Brad Cooper Pleads Guilty to 2nd Degree Murder of Nancy Cooper

[citygirl]

I am taken aback by all the chatter about 'he only has 6 more years'. I wonder how he feels about that? Does 6 more years really seem like no big deal to a prisoner? Perhaps, in comparison to spending a life in prison?
As for his children and seeing them once he is out? Why is everyone so convinced he would have any desire? He murdered their mother. Obviously he had NO concern for their welfare. Why would that change now? He bargained them away to lessen his sentence by one year. I read in an article, no link, that his older daughter suffered tremendously and is finally getting it together. Ya think she will forget that pain? The pain that her father put her through? MOO.

 

[borndem]

Nice work, Bordem, it would seem almost automatic when a parent is convicted of murder, they would lose the rights to their children.
But, now I see the problem, it is because in 6 years or less, Brad is going to be free. The Rentz's would have to deal with this at a later time, if they didn't do it now., it seems.
But, here is one for you and it is sickening...... Raven's son lives with Raven's Mom, which means Raven will get to see him and be in his life, and Raven was convicted of manslaughter. How is that going to work?

The Raven deal, Fever, is indeed sickening. Those of us who watched the trial also got to see how Raven's mom, at least by her testimony, thinks he can do no wrong, and that, I am sure, is what she is telling her grandson, probably daily. And due to the Alford plea, he stood up in court and announced that he did not kill his wife & the mother of his son. So there that one is. Grrrrr.

I hope the little guy is happy and is being treated well, and I imagine that he is. I don't know what he has been and is being told about his mom, that is a mystery we will prolly never know, but thinking good things for him is about all we can do as folks who watched the trial and saw & heard what we did.

 

[seattlechiquita]

The Raven deal, Fever, is indeed sickening. Those of us who watched the trial also got to see how Raven's mom, at least by her testimony, thinks he can do no wrong, and that, I am sure, is what she is telling her grandson, probably daily. And due to the Alford plea, he stood up in court and announced that he did not kill his wife & the mother of his son. So there that one is. Grrrrr.

I hope the little guy is happy and is being treated well, and I imagine that he is. I don't know what he has been and is being told about his mom, that is a mystery we will prolly never know, but thinking good things for him is about all we can do as folks who watched the trial and saw & heard what we did.

omg don't remind me about Raven's mom.... she has to be one of the most unpleasantly uneducated and rash witnesses/characters I have ever come across in true crime. I hear her and I need a shower.

 

[JusticeFever]

The Raven deal, Fever, is indeed sickening. Those of us who watched the trial also got to see how Raven's mom, at least by her testimony, thinks he can do no wrong, and that, I am sure, is what she is telling her grandson, probably daily. And due to the Alford plea, he stood up in court and announced that he did not kill his wife & the mother of his son. So there that one is. Grrrrr.

I hope the little guy is happy and is being treated well, and I imagine that he is. I don't know what he has been and is being told about his mom, that is a mystery we will prolly never know, but thinking good things for him is about all we can do as folks who watched the trial and saw & heard what we did.

So unfair, and even at the plea hearing all her family wanted him to do was say he was sorry, he couldn't even give them that. Sometimes you just have to check out of these cases. I saw this great quote on FB one day, it was pertaining to Casey A. but I use it for Raven as well.

"Have a seat, Karma is sharpening her nails, she says she will be with you shortly"

 

[JusticeFever]

omg don't remind me about Raven's mom.... she has to be one of the most unpleasantly uneducated and rash witnesses/characters I have ever come across in true crime. I hear her and I need a shower.

I honestly will never know how anyone could call this one a NG,,,,:gaah:
But, I still would like to know how Raven can be around his son again?
Even a manslaughter charge should end his parental rights too, he killed Janet.

 

[borndem]

I honestly will never know how anyone could call this one a NG,,,,:gaah:
But, I still would like to know how Raven can be around his son again?
Even a manslaughter charge should end his parental rights too, he killed Janet.

Agreed, in spades. Someone would have to petition for those rights to be terminated. I don't know what kind of litigation or hearing, etc., must be done to get this accomplished, nor what kind of money would be necessary, but he certainly qualifies, seems to me, I can't imagine that an Alford plea would figure into it -- he did plead to a G on manslaughter, but IANAL. Maybe it will happen -- but her folks would certainly, IMO, need a good family lawyer.

 

[Madeleine74]

Thought I'd wandered into the Aboroa threads. There are dedicated threads to go into that case. Can this one stay on the BC case please?

 

[otto]

The law societies of the western provinces (BC, AB, SK, MB) all have an agreement in place to allow their memebers to practice within those provinces. I'm not sure why you mention Ontario because it doesn't factor in this case, but Ontario is not a party to that agreement, though its not hard for an Ontario lawyer to obatin permission to handle a case in AB or BC, or vice-versa, for example. Foreign lawyers have to go through a program which includes the specifics of the Canadian legal system and laws, but if their degree was from a common-law jurisdiction or the US, the barriers to entry are relatively low. Brad will not need a lawyer from NC once he's in Canada, he'll need a Canadian lawyer.

The NC murder conviction does impact Brad's parental rights in Canada, but even more so the adoption extinguishes them. A murder conviction in the US is not viewed much differently in Canada than if he were convicted of the same crime in Canada. His conviction can not be "overturned" in Canada. If he even tried to argue that he did not kill Nancy, before a Canadian court, he would face an insurmountable battle. Its just not going to happen.

Source: The law degree on the wall of my office.

The National Mobility Agreement permits lawyers to practice in other provinces than where they were called to the bar with restrictions. In my comment, I stated that there are "restrictions" preventing lawyers from simply setting up office in another province. That is true. See National Mobility Agreement. This was implemented in 2006. This is a summary of the 2006 changes: http://www.lawyersweekly.ca/index.php?section=article&articleid=1063. I don't think anyone suggested that Brad would not need a Canadian lawyer to have his parental rights restored. It makes a lot more sense for Nancy's sister to have a lawyer from her province complete the paperwork, and I suspect that it would be a good idea for them to have Brad sign a document stating that he was not under duress when he relinquished parental rights.

From a legal perspective, is it better to have the papers drawn up by a NC lawyer and to omit the statement regarding duress?

 

[thefragile7393]

Sigh. So many cases and so many parallels.

 

[otto]

Again, who is going to put up the thousands of dollars it would take to retain an attorney in Canada and litigate any kind of legal custody petition? Brad is penniless. I can't imagine his parents are going to spend their retirement monies on a fool's mission.

I can fully understand the girls wanting answers to some hard questions someday and that makes sense. If you reread my post above, I talked about much more than that, though that was conveniently ignored.

I don't understand the opinion the girls will somehow be okay with or forgive him for murdering their mother, disposing of her body, and leaving them without her forever, which is what would need to happen, at least on some level, for any kind of relationship to form. And don't mistake asking some hard questions for an ongoing relationship. That also is being conveniently ignored. (Of course no one can tell the future, no need to bring that up again.) Why the assumption that Brad will want a relationship with the children he gave up? What is this based on?

I personally don't think the girls will ever think it was okay Brad killed their mother and be able to put that aside and let bygones be bygones. That doesn't mean they'll be full of hatred, but it won't surprise me if they want nothing to do with him ever. He killed their mom, for goodness sakes.

Brad, if penniless, is entitled to Legal Aid.

 

[JusticeFever]

Thought I'd wandered into the Aboroa threads. There are dedicated threads to go into that case. Can this one stay on the BC case please?

It is Abaroa, and there are only 3 posts and they are about custody and plea bargains, both that happened in NC in the last few months, same as Cooper's.. Maybe you could skip over them as I only brought it up as comparison. I think we are done though, if that helps. I can understand your confusion though.

 

[JusticeFever]

Brad, if penniless, is entitled to Legal Aid.

One thing at a time, though. Right now BC is probably determined to make the next 6 years go by as quickly as he can, if that is possible. I think he has only been in prison about 4 years and then 2 years in jail waiting for trial and his re-trial. Not positive though.

 

[Madeleine74]

Brad is not going to be able to turn around this dissolution of parental rights even if he wanted to (and there is no indication other than peoples' imaginations that he would want to). He voluntarily gave up all his rights, not under duress and not under any threat. Further, he's indigent, cannot provide care or financial support for anyone, including himself, cannot house, clothe, or support. He's had no relationship with the children since he went to jail. A family court is not going to reverse an adoption and no judge is going to think the best interests of children are served by living with the indigent, admitted and convicted murderer of the children's mother. The whole thing is a silly pipe dream.

 

[otto]

Brad is not going to be able to turn around this dissolution of parental rights even if he wanted to (and there is no indication other than peoples' imaginations that he would want to). He voluntarily gave up all his rights, not under duress and not under any threat. Further, he's indigent, cannot provide care or financial support for anyone, including himself, cannot house, clothe, or support. He's had no relationship with the children since he went to jail. A family court is not going to reverse an adoption and no judge is going to think the best interests of children are served by living with the indigent, admitted and convicted murderer of the children's mother. The whole thing is a silly pipe dream.

I'm exploring a reversal of the NC order, not a custody order for 14 and 16 year old children. As I've said, I don't think that anyone writes up custody orders for children of those ages (unless one parent intends to take the children to a foreign country). Regarding Brad's financial situation, I don't think anyone knows anything about it. Furthermore, even poor people have rights in Canada.

 

[calgary123]

Brad, if penniless, is entitled to Legal Aid.

I truly appreciate your advocacy and thoughts for something you clearly believe in, even though we disagree. I'm happy to keep responding and posting.

But no, he would not get legal aid to do what you suggest, in Alberta or British Columbia. This time I'm willing to say there is no chance, though I suppose the programs could change in 6 or so years. That being said, funding gets restricted over time not expanded, so... its not going to happen. I actually worked as a legal aid intake officer before I started my "real" career.

Consider: If Brad wanted to get custody of the girls, when he gets released, those girls would only be subject to custody orders for, what a few years? The eldest will be 16? So 2 years and 4 or so for the youngest? And they'll already be old enough to give their thoughts?

If he wants to make the argument you suggest... that he admitted to murdering their mother only because he was under duress... imagine how long it would take to fight the admission that he killed Nancy.... and the cost would be extraordinary.... pulling all the evidence from NC, then arguing everything all over again? There is no plausible way this could happen.

The national mobility agreement is much different from the western agreement, read both.

 

[otto]

I truly appreciate your advocacy and thoughts for something you clearly believe in, even though we disagree. I'm happy to keep responding and posting.

But no, he would not get legal aid to do what you suggest, in Alberta or British Columbia. This time I'm willing to say there is no chance, though I suppose the programs could change in 6 or so years. That being said, funding gets restricted over time not expanded, so... its not going to happen. I actually worked as a legal aid intake officer before I started my "real" career.

Consider: If Brad wanted to get custody of the girls, when he gets released, those girls would only be subject to custody orders for, what a few years? The eldest will be 16? So 2 years and 4 or so for the youngest? And they'll already be old enough to give their thoughts?

If he wants to make the argument you suggest... that he admitted to murdering their mother only because he was under duress... imagine how long it would take to fight the admission that he killed Nancy.... and the cost would be extraordinary.... pulling all the evidence from NC, then arguing everything all over again? There is no plausible way this could happen.

The national mobility agreement is much different from the western agreement, read both.

What criteria would restrict his eligibility for legal aid? I don't see Brad applying for custody. I see him seeking to reverse the NC parental rights order on the basis that it was made under duress. I'm not saying that he will claim anything about the murder plea, I am looking solely at the order to relinquish parental rights. Convicted murderers in Canada are not required to give up their parental rights.

 

[Madeleine74]

Why fight for parentage and custody of a 16 yr old and 14 yr old you no longer know, who don't know you, and have no relationship with you? For what purpose?

 

[macd]

are not required to give up their parental rights.

I don't get this. Brad was not required to give up his parental rights. He offered it up in exchange for a shorter sentence. Both the judge and DA thought this offer was repugnant, but reluctantly agreed while making statements against it. This was Brad's "win".

 

[otto]

I don't get this. Brad was not required to give up his parental rights. He offered it up in exchange for a shorter sentence. Both the judge and DA thought this offer was repugnant, but reluctantly agreed while making statements against it. This was Brad's "win".

I thought he was offered a choice: give up parental rights, or spend another year in jail. Worded otherwise: the murder sentence would be reduced if he gave up parental rights. The victim's family wanted the right to adopt, so wouldn't discussion about adoption have come from that party via the prosecution?

 

[Madeleine74]

Not sure how the year less in prison came about.

Possibility 1: It was offered as an incentive by the state

Possibility 2: His custody attorney asked for it, negotiated for it, and the state then agreed. (he had representation for the custody issue apart from his court appointed attorneys).