and obviously the images from google aren't real time, so you couldn't rely on that to know there weren't houses already built in that area.
Right, which is why it doesn't make sense that that, and only that, was the digital evidence discovered. If he had searched prior, then there would be digital evidence of that as well. If he cleaned up the prior search, then he knew how to and knew to clean up the search the day before. It just doesn't fit properly. Zooming in on the google search without knowing the directions to get there (zooming out) doesn't makes sense either. It just doesn't fit with the overall crime.
I agree. Another page he looked at during that browsing session had the contact information for Nancy's father's place of business. I'm guessing he didn't call his father-in-law very often (ever). He was mentally rehearsing for that call too, IMO.
It does if you consider the possibility of a bug in Microsoft's private browsing feature (which was new at that time). Perhaps it effectively erased the temporary files for earlier sessions, but for some reason failed for that session. My understanding is (at that time) temporary internet files were saved to disk, and then deleted when the private browsing window is closed. If the browser crashed, the laptop rebooted, or something else happened such that the private window did not close normally, I think the temporary files could have been left.
Looking at probabilities, which is what is necessary in this type of evidence, it seems awfully convenient to the Prosecution and the CPD that this particular piece of evidence would be found based on the scenario you describe. I'm not saying it is impossible, just doesn't seem likely.
Landonsmom02
Member
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2011
- Messages
- 653
- Reaction score
- 9
Kelly Morris. Another young mother killed by the man who was supposed to love and protect her. We have too many of these here in NC,imo.
If Brad had done this in Canada, I think there's a good possibility that he would have been charged with second degree murder and given a minimum sentence of 10 years prior to parole eligibility. The murder occurred at the end of another night of conflict after months of uncivil treatment towards each other. It's no stretch to believe that there may have been conflict that tipped either spouse over the edge on the night of the murder. It could also be argued that it was Heat of Passion murder, resulting in a manslaughter conviction. Furthermore, in Canada, no one would have any difficulty understanding that a computer science graduate from the University of Calgary knew perfectly well that if he was planning a murder, the stupidest thing to do would be to leave a search of the dump site on his work computer immediately prior to the murder - a mistake that a person with that education would not do. That, in itself, works agains premeditation for me.
Doesn't Canada's legal system place more emphasis on rehabilitation than punishment, making the "deterrent" factor almost irrelevant?
I must admit I'm lost on this line of thinking. There was little to no evidence that Brad was the killer apart from the Google search. Most of the evidence was at least neutral and at most exculpatory. How can you conclude that he killed her without premeditation?
I suppose I should have said that if he committed murder, then it is more likely that he would be charged with 2nd degree murder, or manslaughter, and the sentence would be no more than 10 years. I think that is a more common sentence for spousal homicides where there does not appear to be any premeditation. If Brad murdered his wife, it is quite likely that after she returned from the party, they had another conflict and this time a physical altercation resulted in her death.
Keep in mind that in Canada, women that murder their children are sent to a psychiatric institution. In the US, women that murder their children are sent to prison for life. The difference is that Canada places emphasis on the mental state at the time of the offence, and everyone accepts that no woman in her right mind murders her children. The US assumes malice, and believes that normal, rational, clear thinking women murder their children because they are an inconvencience. Similarly, spousal homicide is understood in the concext of strong emotions that can get out of control.
Additionally, in Canada, common sense is not thrown out the window. If it is most logical that Brad murdered his wife, then he would be convicted - if not in the first trial, then perhaps after a second or third appeal by the prosecution.
However, given the fact that Nancy appears to have gone for a routine run, that everything was routine that morning, that there is a call from the house to Brad while he was on his way to the store, that Nancy's cell phone was destroyed, that Nancy had a recent and ongoing history of interactions with men outside the marriage, that she was found in a secluded area a reasonable distance from her running route, that a witness saw her running, and that a suspicious vehicle was seen in the area ... all of it adds up to less probability that he would have been charged in the first place.
I should add that in Canada, opinionated neighbours and friends do not testify about their opinion regarding who is guilty of murder. None of the testimony in the first two weeks of Brad's trial would be allowed in a Canadian courtroom because trials are based on fact, not public opinion.
I sometimes think that NC prosecutors like to throw everything at the wall to see what sticks. For example, in the Jason Young trial, a big fuss is made by the prosecution about a rock that was propped in the door sometime between midnight and 6AM, when Jason was allegedly making the six hour trip to murder his wife. Common sense is that if Jason was making the six hour trip (time includes murder and driving) between midnight and 6AM to murder his wife, he did not need to prop the door open with a rock because the door was always unlocked at 6AM. The rock is irrelevant either way, because the door would not be locked when Jason returned from murdering his wife, yet the prosecution wants people to believe that the rock is significant evidence that Jason murdered his wife.
In this case, we have the brief google search of the dump site, allegedly by Brad; someone that obviously knew better than most that such a search would be easily detected by a forensic analysis of the computer. We are asked to believe that Brad made the search and that, even though he is an expert with computers, he was too stupid to realize that the search could be detected. Essentially we are presented with some sort of evidence that logically should not exist with this suspect given his knowledge and experience. First we're asked to believe that he's too dumb to understand the consequences of a google search, then we are asked to believe that he's so clever he can create hoax phone calls. Logic dictates that he's either very calculating and clever, or he's too stupid to understand how computer forensics work, but both cannot be true. The prosecution would have us believe that at one moment Brad is stupid, and then next minute he's clever.
The prosecution in both trials would have us believe that because these men behaved badly in their relationships, they must be capable of murder. That is also not logical. Most men behave badly in relationships at one time or another, but it does not follow that if wives of men that behave badly in relationships are found murdered, the husband is the only suspect to investigate.
In this case, we have the brief google search of the dump site, allegedly by Brad; someone that obviously knew better than most that such a search would be easily detected by a forensic analysis of the computer. We are asked to believe that Brad made the search and that, even though he is an expert with computers, he was too stupid to realize that the search could be detected. Essentially we are presented with some sort of evidence that logically should not exist with this suspect given his knowledge and experience. First we're asked to believe that he's too dumb to understand the consequences of a google search, then we are asked to believe that he's so clever he can create hoax phone calls. Logic dictates that he's either very calculating and clever, or he's too stupid to understand how computer forensics work, but both cannot be true. The prosecution would have us believe that at one moment Brad is stupid, and then next minute he's clever.
The prosecution in both trials would have us believe that because these men behaved badly in their relationships, they must be capable of murder. That is also not logical. Most men behave badly in relationships at one time or another, but it does not follow that if wives of men that behave badly in relationships are found murdered, the husband is the only suspect to investigate.
While I have always thought the google search doesn't make sense, if it is actually an issue with the early version of private browsing, then BC wouldn't have known the files were still on the PC. That is supposed to be the point of private browsing.
That's more like a "what if" situation rather than a "facts indicate" situation. A criminal prosecution should not include "what ifs", but we know that this trial did. What if Brad was upset that Nancy wanted to take the children out of the country, even though she couldn't legally do that, then maybe he had motive for murder. What if Brad created a hoax phone call, even though there is no evidence that it happened. Conversely, what if police destroyed Nancy's cell phone content because it contained information about her morning run?
I'm not familiar with the case. Do you remember a name?
That's the curious thing: google was slower withrealtime a few years ago. There are images from 2007, 2009, 2013. There was no reason for anyone to assume that the short Cul de Sac mapsearch zoom area was still undeveloped in the week of the mapsearch and body discovery area. Regarding the google search, I find it hard to believe that, given Brad's knowledge and experience in the field of computer science, he deliberately placed a permanent forensic trace of the body dump location on his work computer immediately prior to the murder. Let's give Brad and his alma mater some credit.
Prime Minister Steven Harper graduated from the University of Calgary Economics program. Computer Science students do learn about computer forensics and the can give reasons for not leaving crumbs. Can a computer scientist become so arrogant as to believe that he/she can erase the trace crumbs of a google mapsearch? Probably. And ... so for fun, while a computer scientist is contemplating murder, just before the murder, he deliberately leaves crumbs, just for fun, then after the murder, for more fun, that computer scientist screws with the times of those crumbs? For what purpose? Why not just shot himself in the foot. This makes no sense to me, no matter how I look at it.
Give the suspect some credit. He knew better than to search the dump site immediately prior to the murder. To prove that is probably a nasty task, but the failure to prove tampering should not result in assumptions/conclusions
Especially for a Canadian, it's hard to believe that someone that grew up on the prairies wouldn't have a paper map in his car full time, along with a winter coat, a shovel, perhaps candles, hopefully tire chains, and other "stuck in the snow" without cell service equipment stuff ... especially a mountain climber. As a new employee in a foreign country, wouldn't that Canadian have an hardcopy city map for navigation ... and alleged murder planning?
According to the prosecution theory, the computer scientist decided to place a quick google mapsearch of a body dumpsite on his work computer, even though he knew better ... for fun, to put himself in jail, because he wanted the challenge of trying to remove the search from his computer ... why? Clearly he knew better. There is no reasonable argument for a new employee in a foreign country to search google mapsearch to plan murder when there should be a street map of all local cities in every traveling foreigner's car, especially people from the prairies ... with their tire chains, et al. Brad is from Medicine Hat, where his father ran the post-secondary school and his brother ran that IT dept.
Nancy's family was prominent in Edmonton, Brad's family was prominent in Medicine Hat. Brad and Nancy met in Calgary. He was a computer nerd and she was a front-end user interface specialist who changed jobs and opened a used clothing shop.
In no time, they were an item, engaged, and then pushing up the wedding because he had a fantastic job offer in NC. Both Brad and Nancy were all for the wedding because it meant that Nancy had more rights in the US. She didn't think much about her former boyfriend, a philanthropist who left his wife, until things went south with Brad.
By all accounts, the Scotiabank is well represented in Raleigh, yet claims from Nancy and testimony of Nancy's friends was she could not open a bank account in NC. Why couldn't Nancy open a bank account at the Scotiabank in Raleigh? That's the same Bank of Nova Scotia used by Amanda Hayes in North Carolina when she murdered her husband's ex-wife. Scotiabank is in NC. Claims that Nancy could not open a bank account at the Scotiabank in Raleigh, NC. are bogus.
Nancy could not leave the US with the children. That is a fact. Not being able to leave the country would be a reason for Nancy to murder Brad (he prevented her from leaving the US with the children), but that is not a reason for Brad to murder Nancy. Brad held all the cards and murdering his wife would not advance his cause. He was financially solvent and she was financially destitute after divorce in the US except for an offer from her husband to receive payment for caring for the children during the day ... a bit of a tax scam, but manageable ... that was probably the best he could figure out given their divorce in a foreign country situation. She refused that financial offer. Why would that result in her murder?
What did Brad gain by murdering his wife?
Nothing.
Even the sticks and wood ducks turned out to be a figment of the prosecution's imagination.
- Status