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

[MyBelle]

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.

I think the entire custody issue is going to be moot because of jurisdiction. NC does not have jurisdiction to intervene in the parental rights of Canadian citizens or their children who don't live in the United States. I highly doubt any Canadian Court would allow an adoption proceeding unless Brad is in Canada with Canadian legal representation.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

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.

bbm. Ita.

 

[JusticeFever]

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".

Unless you have a link or inside information to share, you and I and everyone else do not know how the issue of custody came to be entered and part of the plea bargain..........

 

[JusticeFever]

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?

It is possible that when the original plea deal was offered that Brad turned down, the one the state for some unknown reason decided to keep quiet, because how would it look if a man charged with murder turned down a plea?
But, in the next deal , after the court error that won Brad his appeal and the right to a new trial, they re-offered their original deal and this time included an incentive for him to lose a year off his sentencing, if he gave up his children.
Pleas can be offered and counter-offers can be made but the state has almost all the bargaining power.
However, in this case there was something that they wanted from BC, his daughters, so they told him to sign away his rights and his sentence would be reduced by a year.
The ironic part is that after he agreed to do what they wanted , they chastised him for it.
This, imo, is the most likely scenario of what went down.
JMO

 

[Hiandmighty]

(Every time i pass by this thread on the new posts section, I automatically read this as "Bradley Cooper" as in the actor. Every single time.)

 

[otto]

I think the entire custody issue is going to be moot because of jurisdiction. NC does not have jurisdiction to intervene in the parental rights of Canadian citizens or their children who don't live in the United States. I highly doubt any Canadian Court would allow an adoption proceeding unless Brad is in Canada with Canadian legal representation.

JMO

If two children lived in NC, and a Canadian prosecutor offered a prisoner a shorter sentence in exchange for giving up parental rights, would the NC courts respect that order or would the result be, as you suggest, that NC courts will make it clear that legal decisions regarding NC children will be made in NC? I find it hard to believe that a Canadian court will not see problems with the deal offered by the NC prosecutor's office. It seems absurd that Canada would allow a foreign countries to dictate adoption orders that pertain to Canadian children living in Canada.

That said, I suspect that Nancy's family is having legal adoption papers drawn up in British Columbia, and that those documents will be presented to Brad for his signature. That doesn't remove the question of whether the agreement was made under "duress". Even if Brad is asked to sign papers declaring that he was not under duress, the extra year in prison looming over his head is enough for him to sign anything that is put under his nose.

 

[calgary123]

Today I spoke with both a family law lawyer and an immigration lawyer on an informal, hey-what-do-you-think basis (ie not asking for a researched legal opinion, but what they thought. I even told them to assume Brad was factually innocent (though also I thought he was guilty). Neither had heard of this case before, but I forwarded them the link to the Dateline episode as they were curious and somewhat shocked I knew the perpetrator).

-The immigration lawyer commented that the girls would be automatic US citizens, as well as eligible for Canadian citizenship as the children of Canadian parents, but an application would have to be made. She noted that certain benefits in Canada require legal status in Canada, and so she couldn't imagine that these girls did not already have formal Canadian citizenship since they have been living here for some time. Whether they had it before Nancy died or after as a result of the Rentz's taking then-temporary custody is unknown. She also commented that Brad would be removed from the US upon release and so will no longer have access to the US for anything, including court proceedings.

-The family law lawyer commented that because the girls will be residing in Canada and by the time Brad is released, will have been for over a decade, there is little doubt that only the Canadian courts will take jurisdiction in any case involving custody of the girls. She pointed out that once released she thought Brad would be removed from the US and so there would be no reason for the US courts to take jurisdiction--- the custodial parents live in Canada, the girls live in Canada, and Brad can not enter the US. She said Brad would not have standing to bring any court application assuming a completed adoption, regardless of what jurisdiction that adoption happened in. Even then, by age 14 and 16 there is no way Brad would be eligible for custody, as he will have been out of their lives for a long time. Even access would not be in their best interests as, whatever the truth is, neither child has any relationship with Brad and the controversial disruption to their lives would only cause pain and frustration. Whether to allow contact with Brad would be a decision only the girls can make, and once again, only once they are adults. The actual conviction for killing their mom is important, but not necessary to prove to deny access.... even if Brad could get over the issue of not having standing, he will have serious problems in convincing the court the disruption would be in their best interests even being the biological father.

-I mentioned the duress argument to the family law lawyer, she thought it would be something she would ever recommend to even try.

Anyway, while these aren't legal opinions, they provide some insight.

 

[calgary123]

-I mentioned the duress argument to the family law lawyer, she thought it would be something she would not ever recommend to even try.

Anyway, while these aren't legal opinions, they provide some insight.

Fixed

 

[calgary123]

One more thing the family law lawyer mentioned, which I hadn't considered before and somehow didn't end up in my post kind of like the error above.

By the time he will be out, Brad will be ill suited to care for any child in any manner. He will return to society as a destitute ex-convict, who will need to rebuild his life, and child care is not in his or any child's interests. It will take time to demonstrate he can function properly in society. Even then, there will never be a time in the future where he would eligible, for example, to serve as a foster parent. To attempt to establish his innocence would take an extraordinary series of evidential realizations, the kind where DNA evidence proves he didn't do it (and she commented this does happen sometimes).

 

[MyBelle]

If two children lived in NC, and a Canadian prosecutor offered a prisoner a shorter sentence in exchange for giving up parental rights, would the NC courts respect that order or would the result be, as you suggest, that NC courts will make it clear that legal decisions regarding NC children will be made in NC? I find it hard to believe that a Canadian court will not see problems with the deal offered by the NC prosecutor's office. It seems absurd that Canada would allow a foreign countries to dictate adoption orders that pertain to Canadian children living in Canada.

That said, I suspect that Nancy's family is having legal adoption papers drawn up in British Columbia, and that those documents will be presented to Brad for his signature. That doesn't remove the question of whether the agreement was made under "duress". Even if Brad is asked to sign papers declaring that he was not under duress, the extra year in prison looming over his head is enough for him to sign anything that is put under his nose.

BBM. It is absurd. If I were in his shoes, I would not sign any adoption papers from Canada. He gave up his U.S. parental rights to the children, not his Canadian parental rights. I doubt a Canadian court would order the adoption without having him present in Canada with Canadian legal representation.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

Today I spoke with both a family law lawyer and an immigration lawyer on an informal, hey-what-do-you-think basis (ie not asking for a researched legal opinion, but what they thought. I even told them to assume Brad was factually innocent (though also I thought he was guilty). Neither had heard of this case before, but I forwarded them the link to the Dateline episode as they were curious and somewhat shocked I knew the perpetrator).

-The immigration lawyer commented that the girls would be automatic US citizens, as well as eligible for Canadian citizenship as the children of Canadian parents, but an application would have to be made. She noted that certain benefits in Canada require legal status in Canada, and so she couldn't imagine that these girls did not already have formal Canadian citizenship since they have been living here for some time. Whether they had it before Nancy died or after as a result of the Rentz's taking then-temporary custody is unknown. She also commented that Brad would be removed from the US upon release and so will no longer have access to the US for anything, including court proceedings.

-The family law lawyer commented that because the girls will be residing in Canada and by the time Brad is released, will have been for over a decade, there is little doubt that only the Canadian courts will take jurisdiction in any case involving custody of the girls. She pointed out that once released she thought Brad would be removed from the US and so there would be no reason for the US courts to take jurisdiction--- the custodial parents live in Canada, the girls live in Canada, and Brad can not enter the US. She said Brad would not have standing to bring any court application assuming a completed adoption, regardless of what jurisdiction that adoption happened in. Even then, by age 14 and 16 there is no way Brad would be eligible for custody, as he will have been out of their lives for a long time. Even access would not be in their best interests as, whatever the truth is, neither child has any relationship with Brad and the controversial disruption to their lives would only cause pain and frustration. Whether to allow contact with Brad would be a decision only the girls can make, and once again, only once they are adults. The actual conviction for killing their mom is important, but not necessary to prove to deny access.... even if Brad could get over the issue of not having standing, he will have serious problems in convincing the court the disruption would be in their best interests even being the biological father.

-I mentioned the duress argument to the family law lawyer, she thought it would be something she would ever recommend to even try.

Anyway, while these aren't legal opinions, they provide some insight.

BBM. Your friend must have slept thru class the day dual citizenship was explained. The Cooper children were born prior to 2009 to Canadian citizens living in the U.S. Also, the aunt and uncle are not "custodial parents" they are legal guardians.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?q=356&t=5

 

[calgary123]

BBM. Your friend must have slept thru class the day dual citizenship was explained. The Cooper children were born prior to 2009 to Canadian citizens living in the U.S. Also, the aunt and uncle are not "custodial parents" they are legal guardians.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?q=356&t=5

Don't take my paraphrasing as exactly what they said word for word including definitions.....and if you have superior info please do tell.

 

[JusticeFever]

BBM. Your friend must have slept thru class the day dual citizenship was explained. The Cooper children were born prior to 2009 to Canadian citizens living in the U.S. Also, the aunt and uncle are not "custodial parents" they are legal guardians.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?q=356&t=5

Thank you for clearing this up...... :clap:

On another note, what would happen if someone took a plea admitting guilt and years later was found innocent, (no, not when hell freezes over) would they then be charged with perjury?

 

[Hez]

BBM. Your friend must have slept thru class the day dual citizenship was explained. The Cooper children were born prior to 2009 to Canadian citizens living in the U.S. Also, the aunt and uncle are not "custodial parents" they are legal guardians.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?q=356&t=5

BBM - Was it necessary to be rude to get your point across? The discussions have been helpful and informative until you posted this.

 

[Madeleine74]

BC already signed a document allowing the adoption to proceed. Not just giving up rights in the US., but parental rights period. It's all done from his side, nothing more for him to sign.

 

[JusticeFever]

BBM - Was it necessary to be rude to get your point across? The discussions have been helpful and informative until you posted this.

Are you just singling out one side of the snark, or both? You may have missed a few posts then.

 

[JusticeFever]

BBM. It is absurd. If I were in his shoes, I would not sign any adoption papers from Canada. He gave up his U.S. parental rights to the children, not his Canadian parental rights. I doubt a Canadian court would order the adoption without having him present in Canada with Canadian legal representation.

JMO

The whole concept of adding a custody issue to a plea bargain deal in a murder case is absurd to begin with.
Brad being able to raise his daughters when he was released wasn't going to happen anyway. He would have had to overcome great odds.
But, then the whole plea bargain hearing itself was absurd, "Let's offer a deal and then let's go on record and say it's not enough time even though its our deal " Huh?

 

[MyBelle]

The whole concept of adding a custody issue to a plea bargain deal in a murder case is absurd to begin with.
Brad being able to raise his daughters when he was released wasn't going to happen anyway. He would have had to overcome great odds.
But, then the whole plea bargain hearing itself was absurd, "Let's offer a deal and then let's go on record and say it's not enough time even though its our deal " Huh?

It truly is absurd and laughably so considering it involves a citizen of another country.

JMO

 

[Madeleine74]

It wasn't absurb in the least. In order for an adoption to legally go through he needed to give up all parental rights; he resides in the U.S., it's not like the DOC was going to ship him off to Canada to complete parental dissolution/adoption paperwork. It was the smart thing for the family to have negotiated on their behalf. Protection of the children has always been the family's main goal, over retribution. Adoption completes that process and provides certainty for the children and their new parents. Brad had his own separate representation for that.

 

[Hez]

Are you just singling out one side of the snark, or both? You may have missed a few posts then.

Nope, just that post because as I said the discussion had been helpful and informative lately, without any snark.