Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #11

[fran]

Hey everyone!!!
I am new to the ballgame, Just getting my feet wet.
I have been lurking for the last 1 and 1/2 weeks.
I am not up to a sparing match yet. Maybe I will be able
to show my fangs later on

Just throwing my two cents in.

IIRC about 10 mil. letters ago a former room-mate of BC implied that
BC was quite the narcissist. NC friends have all alluded to this and
his very controlling nature.
There is still a nagging rumor that BC went shopping much earlier than
he states in any of his affivadits or statements.
Why file a rebuttal against supposed allegations if you are also filing an
objection against these allegations?
My gut leans toward BC killing his wife. However, CPD has not named a POI or
names a suspect Yet.We having nothing in the way of hard evidence implicating anyone Hopefully the sands of time will provide Golden Nuggets of truth that we so desperately need. I guess until then every opinion and observation is usefual

Great first post Figbarinc.

I totally agree.

Welcome to Websleuths!

fran

 

[fran]

Until the forensics come back or a witness, extremely reliable witness, appears, I see no reason how LE could arrest anyone. LE has said it is isolated, they have also said it was not a random murder. Sure would look like that old rush to judgement issue again if LE does not pursue all avenues.

I don't know how to interpret the fliers since we don't know what the focus of the flier is. It very well could be a cover all the bases approach or it could be a serious attempt to get someone to come forward and say they saw Nancy jogging at such and such place at such and such time, or it could be did anyone see a vehicle or an odd person in the undeveloped area where Nancy was found.

Maybe someone can tell us.

IMHO, the flyers could be to eliminate, as well as accumulate information. Like, IF a person was out that Saturday morning and did NOT see Nancy jogging, that's evidence.

We've seen this before. All the witnesses at the Berkeley Marina who testified they did NOT see SP. He said he'd actually spoken to the personnel there and even describe the conversation. The pros proved he did NOT talk to anyone there, which was circumstantial evidence he did NOT leave from the Marina as he had stated.

There were people who originally stated they had seen Laci at the park. Yet,...........they were never called by the defense. IMO, because they most likely realized it was NOT Laci they had seen. Thus, she was NOT at the park as the now convicted murderer had stated.

JMHO
fran

 

[Just the Fax]

It is interesting the DA or cops in Wake County refuse to 'name' a suspect in these high profile cases (same with Ann Miller and Jason Young).

I asked a deputy at the courthouse yesterday about that in general. He said it is done so it is not inflammatory towards the potential jury pool and does not influence someones right to a fair trial.....same basic thought with sealing damning search warrants.

Remember, the key words when you hear no 'person of interest' or 'suspect' is not named

 

[fran]

That doesn't seem like a good sign to me. If they had the evidence to arrest BC, I think they would have done so already. IMO, LE wouldn't waste the time and personnel to hand out flyers if they knew for sure that BC did it. I don't think they are doing this just to put icing on the cake, ie., to prove that they looked at someone other than BC.

What we think we know about BC may fit the profile (not literally, just based on other cases) and statistics associated with wife killers, but that alone does not prove anything.

Respectfully,
RC

Whenever we, from the outside looking in, get impatient of LE not making a speedy arrest,...........think OJ.

The defendent is entitled to a speedy trial. LE MUST have all their evidence gathered BEFORE they arrest the POI, or suspect. IF they don't, they may loose because evidence comes in too late to be presented in court.

THe defendent is entitled to review evidence to be used against him, 30 days, IIRC, prior to trial.

JMHO
fran

 

[Star12]

It just seems to me that since it was off the record, and was said by the district attorney, that perhaps it should be held as confidential.

I don't mean to step on any toes here, but after many years working in the legal field, you get kind of cautious about what is said, implied, or just understood.

I would hate for this case to be compromised, or for WS to be censured, because of a slip.

I get very hinky, and very much uptight about stuff like this. So maybe it's just me being very straightlaced.

Sorry if I offended you, Fax, but to paraphrase Fran's tag, I'm not saying, I'm just saying.

 

[raisincharlie]

IMHO, the flyers could be to eliminate, as well as accumulate information. Like, IF a person was out that Saturday morning and did NOT see Nancy jogging, that's evidence.

We've seen this before. All the witnesses at the Berkeley Marina who testified they did NOT see SP. He said he'd actually spoken to the personnel there and even describe the conversation. The pros proved he did NOT talk to anyone there, which was circumstantial evidence he did NOT leave from the Marina as he had stated.

There were people who originally stated they had seen Laci at the park. Yet,...........they were never called by the defense. IMO, because they most likely realized it was NOT Laci they had seen. Thus, she was NOT at the park as the now convicted murderer had stated.

JMHO
fran

I think so as well Fran. LE wants to know if anyone saw Nancy that Saturday morning, what time and where if they did see her. If witnesses come foward LE will make the maps and note the times to define the potential viability of such sightings if there are any. Same with a vehicle, lets hope another brown van shows up :crazy:

I believe LE would be remiss if it did not have all this data before taking the cas to the DA. Its all good.

 

[fran]

It is interesting the DA or cops in Wake County refuse to 'name' a suspect in these high profile cases (same with Ann Miller and Jason Young).

I asked a deputy at the courthouse yesterday about that in general. He said it is done so it is not inflammatory towards the potential jury pool and does not influence someones right to a fair trial.....same basic thought with sealing damning search warrants.

Remember, the key words when you hear no 'person of interest' or 'suspect' is not named

LOL, we here at Websleuths learned that a long time ago. They used to say POI, thinking that would satisfy everyone without actually naming a suspect. Yet the public became aware POI means they're a 'suspect' in LE's eye. So they've even done away with POI unless they are SURE they have their man, orrrr woman!

JMHO
fran

 

[Just the Fax]

It just seems to me that since it was off the record, and was said by the district attorney, that perhaps it should be held as confidential.

I don't mean to step on any toes here, but after many years working in the legal field, you get kind of cautious about what is said, implied, or just understood.

I would hate for this case to be compromised, or for WS to be censured, because of a slip.

I get very hinky, and very much uptight about stuff like this. So maybe it's just me being very straightlaced.

Sorry if I offended you, Fax, but to paraphrase Fran's tag, I'm not saying, I'm just saying.

The DA had nothing to do with the custody hearing....hence, that is why he was walking the halls conversing with numerous media folks in the area.

The term 'off the record' was mine, as that was not used by him to preface his casual conversation.

Again, I drew my own conclusion based on his hypothetical that if he is arrested in 2 months.....

 

[Just the Fax]

LOL, we here at Websleuths learned that a long time ago. They used to say POI, thinking that would satisfy everyone without actually naming a suspect. Yet the public became aware POI means they're a 'suspect' in LE's eye. So they've even done away with POI unless they are SURE they have their man, orrrr woman!

JMHO
fran

The DA in Wake county does not like to use either term even if the know who the killer is....just look at Jason Young and Ann Miller

 

[fran]

LE is out on Holly Springs road again this morning stopping traffic and giving out flyers.

That's good! Shows they're continuing the investigation.

Everybody should be happy about that!

JMHO
fran

 

[fran]

The DA in Wake county does not like to use either term even if the know who the killer is....just look at Jason Young and Ann Miller

That's what I was saying. LE STOPPED using that term. Errrr........unless an arrest is IMINENT.........meaning within hours!

JMHO
fran

 

[raisincharlie]

Whenever we, from the outside looking in, get impatient of LE not making a speedy arrest,...........think OJ.

The defendent is entitled to a speedy trial. LE MUST have all their evidence gathered BEFORE they arrest the POI, or suspect. IF they don't, they may loose because evidence comes in too late to be presented in court.

THe defendent is entitled to review evidence to be used against him, 30 days, IIRC, prior to trial.

JMHO
fran

Additionally in NC the moment a person is arrested, their counsil has the right to receive all discovery beginning at that point. Also if I recall it correctly, NC is not a reciprical discovery state. In other words the DA must turn over his evidence but the defense council is not required to provide any to the DA.

Am I recalling that correctly Just the Fax ?

 

[Just the Fax]

That's good! Shows they're continuing the investigation.

Everybody should be happy about that!

JMHO
fran

They want to know if anyone saw a silver BMW X-5 .


While out, I drove by Brad's house and the area where her body was found.

*Her body was dumped 10 feet off the road in a paved, but totally undeveloped cul-de-sac. It was 1.1 miles in the very back area of a new section of existing subdivision ($500,000 + homes).

*The entrance to the subdivision is only 1.3 miles from his home
(no way anyone would jog there, as 2 lane very busy road with no SWs)

It was obvious he chose a remote area where the body would not likely be found for days or possibly weeks.


Photos of the actual site and area

 

[raisincharlie]

They want to know if anyone saw a silver BMW X-5 .


While out, I drove by Brad's house and the area where her body was found.

*Her body was dumped 10 feet off the road in a paved, but totally undeveloped cul-de-sac. It was 1.1 miles in the very back area of a new section of existing subdivision ($500,000 + homes).

*The entrance to the subdivision is only 1.3 miles from his home
(no way anyone would jog there, as 2 lane very busy road with no SWs)

It was obvious he chose a remote area where the body would not likely be found for days or possibly weeks.

Is that what the fliers are asking - about the BMW SUV ? Really?

 

[Just the Fax]

Is that what the fliers are asking - about the BMW SUV ? Really?

I have not seen one of the flyers .

I doubt they are being that direct, but likely asking if they saw an 'unfamiliar vehicle' in the area.

I guess I need to drive back over there and see for myself.

 

[fran]

I have to admit I believed some of Brad's' rebuttal because it was all stuff that could be easily proven. However, whether Brad or nancy's friends are telling the truth is really not relevant to whether he killed her. Sure her friends make him out to be an absentee husband who may or may not have been a little controlling but none of that can prove murder.

If Brad is innocent then I would like him to answer the following questions, since he seems to have an answer for everything and many here suspect he is reading. Here are my questions:

1. Why have the LE publically stated that her murder is not random. Isn't he concerned that someone he knows killed his wife then? Wouldn't he be concerned for his own safety?

2. Why - in a neighbourhood where everyone seemed to know everyone and their business- did not one person see nancy jogging on a Saturday morning?

Thats all I've got which is why I'm wondering why everyone thinks he did it. My gut tells me he did it but the facts don't.

Those are very good questions Crazy Canuck. I'm sure he's working on the answers right now.

My question to anyone that doubts there was actually abuse in the Cooper marriage, I would like to ask just one thing.

Which one was MURDERED?

Just sayin'
fran

PS...I know this is going to sound corny........but that's why we're here at Websleuths. We're the voice for the victim, the silenced...........fran

 

[fran]

I have not seen one of the flyers .

I doubt they are being that direct, but likely asking if they saw an 'unfamiliar vehicle' in the area.

I guess I need to drive back over there and see for myself.

Great pictures! That would be helpful if you could actually get one of the flyers.

Boy, we're lucky you joined our community. Wealth of information.

Thanks,
fran

PS......see how these cases can get under your skin.....'voice for the silenced.'

 

[Just the Fax]

Additionally in NC the moment a person is arrested, their counsil has the right to receive all discovery beginning at that point. Also if I recall it correctly, NC is not a reciprical discovery state. In other words the DA must turn over his evidence but the defense council is not required to provide any to the DA.

Am I recalling that correctly Just the Fax ?

North Carolina's open file discovery law passed in 2004.

Correct, the prosecutors must turn over everything to the defense but the defense does not have to do the same.

" Without the 2004 law, much of the exculpatory evidence Durham County Prosecutor Mike Nifong illegally withheld in the Duke case would never have come to light because Nifong wouldn't have been required to inform defense attorneys it existed."

http://charlotte.creativeloafing.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid:156124

 

[fran]

North Carolina's open file discovery law passed in 2004.

In California they must turn over discovery 30 days prior to trial. I'm not sure if it's 30 days before it's going to be used, or the actual onset of the trial.

Oh, and they ONLY turn over what they HAVE to.

Like if they have evidence to go to a GJ, they ONLY present what they need to to get an indictment. They may have MORE, just not turn it over until they HAVE TO by law.

A retired detective told me one time, 'you always hold something back.'

JMHO
fran

 

[fran]

On the heels of Crazy's good questions I too am concerned. I live in Cary. I'm a single woman, living alone.

The CPD said this is "an isolated incident and the community is not at risk to the best of their knowledge." To me that means it was someone close to or known by the victim.

If it's someone 'random,' then that is scary stuff indeed and it makes me very nervous. Do I believe the police on this? Should I assume they've got it wrong?

And if the husband didn't want her dead and didn't do the deed, then which friend or acquaintance might have done it?

And if it's none of the above then who is the murdering nutjob running around Cary?

Just to be safe, it's best to take precausions to protect yourself. Whether there's rumor or fact or even NOT that there's someone out killing innocent people. Let's face it, this case proves that 'something bad' can happen anywhere to anyone.

Even you and me.

JMHO
fran