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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
oenophile said:
Just rewatched part of the plea, and something bothered me. The judge chastised Brad for giving up his children in exchange for a year of incarceration. It sounds to me like Brad wasn't willing to let the children be adopted, but agreed in exchange for a one year reduction on the sentence. Did I hear that properly?
Click to expand...

That's what he said. It doesn't change anything, it just suggests that Brad had the option of agreeing to spend an extra year in prison and not sign the adoption papers. He chose otherwise. Really, he wouldn't have any prospect of getting the children back anyway. The judge just chose to pile on with his comment. Let's face it, Brad is getting out of jail quicker than he deserves, the judge is putting an exclamation point on it.
 
SStarr33 said:
The State lied numerous times in the trial and in the hearing today.

And Brad also swore he was NG
Click to expand...

Brad today swore that what the state was saying was true. He was explicitly asked that and he said YES.
 
Bradley Graham Cooper, 40, was sentenced to 12 to 15 years – 145 to 183 months – in prison with credit for time served since his arrest in October 2008 for Nancy Cooper's July 12, 2008, death.

The plea – in which Brad Cooper relinquished his parental rights – also makes way for Nancy Cooper's twin sister in Canada to adopt the Coopers' two daughters – now ages 8 and 10.
Read more at http://www.wral.com/cooper-pleads-g...fe-s-2008-death/14003991/#5rSVrokEIssFZ5pc.99
 
At 35 minutes in it is explained why the plea was offered: (1) the mercy of the Rentz's and (2) the trial had cost the county millions already. In other words, they would have gone forward had the Rentz's wanted it though it would have been expensive and they were OK without having to have the expense of a further trial. As well, they'd know Brad would be removed from the US as soon as he's out (or earlier) so the plea makes sense to the state.

Also very interesting that its commented in open court that Brad may not have been notified of the plea deal offered earlier, there's no reason to say that unless that issue could be pressed. They're making sure Brad hears he had the option of pleading earlier. That ball will be in Brad's court.
 
SStarr33 said:
Mercy?? That is hilarious. They LIED to get him convicted.
Click to expand...
If I'm not mistaken that conviction, which you assert was based on a lie, was overturned and up until today, he technically wasn't convicted of anything. He had a shot at a retrial to prove his innocence and be acquitted, instead he plead guilty and admitted to strangling his wife and dumping her body. If you ask me, it's Brad who has been lying the whole time. :jail:
 
calgary123 said:
At 35 minutes in it is explained why the plea was offered: (1) the mercy of the Rentz's and (2) the trial had cost the county millions already. In other words, they would have gone forward had the Rentz's wanted it though it would have been expensive and they were OK without having to have the expense of a further trial. As well, they'd know Brad would be removed from the US as soon as he's out (or earlier) so the plea makes sense to the state.

Also very interesting that its commented in open court that Brad may not have been notified of the plea deal offered earlier, there's no reason to say that unless that issue could be pressed. They're making sure Brad hears he had the option of pleading earlier. That ball will be in Brad's court.
Click to expand...

what do you mean about the ball in Brad's court?
 
oenophile said:
Just rewatched part of the plea, and something bothered me. The judge chastised Brad for giving up his children in exchange for a year of incarceration. It sounds to me like Brad wasn't willing to let the children be adopted, but agreed in exchange for a one year reduction on the sentence. Did I hear that properly?
Click to expand...
It sounds to me like Brad was using his children as a bargaining chip to try and reduce his time spent behind bars. As the judge said, repulsive.
 
Hez said:
It sounds to me like Brad was using his children as a bargaining chip to try and reduce his time spent behind bars. As the judge said, repulsive.
Click to expand...

Because he wanted to get out sooner to see them is hardly repulsive.
 
Hez said:
Thanks, but that doesn't support your assertion that the State LIED (your emphasis) to get him convicted. :rolleyes: Nice try though. All I'm seeing from Brad's supporters today is a lot of this :deadhorse: and this :ignore:.
Click to expand...

If you know all of the facts of the case it does.

Hopefully you or someone you love will never be lied about by someone with this type of power.
 
Hez said:
He completely gave up his rights to see them in exchange for a reduced sentence. GMAB
Click to expand...

Um, no he didn't. And hopefully they will be allowed to see him if they want to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 85 more.
Total: 2,360 (members: 86, guests: 2,274)

Online statistics

Members online
86
Guests online
2,274
Total visitors
2,360
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,094
Messages
18,134,633
Members
231,231
Latest member
timbo1966
Back
Top