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

[MoonFlwr]

I hope you never stick up for a friend.

Not sure what you mean by that...but :waitasec:

Was just responding about people insinuating that through all allegations, the one being painted in a certain way, is expected to stay mum.
Heh I'd love to see what would've unfolded on these boards if Brad hadn't responded.

It doesn't make sense. Nancy's friends came forward to speak on her behalf...so, she wasn't voiceless. By the reasoning of some posters on here...both sides have a right to speak up...therefore, why should Brad remain quiet. It doesn't make sense!

 

[gritguy]

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.

That's generally true, but not always. In this case, it looks to me like they may have told him to have at the other affidavits and dispute what he could. There are several grammatical and typographical errors; it was obviously done in as much a hurry as possible given the level of detail involved.

I see him at home typing this stuff up while reading through the other affidavits, e-mailing to his lawyer, paralegal cutting and pasting, a little poishing and viola: affidavit.

 

[Blondieskatz]

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.

Snip~
IMO the office is being searched so they check his computer. Look for emails, any receipts, research, maybe maps. Doesn't mean he's guilty, but most people spend most time at work than home so it makes sense to check the office. As far as being put on leave that also makes sense, again doesn't mean Cisco thinks he guilty. They are probably trying to keep employees focused on work rather than BC which would be easier when he's not there.

 

[KTaylorsc]

It doesn't make sense. Nancy's friends came forward to speak on her behalf...so, by the logic of some posters on here she wasn't voiceless. Therefore, why should he remain so.

Good point. Brad was defending himself against what had been said from the other side.

 

[gritguy]

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.

Good point, and so is the one about possibly he's just not emotional. However, if the attorneys were really on top of the affidavits (and possibly they couldn't be what with the hurried pace), they could have introduced a dose of humility that would have made the piece a little easier to swallow.

 

[stillblv]

Not sure what you mean by that...but :waitasec:

Was just responding about people insinuating that through all allegations, the one being painted in a certain way, is expected to stay mum.
Heh I'd love to see what would've unfolded on these boards if Brad hadn't responded.

It doesn't make sense. Nancy's friends came forward to speak on her behalf...so, she wasn't voiceless. By the reasoning of some posters on here...both sides have a right to speak up...therefore, why should Brad remain quiet. It doesn't make sense!

I just think it's kind of rude and disrespectful to call her friends a gaggle. Obviously you're above all that kind of behavior - like sticking up for a friend. Yeah, they may be overreacting but I'd sure as hell wish they'd overreacted a little bit more. Maybe she'd still be alive.

 

[stillblv]

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

oh yeah....THAT guy. The one with no physical contact.

 

[Blondieskatz]

Good point. Brad was defending himself against what had been said from the other side.

I look at it like this~ BC is already presumed guilty so he is defending himself. The attorneys..well that's what they do. I don't know if he's guilty or innocent, but I understand defending oneself. If I thought I was going to tried for murder, I'd probably do the same.

 

[KTaylorsc]

Snip~
IMO the office is being searched so they check his computer. Look for emails, any receipts, research, maybe maps. Doesn't mean he's guilty, but most people spend most time at work than home so it makes sense to check the office. As far as being put on leave that also makes sense, again doesn't mean Cisco thinks he guilty. They are probably trying to keep employees focused on work rather than BC which would be easier when he's not there.

I agree IMO they are looking for the e-mails and other things he was talking to in his affadavit.

 

[fran]

I'm not saying that he didn't do it, I'm just saying that we don't need to string him up by his toes and go on about how horrible he is until we know all the facts and have the evidence that beyond a shadow of a doubt says that he killed his wife.

jmo

Just keep your open mind in that he may be innocent. Truly, he needs people like you, because without the you's, he wouldn't be able to get a fair trial. He needs people on that jury that go in without an opinion. really

I don't begrudge anyone who feels he's innocent or says what we now know isn't enough to convict him. That's well and good, IMO. He's entitled to a fair trial. Eventhough, everyone who's read MY words, know how I feel, I want him to get a fair trial, IF they accuse and arrest him. That's what is so great about our country. Heck, they could have someone's crime on video, they STILL are entitled to a trial. Good! I'd want the same for myself too.

But, IF he did this crime, hopefully, someone reading about it, reading pages here on Websleuths, IF they too are in such a relationship and they're looking in a mirror of their life, PERHAPS, just one life will be saved. This SAME SET of CIRCUMSTANCES happen over and over and over. Believe me, they are NOT all solved. Even if WE know who did it, IN OUR OPINION, without enough evidence, they remain UNSOLVED.

Sad, but true.

fran

PS....I don't think we're really saying all that much 'bad' about him. We're just talking about the way his wife and friends say he is. After all, he's the one speaking ill of the dearly dead and departed. Guess she wasn't quite as dear to him though, obviously.......fran

 

[KTaylorsc]

I look at it like this~ BC is already presumed guilty so he is defending himself. The attorneys..well that's what they do. I don't know if he's guilty or innocent, but I understand defending oneself. If I thought I was going to tried for murder, I'd probably do the same.

right and if he wanted his daughters back he needed to answer to those allegations being made

 

[d99gr81]

The people that believe her friends affidavits did not respond to what I said a few posts ago. When I said three friends claim 3 different stories... for instance when referring to the money he was giving her. Either A) that indicates that she is exaggerating stories to her friends for sympathy... or B) two of her friends are lying. Which is it?

 

[MoonFlwr]

I just think it's kind of rude and disrespectful to call her friends a gaggle. Obviously you're above all that kind of behavior - like sticking up for a friend. Yeah, they may be overreacting but I'd sure as hell wish they'd overreacted a little bit more. Maybe she'd still be alive.

lol! You sure jump to conclusions.

Anyway, the word gaggle has been used on here...and, by the way their stories don't match up in some instances...and yadda yadda yadda, they sure do come across as being spurious in some of their claims.
(Their intention/s may've been right, but it appears that some facts weren't verified before stated...hence the word 'gaggle'..because it came across to some that they were whipping each other up.)

 

[MoonFlwr]

I look at it like this~ BC is already presumed guilty so he is defending himself. The attorneys..well that's what they do. I don't know if he's guilty or innocent, but I understand defending oneself. If I thought I was going to tried for murder, I'd probably do the same.

Point I was trying to make. You stated it better!

 

[raisincharlie]

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.

links please :

$1200 purse

Nancy's name is signed on the lease papers and is financially responsible for leased BMW.



You can assure it? Unless you are Brad or his lawyer or have direct access to those items you can assure nothing.

While you whine about the kids being removed based on lies in those affidavits - here's some paper for you - the children were removed from his custody on 7/16/08. Those affidavits full of lies you keep whining about were not even written and submitted until 22 and 23 July. That is easily assured.

 

[d99gr81]

right and if he wanted his daughters back he needed to answer to those allegations being made

Exactly... and Like I said there was a time I would not be grieving if something happened to my ex.. and rest assured I would do anything for my boys...not matter what it took and not matter who's feeling were hurt... If it were me and I was innocent and I would do anything for my boys.

 

[MoonFlwr]

Exactly... and Like I said there was a time I would not be grieving if something happened to my ex.. and rest assured I would do a thing for my boys...not matter what it took and not matter who's feeling were hurt... If it were me and I was innocent and I would do anything for my boys.

Another point, well-stated!

 

[Blondieskatz]

The people that believe her friends affidavits did not respond to what I said a few posts ago. When I said three friends claim 3 different stories... for instance when referring to the money he was giving her. Either A) that indicates that she is exaggerating stories to her friends for sympathy... or B) two of her friends are lying. Which is it?

They could all be talking about different times as far as the money goes. One week he may have given her $300, the next $80 thus each friend remembers a different amount.

 

[KTaylorsc]

Exactly... and Like I said there was a time I would not be grieving if something happened to my ex.. and rest assured I would do a thing for my boys...not matter what it took and not matter who's feeling were hurt... If it were me and I was innocent and I would do anything for my boys.

Yup...if he had kept quiet and just let the girls go without so much as a word, people would have made alot more out of that. He was damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

[d99gr81]

links please :

$1200 purse

Nancy's name is signed on the lease papers and is financially responsible for leased BMW.



You can assure it? Unless you are Brad or his lawyer or have direct access to those items you can assure nothing.

While you whine about the kids being removed based on lies in those affidavits - here's some paper for you - the children were removed from his custody on 7/16/08. Those affidavits full of lies you keep whining about were not even written and submitted until 22 and 23 July. That is easily assured.

pretty nice vehicle to be in ones name when that one has no job.