Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #12

[d99gr81]

Yeah, and you're also here to tell us about it.

Seeeeee........that's the difference, IMO.

You have compared what happened to you and related it to this case. Which, is what we do as human beings, base much of our decisions and opinions on what we've experienced and seen.

While we all appreciate everything you've shared here, showing how it's NOT always the man who's the CHEATER AND ABUSER, either physically or mentally, the difference is you both came out to tell your side of the story. Whatever story is told, at least you both can tell it, whether it's truth or contradictory or not.

THIS case, THIS story, has one dead. One is silenced, one is here to tell all the dirty little secrets, or at least their version.

IF the other side contradicts his side, and part of the deceased story was that he was controlling and abusive. Just the mere fact the person claiming the ABUSE is dead, should be enough evidence to anyone looking from the outside in, that the survivor is most likely the perp. Especially as he was the LAST ONE with the victim.

Now,................to prove it.

JMHO
fran

PS....Like I've said, IF I am wrong, I will profoundly aplogize on this forum and to every single person who's read my words. This is JUST MY OPINION....fran

So because she is not here and can not speak it means he is a liar? First off he can provide receipts to prove whom spent what. He has made it clear in his affidavits that you don't believe...yet those things are EASILY proven by receipts and phone records. Again all friends on both sides admitted to never witnessing abuse. You never mention the fact that three close friends who you believe in their affidavits claim different money was given...50, 80 and 300. So which one of those three is NOT lying? Obvious 2 of them are lying OR have all been given a different sob story. YES? Either way that in itself makes me believe there versions are exaggerated complaints from a friend in a bad marriage looking for sympathy. You reason to believe the Plaintiff's hear say that clearly is contradictory to themselves... your reason cant just be "Well she is not here to tell her side." Or my EX is still here to tell her side.

 

[KTaylorsc]

okay...sorry...one more thing.

The reason NC's friends testified to what Nancy said is because that is what she was telling them. I'm not saying it wasn't real or that it didnt' happen. But they were only getting her side of the story. And if they beleived it to be so true why the hell didn't they help her?

 

[MoonFlwr]

So because she is not here and can not speak it means he is a liar? First off he can provide receipts to prove whom spent what. He has made it clear in his affidavits that you don't believe...yet those things are EASILY proven by receipts and phone records. Again all friends on both sides admitted to never witnessing abuse. You never mention the fact that three close friends who you believe in their affidavits claim different money was given...50, 80 and 300. So which one of those three is NOT lying? Obvious 2 of them are lying OR have all been given a different sob story. YES? Either way that in itself makes me believe there versions are exaggerated complaints from a friend in a bad marriage looking for sympathy. You reason to believe the Plaintiff's hear say that clearly is contradictory to themselves... your reason cant just be "Well she is not here to tell her side." Or my EX is still here to tell her side.

And...what the poster said, who you responded to (fran?) ..'one party is dead and can't tell their side', but her friends sure rushed forward and gave sworn statements. If they do that, then, surely the other side has a right to speak, too, or is he supposed to stay mute? By that poster's logic that isn't fair.

 

[raisincharlie]

Here's another possibility...Do you think someone was hired to kill her?

There is that pesky home equity line for $55 K that hasn't been referenced. Seriously, the hired killing is not out of the question, not likely but not impossible either. I'm trying to puzzle why Brad's office is being searched, certainly Nancy was not murdered there. There are obvious reasons for this search but I seriously doubt one of those reasons is to rule Brad out as a suspect. At this point I would not rule out a hired murder.

 

[cassadinechik]

Reading the rebuttal affidavit of BC was interesting.

What struck me beyond the mudslinging on all sides was the absolute lack of sympathy or empathy that BC displayed for his slain wife, the one he had earlier said he wanted to stay married to. I think if I were writing all that, I would include something in there about the family's common loss, and his anger at the person who stole Nancy's life, and his daughters' mother. I cannot understand being coldly argumentative about your wife's exaggerations, even if true, only days after her murder.

Here are some things about the typical engineering personality type - http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119777920/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

There was once a movie with Robert Urich where his wife was killed and he was an engineer. He lack of emotion led everyone to think he was guilty, when it was really just the way he was. If you know highly technical engineering types, not all of us are this way, but many of us are.

The best way I can illustrate this is with a personal story. I was driving to work on night and I hit a guy on his bike. It was ruled in now way my fault. His blood alcohol was .25 or something insane and he was right in the middle of a dark road. The very night it happened, I called my husband and he came. I was sobbing. I then went home, my husband got the car washed. The car still had a dent in it. I am now in the middle of a lawsuit over it, though my insurance company assures me it will be okay, I worry that my now total lack of emotion really will hurt me if I seem to not care. I do care, I am just very logical. Me crying or being upset in any way won't repair their situation for them.

I have probably made myself sound like a cold hearted you-know-what now, but I am just trying to point out that many of us engineering types run for the most part on pure logical and not emotional basis.

So anyhow (I am very long winded today), he was writing an affidavit to show why he was a fit father, not one to defend himself in a murder case for the public to read or to show he was grieving. I think if he didn't do it, he is obviously grieving and that had nothing to do with the matter at hand.

 

[KTaylorsc]

Here are some things about the typical engineering personality type - http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119777920/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

There was once a movie with Robert Urich where his wife was killed and he was an engineer. He lack of emotion led everyone to think he was guilty, when it was really just the way he was. If you know highly technical engineering types, not all of us are this way, but many of us are.

The best way I can illustrate this is with a personal story. I was driving to work on night and I hit a guy on his bike. It was ruled in now way my fault. His blood alcohol was .25 or something insane and he was right in the middle of a dark road. The very night it happened, I called my husband and he came. I was sobbing. I then went home, my husband got the car washed. The car still had a dent in it. I am now in the middle of a lawsuit over it, though my insurance company assures me it will be okay, I worry that my now total lack of emotion really will hurt me if I seem to not care. I do care, I am just very logical. Me crying or being upset in any way won't repair their situation for them.

I have probably made myself sound like a cold hearted you-know-what now, but I am just trying to point out that many of us engineering types run for the most part on pure logical and not emotional basis.

So anyhow (I am very long winded today), he was writing an affidavit to show why he was a fit father, not one to defend himself in a murder case for the public to read or to show he was grieving. I think if he didn't do it, he is obviously grieving and that had nothing to do with the matter at hand.

I agree

 

[KTaylorsc]

There is that pesky home equity line for $55 K that hasn't been referenced. Seriously, the hired killing is not out of the question, not likely but not impossible either. I'm trying to puzzle why Brad's office is being searched, certainly Nancy was not murdered there. There are obvious reasons for this search but I seriously doubt one of those reasons is to rule Brad out as a suspect. At this point I would not rule out a hired murder.

you know it could not have even been a "professional" hitman. You just never know.

Okay seriously last post...

 

[cassadinechik]

Ok, me too. I have so much work to do. I am promising myself that I will not post here for the next hour LOL

 

[raisincharlie]

So because she is not here and can not speak it means he is a liar? First off he can provide receipts to prove whom spent what. He has made it clear in his affidavits that you don't believe...yet those things are EASILY proven by receipts and phone records. Again all friends on both sides admitted to never witnessing abuse. You never mention the fact that three close friends who you believe in their affidavits claim different money was given...50, 80 and 300. So which one of those three is NOT lying? Obvious 2 of them are lying OR have all been given a different sob story. YES? Either way that in itself makes me believe there versions are exaggerated complaints from a friend in a bad marriage looking for sympathy. You reason to believe the Plaintiff's hear say that clearly is contradictory to themselves... your reason cant just be "Well she is not here to tell her side." Or my EX is still here to tell her side.

What will you say if his signature appears on those receipts ? will you continue to say Nancy is the one who spent like crazy, for some reason I think so. Even Brad acknowledges he took away access to charge cards and the checking account.

I have little doubt Brad can prove certain things by means of paper, but he makes more allegations which cannot be proven because the other party is indeed deceased. Because he can prove some items with paper is in no way proof that he can prove everything he is claiming. And please tell, what the heck searching his office is going to prove about who spent what, or that Nancy lied. Face it - your boy is aq suspect, plain and simple, despite his receipts and phone records.

 

[raisincharlie]

you know it could not have even been a "professional" hitman. You just never know.

Okay seriously last post...

Plenty of gang members who would do it pretty cheap and given Raleigh's recent disclosure concerning the gang problem - not out of the question.

 

[raisincharlie]

<snip>

So anyhow (I am very long winded today), he was writing an affidavit to show why he was a fit father, not one to defend himself in a murder case for the public to read or to show he was grieving. I think if he didn't do it, he is obviously grieving and that had nothing to do with the matter at hand.

So based on this logic - if Brad was trying to prove he was a fit father to continue to have custody of his children - why didn't he stick with that approach? Given the timing and circumstance of the custody issue - what Nancy was or how she was had nothing to do with the issue - it should have been about him and his abilities, not his deceased wife's failings.

 

[IMHO63]

Thanks IMHO63

I was curious why only the N & O reported applying for a hearing on the issue of the warrants. It appears from this that WRAL is also involved.

Hope they win their issue but more so hoping the warrants stay sealed so that justice may proceed.

raisincharlie--

I'm with you on that. The warrants are currently only sealed for 30 days, I think the media should be able to wait. I know a lot of people want to see them, but it would best to let LE fully investigate before anythings gets out.

 

[d99gr81]

Reading the rebuttal affidavit of BC was interesting.

To me, her friends overplayed their hands in several instances and BC has been able to come back and show that their stories are overblown. Of course the only story that will really matter is the one that gets told to the jury. But at first there was the temptation, out of sympathy and trying to make sense of this I suppose, for people to fit Nancy into the sweet innocent controlled victim mold and Brad as the complete uncaring monster mold. Given that they were both real people, this would never turn out to be the full true picture. Yet Nancy didn't owe anyone being perfect as a pre-condition to our community's shared sorrow for losing her.

There will be negative things about Nancy. That's irritating to see because of the horror of what happened to her, but that's the way it is. It will also turn out that BC was probably not constantly as bad as people wanted to believe he was. Neither of those things has anything to do with his possible guilt.

What struck me beyond the mudslinging on all sides was the absolute lack of sympathy or empathy that BC displayed for his slain wife, the one he had earlier said he wanted to stay married to. I think if I were writing all that, I would include something in there about the family's common loss, and his anger at the person who stole Nancy's life, and his daughters' mother. I cannot understand being coldly argumentative about your wife's exaggerations, even if true, only days after her murder.

I am somewhat afraid that the investigation will continue to make unspecified progress but yet never end; however, I still have faith and some confidence that this case will be solved.

This may sound harsh but I want to be honest. My ex wife did so many horrible things to destroy our family. The boys nor I did anything to go through what we went through. I would never wish anyone dead but there was a time there that IF anything had happened to her I would not have been grieving. I would have been sad that the boys lost their mother but I was so hurt and not happy at the time ...sad to say i would not have been grieving.

 

[MoonFlwr]

So based on this logic - if Brad was trying to prove he was a fit father to continue to have custody of his children - why didn't he stick with that approach? Given the timing and circumstance of the custody issue - what Nancy was or how she was had nothing to do with the issue - it should have been about him and his abilities, not his deceased wife's failings.

But..I don't think he cast the first stone, IIRC. The gaggle came forward first, with allegations against him!

 

[raisincharlie]

raisincharlie--

I'm with you on that. The warrants are currently only sealed for 30 days, I think the media should be able to wait. I know a lot of people want to see them, but it would best to let LE fully investigate before anythings gets out.

Yes indeed - let LE do what they need to do.

 

[stillblv]

So based on this logic - if Brad was trying to prove he was a fit father to continue to have custody of his children - why didn't he stick with that approach? Given the timing and circumstance of the custody issue - what Nancy was or how she was had nothing to do with the issue - it should have been about him and his abilities, not his deceased wife's failings.

I think that Brad had nothing to do with what went into the affadavits; the lawyers are the ones who decide what to ask dependent on what they want to include in those affadavits. And their reasons are purely to forward their client's "case" - not to necessarily make him look good.

 

[d99gr81]

What will you say if his signature appears on those receipts ? will you continue to say Nancy is the one who spent like crazy, for some reason I think so. Even Brad acknowledges he took away access to charge cards and the checking account.

I have little doubt Brad can prove certain things by means of paper, but he makes more allegations which cannot be proven because the other party is indeed deceased. Because he can prove some items with paper is in no way proof that he can prove everything he is claiming. And please tell, what the heck searching his office is going to prove about who spent what, or that Nancy lied. Face it - your boy is aq suspect, plain and simple, despite his receipts and phone records.

The fact that she has a 1200 purse, 200 dollar jeans, 8000 dollar paintings, BMW x5 and 200 dollar pedicures. The fact that he said she did and that can easily be proven . I can pretty much assure you those signatures are hers. That is what she was cut off from spending.

 

[stillblv]

But..I don't think he cast the first stone, IIRC. The gaggle came forward first, with allegations against him!

I hope you never stick up for a friend.

 

[fran]

Hyperbole aside, and believing that Brad is the culprit in this horrendous crime... it now comes down to what can be proven in a court of law, assuming enough evidence is amassed to even qualify to take this case to trial.

And therein lies the mystery for us sleuthers. We don't know what LE has on the guy, aside from the obvious things such as the contentious separation, etc. The affidavits give us some good clues into the state of things in that rel'p, but it's not enough.

I am waiting anxiously to learn what REAL evidence might exist--the kind of evidence that would allow the DA to feel confident about proceeding forward with a murder charge.

IF they arrest him, that SHOULD be an indication that LE was able to gather sufficient evidence that they BELIEVE they can get a conviction.

We, the public at large, may NOT see 90% of the evidence prior to trial. That may be the ONLY and FIRST time the evidence will be revealed to the public.

The affidavits not only gave US some good CLUES into the state of things, it also gave LE the direction in which to SEARCH for the EVIDENCE.

Hence, SW at Brad's Cisco office.

Interesting, there's an additional SW that they're not revealing for where?

JMHO
fran

PS....these cases are like puzzles. Bit by bit, piece by piece, LE fits the pieces together until they get the complete PICTURE of murder and eventually a trial...fran

 

[d99gr81]

IF they arrest him, that SHOULD be an indication that LE was able to gather sufficient evidence that they BELIEVE they can get a conviction.

We, the public at large, may NOT see 90% of the evidence prior to trial. That may be the ONLY and FIRST time the evidence will be revealed to the public.

The affidavits not only gave US some good CLUES into the state of things, it also gave LE the direction in which to SEARCH for the EVIDENCE.

Hence, SW at Brad's Cisco office.

Interesting, there's an additional SW that they're not revealing for where?

JMHO
fran

PS....these cases are like puzzles. Bit by bit, piece by piece, LE fits the pieces together until they get the complete PICTURE of murder and eventually a trial...fran

Yeah, I wonder if that SW is for the man she had an affair with?