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

[Truckdriver]

I see. Another slimy Cummings move.

Could you please elaborate on how this would be a "slimy Cummings move"? I'm confused. I was under the impression that if a plea deal was offered by the prosecution to Kurtz and the plea was not given to BC by Kurtz, then how is that a slimy move by the prosecution? If Kurtz did not deliver/tell/explain/read/discuss the plea deal to BC, wouldn't that fall on Kurtz?

 

[Madeleine74]

Brad SWORE he was telling the truth, the whole truth today. Brad swore the state's version of events was correct. Brad signed a document that said all of that.

Is Brad a lying liar who lies?

 

[CyberPro]

I was confused about the devices. Why would he want them? They are antiquated now, and in a few years they will be relics. There is something strange there.

They are a trophy of his "dealing" with his problem.

The only other reason that I can come to is that they might have some bearing as evidence in a civil trial, should one ever come up. As with the OJ case.

 

[Madeleine74]

Because he wanted to get out sooner to see them is hardly repulsive.

He gave up custody and all rights. He will never see them. As adults they can legally bar him from ever contacting them if they want. And as minors, which they still will be when he gets out, he's not allowed to see or speak to them. He was very willing to do this, not for their benefit, but his. He had a choice and he signed on the dotted line.

 

[Hez]

Um, no he didn't. And hopefully they will be allowed to see him if they want to.

Yes, he is giving them up for adoption to Nancy's sister, so his parental rights at that time will be terminated. I highly doubt the children will ever want to see their mother's murderer. :moo:

 

[ncsu95]

Brad SWORE he was telling the truth, the whole truth today. Brad swore the state's version of events was correct. Brad signed a document that said all of that.

Is Brad a lying liar who lies?

Well obviously he is since he also swore under oath that he didn't do it. Either way, he's now a convicted murderer and it's over. I absolutely hate this outcome though. This is not a 2nd degree murder.

 

[Hez]

Could you please elaborate on how this would be a "slimy Cummings move"? I'm confused. I was under the impression that if a plea deal was offered by the prosecution to Kurtz and the plea was not given to BC by Kurtz, then how is that a slimy move by the prosecution? If Kurtz did not deliver/tell/explain/read/discuss the plea deal to BC, wouldn't that fall on Kurtz?

BBM - Exactly, this notion is absolutely ludicrous.

 

[Madeleine74]

We now know it was Trenkle who was in talks with the DA's office about a plea deal. Confirmed in today's hearing.

IF Kurtz, as lead attorney, barred Trenkle from taking a deal to Brad, and Brad didn't know he could have had a plea back when those discussions were occurring, Kurtz could be in trouble.

 

[Madeleine74]

Well obviously he is since he also swore under oath that he didn't do it. Either way, he's now a convicted murderer and it's over. I absolutely hate this outcome though. This is not a 2nd degree murder.

No it's not. It's first degree murder. He planned it and carried it out.

It stinks that he's getting far less than he deserves but this deal had the full support of the family or it wouldn't have happened. He can thank the Rentz family for being far more gracious and giving than he was to their daughter. He really should be rotting in prison the rest of his life.

 

[CyberPro]

The proffer by Frye is in evidence. It exists and it's real. Brad was on that router at 10:21pm on 7/11/08 in his own house, connected directly to that very router. The MAC ID left its calling card in his Windows System Event log, discovered by Chris Frye. Those are the facts and that's exactly what was in the proffer in 2011 [snip].

(Predicated on this MAC address info being real, and not having seen it myself) this is yet another mistake BC made. Understandably, under a stressful situation. He could have connected the router by a serial "rollover" connection, which is a light blue cable that can be used to configure a router that you have physical access to, and there would have been no log of this being done. A faster, easier way is to make a telnet connection to the router over the network, which would result in the MAC address being logged. Guess which way he used?

 

[CyberPro]

Um, it was proved in the trial. The max time is 23 seconds and the call was longer than that.

You are confusing the time the phone call supposedly took with the log file that indicates a computer was connected to the router to perform the configuration that would allow the call to be routed. They are related, but the time would not have to match at all. It is like saying you come into my kitchen and finding eggs, milk, oil, cake mix, bowls, a mixer and dirty cake pans out, but this somehow proving that I didn't cook a roast in there.

Even if the log does not match the duration or time of the call, it only means that a connection was made to the router that would allow it to have a configuration file changed. In totality it is very damaging, especially since he claimed he didn't have a router like that.

 

[SStarr33]

Could you please elaborate on how this would be a "slimy Cummings move"? I'm confused. I was under the impression that if a plea deal was offered by the prosecution to Kurtz and the plea was not given to BC by Kurtz, then how is that a slimy move by the prosecution? If Kurtz did not deliver/tell/explain/read/discuss the plea deal to BC, wouldn't that fall on Kurtz?

What was the need to mention it today when they had already done it?

 

[SStarr33]

I don't think Brad will ever see his kids again.

You never know. They have Nancy's genes

 

[SStarr33]

Brad SWORE he was telling the truth, the whole truth today. Brad swore the state's version of events was correct. Brad signed a document that said all of that.

Is Brad a lying liar who lies?

As previously stated, many people plead guilty to crimes they didn't commit.

 

[Madeleine74]

As previously stated, many people plead guilty to crimes they didn't commit.

Brad isn't one of them.

When it came time to put up or shut up

Brad knew he could not put up and could not show any tampering. He knew he was toast if another jury got a look at all the evidence.

His lawyers were poseurs and did a good job at making people think there was a conspiracy. They proved how gullible people can be.

 

[SStarr33]

Brad isn't one of them.

Disagree.

 

[calgary123]

What was the need to mention it today when they had already done it?

Let's start with one reason: The integrity of the system.

 

[SStarr33]

Krista almost spilled the beans about something at about 4:00 in this video:

http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/14005507/

And why does she look at her dad when asked about adoption?

 

[SStarr33]

Let's start with one reason: The integrity of the system.

They already told him.

 

[Madeleine74]

<mod snip>

<mod snip> it's in the written agreement. He gave up all rights to them. He cannot contact them as minors, he is no longer their parent, he signed it away. And it will totally be up to them if they ever want to see him once they are adults. They can, if they choose, as adults, keep him away.