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

[otto]

I am going to have to go back and look this up at the trial, but does it sound right that Cummings reported Brad's income at
$17, 000
per month at the plea hearing and yet they were broke?????

After taxes, 17k is more like $8k/month. Wasn't there a huge debt load, and a problem with overspending? Weren't they facing serious financial problems if they didn't reign things in? Hadn't Brad reigned things in a few months before Nancy was murdered, and wasn't she completely not on-board with budgeting for a family? Wasn't she a bit reactive, to the extent that she complained long and loud to anyone that would listen about having to comply with the family budget? She didn't react as a mature mother of two working with her husband to manage family finances? Why should Nancy get a pass on her behaviour in the marriage? She overspent, badmouthed her husband, had affairs, manoeuvred without his knowledge. Is it any surprise that he did the same thing ... listened to her private communication, secured the passports to prevent the children from leaving the home/country?

I wonder which came first. I think that Nancy had the first affair, but was the budget put in place before, or after, he was listening-in? I ask because I'm curious whether he hatched a plan months earlier, or if this was a reaction. If the budget came first, the subsequent badmouthing, and support for her complaints, could have resulted in Brad, a quiet private man, reacting. If he was listening-in, then imposed a budget, secured the passports, and began scheming a plan that was hatched a few months later.

... just trying to figure out for myself whether it was first or second degree murder.

Jason Young definitely hatched a plan months earlier, if he's guilty. With Brad, it's hard to say. The plan about going for a run was pretty convincing in terms of a plausible story. His downfall was checking the dump site from work the day before the murder ... building up his courage, couldn't resist checking the fine details ... the missing cookie?

One thing Nancy was upset about was that her children could no longer have pedicures with her pocket money budget of $300/month.

 

[otto]

Yes, be disgusted by that and not the fact that the confessed murderer ended the life of his wife and destroyed his kids' childhood, perhaps leaving them with psychological scars that will never fully heal. Don't hold him accountable for anything, certainly not his own acts and decisions. Make sure to save all the sympathy for the killer who perpetrated the crime, lied about it for years, and left his children without their beloved mother and the family without their sister/daughter/niece.

Empathy is needed for the killer, the blank slate sociopath upon which has been projected various ills of society or personal mistrust of the government or anger over divorce, custody or family drama, or paranoid and conspiracy ideations. It's very important to be disgusted at everyone else but not the actual killer aka the innocent martyr who's been woefully railroaded.

I have to question whether the children's childhoods were destroyed. Their mother was murdered. Their father was convicted of murder. When their mother was murdered, the children were immediately taken into the care of their mother's identical twin and her husband, a police officer. They received counselling, and have presumably processed the event in a healthy way. I believe that the Rentz family, especially given Mr Rentz's area of specialization, has allowed/promoted the children to grow into health teenagers. I can't see that the Rentz family would allow the children's childhoods to be destroyed by the story about their parents.

Understanding, is what is needed, from my perspective. I want to understand whether this was first or second degree murder. I think that if it is a first degree murder, then it is a so much more dangerous situation. People that can cold-bloodedly plan a murder to solve a problem, one with easy solutions, are a danger to everyone.

 

[otto]

Perhaps Mr. Cummings should have used the actual trial transcripts at the plea hearing.

www.wral.com/news/video/14004059/

1)States that Brad never called Nancy's parents the day she went missing. False.
Mr. Rentz testified that Brad did call him that day.

2)States that at the party, Brad showed no parenting skills. False.
It was Brad who took the girls home at approx 8:30 PM..

3)States that Nancy Cooper stayed at the party a little longer. False
She stayed for another 3-3.5 hours.

4)States that Brad Cooper's income was $17, 000 per month. :waitasec:
Yet, Brad would balk at paying $2, 100.00 in the custody agreement.

I know that Mr Rentz received a phone call when he was attending a funeral, but I thought that was someone other than Brad. Did Brad also call that day - before the parents were arranging flights?

I always knew that Nancy partied until around midnight, when everyone was leaving, and Brad left early with the children at their bedtime. I believe Nancy said something that would humiliate most people about his ability to care for their children.

 

[otto]

5)States that Brad fell in love with a female student in France, and wanted to move the entire family there.
Why? If he didn't love his daughters, why not just go himself?

6)States that Nancy had no money for the trip to Hilton Head. False
It was testified that Brad gave her approx $700.00 and that Nancy used the money to buy groceries for everyone.

7)States that Brad didn't give Nancy any money. False.
We all know about the $300.00 per week allowance.

8)States that he offered a plea deal through Mr. Trenkle during the trial and that he offered another one to Mr.
Kurtz before the case started. Wow. This information was never released until recently. Why did the state keep
the plea deals offered a secret and now there was not just 1, but 2, so it was the third one Brad accepted.



I know Mr. Cummings repeatedly referred to notes during the plea hearing, but I don't know where he got them from,
because the inconsistencies I listed were not facts or testimony from the trial.

Why hasn't anyone else pointed these things out , they just happened !!

Brad wanted to move to France and play the guitar according to some reports. That's probably true out of context. I suspect that he wanted a lot more. He'd recently completed his MBA and was probably considering academic positions and other opportunities in France. His father is a true academic, and he brother works in academia. It's a natural step for someone like Brad ... except for murdering his wife. Brad wanted to move to France. Brad had a friend in France that would have led to divorce with him as petitioner. He probably wanted to continue with his career, and was he actively looking for international work opportunities?

Nancy's family gave her a lot of money. She gave a good chunk of it to an expensive lawyer, who is now representing Nancy's interests. Was it a $20k retainer? 5k? She broke down when she last saw her family during their vacation because she said she had no money. What was probably more true is that she no longer had access to money to live the high life.

 

[JusticeFever]

The prosecution has been fickle from beginning to end. During trial they claimed that Brad murdered his wife because he didn't want her to take his children to Canada. Sounds reasonable, and everyone bought it. Today, we see an entire about-face position. Today, apparently, Brad couldn't care less about his children and is deserving of a public scolding, according to the judge. Clearly the prosecutors don't know what they're talking about since both can't be true: either he murdered Nancy because he couldn't bear for her to take his children to Canada, or he couldn't care less about his children ... not both, but both is what the prosecutors have argued. It seems that the prosecution is prepared to say whatever advances their agenda, apparently completely ignorant of their own contradictions.

We see that same fickleness where we assume that the prosecutors are making a plea deal in good faith, but then they act like silly children by declaring throughout the official affirmation of that agreement that they don't agree with the deal. Why did they make the deal if they don't agree with it? No one is threatening to put them in prison if they don't agree with the deal.

I think they look silly at this point, but that's just my opinion. I don't think much of prosecutors that can't keep their story straight, who contradict their theory of the crime in court, and who can't behave honourably while affirming agreed upon decisions.

Sorry I missed this one, good post, Otto....... :clap:
I never care if someone thinks guilty or non guilty as long as we get there by learning the truth.
And, at a simple plea hearing even then the truth was not told. I would think the state would be under oath as well in presenting the facts of the case.
I can't blame BC for taking the plea under the circumstances, especially now knowing he turned down 2 previous ones.

JMO

 

[JusticeFever]

I know that Mr Rentz received a phone call when he was attending a funeral, but I thought that was someone other than Brad. Did Brad also call that day - before the parents were arranging flights?

I always knew that Nancy partied until around midnight, when everyone was leaving, and Brad left early with the children at their bedtime. I believe Nancy said something that would humiliate most people about his ability to care for their children.

Mr. Rentz testified that Brad called him the day she went missing. I believe the date he testified was around April 11, 2011, I was pulling up old testimony earlier.

 

[otto]

Is it Thanksgiving Weekend yet?

 

[otto]

Sorry I missed this one, good post, Otto....... :clap:
I never care if someone thinks guilty or non guilty as long as we get there by learning the truth.
And, at a simple plea hearing even then the truth was not told. I would think the state would be under oath as well in presenting the facts of the case.
I can't blame BC for taking the plea under the circumstances, especially now knowing he turned down 2 previous ones.

JMO

Two refused plea deals before trial, presumably because he believed that justice would prevail, and once after a trial without rights, most people would agree to a plea. Most would even give up parental rights if it meant a shorter time in prison. How many would trust a faulty judicial system twice if the downside meant remaining in prison until death?

 

[otto]

Mr. Rentz testified that Brad called him the day she went missing. I believe the date he testified was around April 11, 2011, I was pulling up old testimony earlier.

We know that Mr Rentz received a phone call about Nancy at the funeral, and they left immediately to make flight arrangements. Did Mr Rentz receive two phone calls? I thought that Mr Rentz testified that the call from Brad was later, after they were on their way to NC.

 

[JusticeFever]

Update::: Looks like Brad was moved yesterday to Mountain View Prison in Spruce Pines, NC.........10/09/14

Custody Level: Medium


North Carolina Department of Public Safety Offender Public Information:
Cooper, Bradley, G
DOB: 10/09/1973
Inmate or Doc #1264179
Status: Active
Current Location: Mountain View

Just googled the distance from Raleigh, he is now about 4 hours away and near Asheville.

More:
Projected Release Date 4/19/2021
Next Custody Review: 4/1/2015
Minimum Term :12 years, I month
Total Incarceration Term: 15 years, 3 months
Last movement date: 10/09/14

 

[ncsu95]

Yes, be disgusted by that and not the fact that the confessed murderer ended the life of his wife and destroyed his kids' childhood, perhaps leaving them with psychological scars that will never fully heal. Don't hold him accountable for anything, certainly not his own acts and decisions. Make sure to save all the sympathy for the killer who perpetrated the crime, lied about it for years, and left his children without their beloved mother and the family without their sister/daughter/niece.

Empathy is needed for the killer, the blank slate sociopath upon which has been projected various ills of society or personal mistrust of the government or anger over divorce, custody or family drama, or paranoid and conspiracy ideations. It's very important to be disgusted at everyone else but not the actual killer aka the innocent martyr who's been woefully railroaded.

Why do you keep doing this? Why is it not reasonable and okay to be disgusted with the prosecutors that are supposed to represent the people of Wake County NC where most of us live? How does questioning their actions throughout this mean we support and have sympathy for Brad? The actions of the police, district attorneys, and the judge were often disgusting in this case. The judge was completely manipulated by Zellinger and his rulings were unfair and often laughable. That has nothing to do with Brad Cooper. All I wanted was a fair trial from the people paid for with my tax dollars. And that didn't happen. Now while I have many questions and doubt about the evidence, that doesn't mean I support BC. I support his right to a fair trial. I support his right as a dad to not have his kids unfairly taken from him with a bogus emergency custody hearing when those kids were in no danger. I support his right to not have evidence destroyed by the police even after getting a specific request from the defense attorneys to maintain that evidence. I support his right as a defendant to have access to the evidence to prepare a defense and not have that delayed until after Google no longer kept access to the data. I expect to have prosecutors that don't use Facebook to challenge the qualifications of a defense expert. I expect to have prosecutors that don't blatantly lie during closing arguments. I expect much more from them than what we got with this trial. And I'm glad the appeals court smacked them down. I don't give a crap about Brad Cooper. I have no respect for how either one of them chose to live. I wouldn't have been friends with either one of them. She didn't deserve to die, and he deserved a fair trial. But I'm still highly pissed at the actions of the people that are supposed to represent me.

 

[otto]

Why do you keep doing this? Why is it not reasonable and okay to be disgusted with the prosecutors that are supposed to represent the people of Wake County NC where most of us live? How does questioning their actions throughout this mean we support and have sympathy for Brad? The actions of the police, district attorneys, and the judge were often disgusting in this case. The judge was completely manipulated by Zellinger and his rulings were unfair and often laughable. That has nothing to do with Brad Cooper. All I wanted was a fair trial from the people paid for with my tax dollars. And that didn't happen. Now while I have many questions and doubt about the evidence, that doesn't mean I support BC. I support his right to a fair trial. I support his right as a dad to not have his kids unfairly taken from him with a bogus emergency custody hearing when those kids were in no danger. I support his right to not have evidence destroyed by the police even after getting a specific request from the defense attorneys to maintain that evidence. I support his right as a defendant to have access to the evidence to prepare a defense and not have that delayed until after Google no longer kept access to the data. I expect to have prosecutors that don't use Facebook to challenge the qualifications of a defense expert. I expect to have prosecutors that don't blatantly lie during closing arguments. I expect much more from them than what we got with this trial. And I'm glad the appeals court smacked them down. I don't give a crap about Brad Cooper. I have no respect for how either one of them chose to live. I wouldn't have been friends with either one of them. She didn't deserve to die, and he deserved a fair trial. But I'm still highly pissed at the actions of the people that are supposed to represent me.

BBM

First thing that comes to mind is the wiping of the phone, and the deceit perpetrated by police surrounding the wiping of the phone ... phone destruction wasn't released until well past disclosure. Only then did people realize that police monkeyed with Nancy's phone ... ten times in a row ... big mistake to accidentally hit the wrong password 10 times, ignore all warnings, and not realize that the phone was going to be locked and wiped after 10 tries. Why did the Police Department do that, and what was that officer trying to hide? From a police perspective, someone that goes to great lengths to wipe a phone that is critical to a criminal offence is most likely party to the offence.

The Judge is a buffoon. What judge, in his right might, starts pontificating at a plea affirmation hearing? He set a bad example for the retiring prosecutors. It's bad form all round to make a deal, and then openly criticize that deal as you shake hands.

The prosecution has been fickle from beginning to end. The prosecutor argued that Brad murdered Nancy because he both couldn't bear for her to take his children to Canada, and he couldn't care less about his children. That doesn't make sense. It seems that the prosecution is prepared to say whatever advances their agenda, apparently completely ignorant of their own contradictions.

Prosecutors only get one kick at the cat, and they don't get to change their theory of the crime during a plea bargain.
Prosecutors need a corporate memory so that they can keep their cases straight. It just looks bad when they contradict their theory of the crime in court.
Behaviour unbecoming of a prosecutor is simply unbecoming ... like when prosecutors have the guts to stand up in court and request a plea bargain, only to repeatedly criticize their own decision in public. The profession presumes honour while affirming agreed upon decisions. Buffoons in retirement cloaks.

Wasn't the cost of a retrial mentioned as part of the bargain ... justice versus money for foreign murderer trials?

 

[Madeleine74]

First degree murder is the intentional killing of a human with malice and premeditation.

Nothing to figure out in this case. Nancy was murdered via strangulation. It takes up to 4 minutes to strangle or asphyixiate someone to death. In that time the killer knows if they continue to cut off the air supply to the victim, the victim will die. And if they continue to cut off the air they are doing so deliberately and with malice. Premeditation can be formed in a matter of seconds, but in this case the killer had up to 4 minutes to realize what he was doing. Slam dunk on meeting the premeditation test. It was obviously done intentionally and with malice.

In addition, Brad pre-planned the murder, looking on his work computer while in his office at work, where he would dump his wife's body about 12 or so hours later. He increasingly zoomed in on the exact spot. That further proves it was not a heat of the moment crime. Preplanning is not a required element to prove premeditation, but when it exists it's powerful evidence.

He was convicted of first degree murder in the first trial because he planned & committed the murder.

However, in a plea situation, most defendants who are charged with first degree murder are not going to plead to first degree murder. They would at least take their chance at trial with a jury. An incentive from them to plead guilty is to obtain a lesser conviction where they will get less years in prison. That's where negotiations occur between the defense lawyer(s) and the attorneys representing the state. It's a compromise where each side wins some and loses some. It's not really justice for the victim, but it is a resolution and a way to adjudicate cases and allow closure for the family of the victim.

 

[Madeleine74]

Why do you keep doing this? .

Do you think every post is about you or your opinions or is somehow pointed at you?

I focus on the victims in cases. And I point out when empathy, pity and concern is given to the killer (no, not by you, NCSU95, not everything is about you) by those who continue to try and make Brad into an innocent victim. The real crime here was committed by the killer.

Be angry at the state all you want, for they did make errors, as did the judge and even the police. And for the judge's decision to not allow Ward to testify about the hard drive and to not consider him a "forensic" expert but only a "network expert," the conviction was overturned. The appellate judges could have decided differently but they didn't. Had everyone done their jobs perfectly at every moment and had no one made any mistakes, Brad's butt would be in prison for life. Had the appeals court decided Ward wasn't a "forensic" expert Brad would still be in prison for life unless he won at a higher level court. Humans make mistakes, and while they should be perfect they aren't. I can spend energy on being angry that mistakes were made by police or the state that ultimately benefited Brad's defense and allowed them to go whole-hog on a conspiracy tangent, but at the end of the day I believe the mistakes were from human error and not done intentionally to frame or railroad. Then again, speaking of humans and mistakes, had Brad done everything perfectly he might have gotten away with the murder.

I'll save my own disgust for the killer and continue to focus on who the real victims are in this case.

 

[otto]

First degree murder is the intentional killing of a human with malice and premeditation.

Nothing to figure out in this case. Nancy was murdered via strangulation. It takes up to 4 minutes to strangle or asphyixiate someone to death. In that time the killer knows if they continue to cut off the air supply to the victim, the victim will die. And if they continue to cut off the air they are doing so deliberately and with malice. Premeditation can be formed in a matter of seconds, but in this case the killer had up to 4 minutes to realize what he was doing. Slam dunk on meeting the premeditation test. It was obviously done intentionally and with malice.

In addition, Brad pre-planned the murder, looking on his work computer while in his office at work, where he would dump his wife's body about 12 or so hours later. He increasingly zoomed in on the exact spot. That further proves it was not a heat of the moment crime. Preplanning is not a required element to prove premeditation, but when it exists it's powerful evidence.

He was convicted of first degree murder in the first trial because he planned & committed the murder.

However, in a plea situation, most defendants who are charged with first degree murder are not going to plead to first degree murder. They would at least take their chance at trial with a jury. An incentive from them to plead guilty is to obtain a lesser conviction where they will get less years in prison. That's where negotiations occur between the defense lawyer(s) and the attorneys representing the state. It's a compromise where each side wins some and loses some. It's not really justice for the victim, but it is a resolution and a way to adjudicate cases and allow closure for the family of the victim.

Four minutes for someone to be dead from strangulation? Where does that come from?

In four minutes, many things are possible. We have the Nancy Grace "a second is premeditation" to unconsciousness, which is most likely prior to four minutes. After unconsciousness, how often is murder the outcome. In this case it was ... if Nancy was strangled to death, then she was probably "out" sooner than four minutes.

Brad was convicted of first degree murder, but his conviction was overturned by the Supreme Court with a comment that a different outcome was likely had the rights of the accused been respected. That's a rather serious conclusion for the Supreme Court to come to. Essentially, the conclusion is that if the rules had been applied, Brad might have been found not guilty. All of a sudden, Brad accepts the third plea from the prosecutor's office to take a deal ... and then the prosecutors act like a bunch of buffoons when they are in court affirming their much sought after plea agreement.

 

[JusticeFever]

Why do you keep doing this? Why is it not reasonable and okay to be disgusted with the prosecutors that are supposed to represent the people of Wake County NC where most of us live? How does questioning their actions throughout this mean we support and have sympathy for Brad? The actions of the police, district attorneys, and the judge were often disgusting in this case. The judge was completely manipulated by Zellinger and his rulings were unfair and often laughable. That has nothing to do with Brad Cooper. All I wanted was a fair trial from the people paid for with my tax dollars. And that didn't happen. Now while I have many questions and doubt about the evidence, that doesn't mean I support BC. I support his right to a fair trial. I support his right as a dad to not have his kids unfairly taken from him with a bogus emergency custody hearing when those kids were in no danger. I support his right to not have evidence destroyed by the police even after getting a specific request from the defense attorneys to maintain that evidence. I support his right as a defendant to have access to the evidence to prepare a defense and not have that delayed until after Google no longer kept access to the data. I expect to have prosecutors that don't use Facebook to challenge the qualifications of a defense expert. I expect to have prosecutors that don't blatantly lie during closing arguments. I expect much more from them than what we got with this trial. And I'm glad the appeals court smacked them down. I don't give a crap about Brad Cooper. I have no respect for how either one of them chose to live. I wouldn't have been friends with either one of them. She didn't deserve to die, and he deserved a fair trial. But I'm still highly pissed at the actions of the people that are supposed to represent me.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

This is probably the best post I have ever read while discussing the Cooper case.

 

[SStarr33]

Just wanted to drop in and post a link to a book that has been written by a former Secret Service agent about this case. He also wrote a book about the JonBenet case:

Isolated Incident: Investigating the Death of Nancy Cooper Paperback – October 3, 2014
by John W. Taylor (Author)

http://www.amazon.com/Isolated-Inci...=1412340903&sr=1-3&keywords=isolated+incident

 

[otto]

Just wanted to drop in and post a link to a book that has been written by a former Secret Service agent about this case. He also wrote a book about the JonBenet case:

Isolated Incident: Investigating the Death of Nancy Cooper Paperback – October 3, 2014
by John W. Taylor (Author)

http://www.amazon.com/Isolated-Inci...=1412340903&sr=1-3&keywords=isolated+incident

This is a bit of an oops. TransCanada Pipelines is an oil/energy company ... as may be inferred from the word "pipelines" in the name of the company. Perhaps the author hasn't heard of the Keystone XL pipeline project.

http://www.amazon.com/Isolated-Inci...&keywords=isolated+incident#reader_0692291318

 

[ncsu95]

Do you think every post is about you or your opinions or is somehow pointed at you?

I focus on the victims in cases. And I point out when empathy, pity and concern is given to the killer (no, not by you, NCSU95, not everything is about you) by those who continue to try and make Brad into an innocent victim. The real crime here was committed by the killer.

Be angry at the state all you want, for they did make errors, as did the judge and even the police. And for the judge's decision to not allow Ward to testify about the hard drive and to not consider him a "forensic" expert but only a "network expert," the conviction was overturned. The appellate judges could have decided differently but they didn't. Had everyone done their jobs perfectly at every moment and had no one made any mistakes, Brad's butt would be in prison for life. Had the appeals court decided Ward wasn't a "forensic" expert Brad would still be in prison for life unless he won at a higher level court. Humans make mistakes, and while they should be perfect they aren't. I can spend energy on being angry that mistakes were made by police or the state that ultimately benefited Brad's defense and allowed them to go whole-hog on a conspiracy tangent, but at the end of the day I believe the mistakes were from human error and not done intentionally to frame or railroad. Then again, speaking of humans and mistakes, had Brad done everything perfectly he might have gotten away with the murder.

I'll save my own disgust for the killer and continue to focus on who the real victims are in this case.

I never said your posts were about me. But criticizing the prosecutors/judge/cops != sympathizing with Brad Cooper.

 

[RR0004]

Brad is where he should be. Too short, IMO, but guilty is guilty is guilty!
And as far as the Cooper children having their childhood destroyed, so true. Their childhood as they knew it was gone. I don't know how anyone can minimize their loss...regardless of how much therapy they received and how great their support system is now, life as they once knew it is no longer. JMPO