Paranoia.. Everything has to be a conspiracy.
The facts of the case were nuanced and conclusions were molded to fit a paranoid-conspiracy agenda.
- No evidence pointed away from Brad.
- When were the shoe prints made? Can you date them? How do you know they were made that night? Do you know for a fact those shoe impressions were not there the day before? Where's the proof? Further, those prints were physically distorted and the CCBI agent testified to their condition and why he didn't take castings of them. The prints were filled with water from the rains that day. Photos were taken but CCBI testified they could not get a print or accurate shoe size out of that distorted shoe impression. Oooh conspiracy!
- Tire tracks - Can you date them? When were they made? How do you know they were made that night? Where's the proof? It's another "had to be made that night because..." Do you know for a fact those tire tracks were not there the day before?
- The weather report was that there had been no rain at all the few days before the body was dumped. Zero rain the day of the dump and zero rain the day after. Then the rains started. Yet the claim is somehow those tire tracks were made on muddy/wet ground by the vehicle that carried Nancy's body. Where's the proof of that? The ground was dry the day she was dumped; it rained sometime after her body was dumped.
- The job of investigators is not to try and prove someone innocent. This is a fundamental misunderstanding if you think that's their role. Their job is to investigate a case, gather information, and go where the evidence leads, not spend their time to try and prove someone didn't do a crime. The crime scene techs (who are different people, not in the local police dept) catalog and process scenes, photograph and turn potential evidence in. Claiming there was "no evidence" is ridiculous. Hundreds of exhibits were entered at trial and given Bates stamps. Each item is considered evidence in a case. That you don't consider them evidence doesn't make it so.
- What 16 eyewitnesses came into court? Please point to them. Three came into court. 1 person saw two women running down Fielding Dr. 1 witness (Rosemary Zednick) saw a woman wearing an iPod who smiled as she passed. One witness was Curtis Hodges who saw a woman running down a major street, not in distress, not being attacked, not stopped. He saw a "van" turning around and heading in the same direction as that runner. At no point did he see anyone in trouble or being hassled. Did Hodges get a license plate number? No. Good identification of the vehicle? No. Where are the 13 other witnesses who testified? You said there were 16 witnesses. Who are they?
It's been pointed out at least once, if not more, that the first trial essentially never happened. Over. Done. Overturned. Move on. Now it's being dragged back up yet again. Why? Because Brad did something his supporters never ever thought he would. He declared himself guilty. He admitted it. Instead of finally conceding he's actually the killer, no it can't be. Back to conspiracy-land once again, ratcheted up. The whole town conspired against this guy..no the whole government. He only took a plea because "he had no choice" and "it's all so unfair he couldn't ever get a fair trial so even though he won a new trial it didn't matter...he didn't even need to try."
He was back to "innocent until proven guilty" legally and then when he finally had his opportunity to prove every claim he/his team made, when given an alternative, he folded.
Brad was back to innocent, legally. It was then on the state to prove guilt. Well Brad ended it and he wrote the last chapter. He said he was, in fact, guilty, and he in fact killed his wife and dumped her body. That's what he told the world Sept 22, and that's how he and his case will be remembered.
BBM. Maybe because this is the Nancy Cooper trial forum. If you have issues with people continuing to bring up stuff from the trial that never happened, then why do you continue to engage in the conversation? He's guilty. He plead guilty. So why do you care if people continue to discuss the trial?