Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #13

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
The requests sealed were done in good faith, it is done in the proper way
 
thanks d99...i was falling asleep, some of those points were repetative AND slow in coming...was a bit mind numbing.
 
I'm listening. Sounds like the judge is not inclined to release the content of the 3 SWs....he hasn't made his ruling yet, but he's obviously not for it.
 
Can anyone tell me what color the 2008 license plate for NC is ?

Sorry if this has been answered. I'm catching up and am on page 10 of this thread.

Way back, many threads ago, I posted that the BMW SUV had a blue plate. Last year, NC started switching to red plates (they have been blue for many years). Any new purchases would definitely have been issued a red plate unless they transferred an old blue plate to that car.
 
I'll ask again, especially for mto3...did the judge mention knightdale police dept? what did that mean?

also---the state just commented the SW should remained sealed to prevent bias from future witness when they go to trial....does anyone think there would be a change in venue?
Most likely.
 
DA is requesting they stayed sealed but he says he doesn't mind if the people who submitted DNA shared the results. he said they can talk to brad's attorneys if they want to or anyone.
 
answer coming now...judge thinking

NO is most likely going to be the answer from judge...he is telling the attorney he appreciates his desire to open the SW...

He is asking questions at the moment and speaking about the 4th circuit court
Now judge is asking about 1st amendment and Supreme Court
 
judge hasn't ruled but he is saying that release might prejudice the defendant
 
I'll ask again, especially for mto3...did the judge mention knightdale police dept? what did that mean?

also---the state just commented the SW should remained sealed to prevent bias from future witness when they go to trial....does anyone think there would be a change in venue?

Sorry, I put this to the wrong person.
He was using an example in his talking about the sealing. He just threw out a smaller town coming forth asking for a sealed SW.
 
Sorry, I put this to the wrong person.
He was using an example in his talking about the sealing. He just threw out a smaller town coming forth asking for a sealed SW.

thanks mt3k--i had phased out...it was a bit dry, slow and redundant...then I heard knightdale. much more interesting now.
 
judge is saying that the affs contain hearsay that probably would not be admissible in court and that it would interfere w/ the defendant's right to a fair trial.

the other DA is arguing that the affs are no different in this case than any other case
 
They are concerned if they let too much info out it could tip off if someone or somewhere else that is being looked at or the person who has already been searched would know where and what they are looking for. Too much can get contaminated if they open them and make this case harder. Opening SW can also lead to another SW, another SW, another SW if they someone knows who or what the Le is looking for.
 
thanks mt3k--i had phased out...it was a bit dry, slow and redundant...then I heard knightdale. much more interesting now.


why?
what is knightdale? how does it change the case?
was she killed somewhere other than the house and then dumped?
 

If you believe you may have seen Nancy or if you witnessed any suspicious activity that you feel could be relevant to this investigation, we implore you to come forward and speak with us.

Oh my. Of course, aren't the police asking people to speak to them if they saw something? If Brad is innocent, don't they want people to tell the police? Maybe I'm naive, but this is just cheesy and sleazy.

After reading further, they do say If you would prefer, you may also contact the Cary Police Department at (919) 469-4012.
 
theyre also concerned about the timing involved...sealing before SW were even issued. 1st amendment vs. 4th amendment concerns.

judge just said it's an interesting argument with both representing the publics concerns but from different view points.

he says hes busy with another trial at the time being--but will try to have his finding today, seemed like no promises.
 
answer coming now...judge thinking

NO is most likely going to be the answer from judge...he is telling the attorney he appreciates his desire to open the SW...

He is asking questions at the moment and speaking about the 4th circuit court
Now judge is asking about 1st amendment and Supreme Court

I agree. He will not unseal them.
 
I agree. He will not unseal them.

I too think he will leave them sealed but he seems to be intrigued by the interesting argument...both representing the publics concern. His response should be interesting in terms of his phrasing.

ETA...don't think he's happy this is on his docket
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
191
Guests online
1,903
Total visitors
2,094

Forum statistics

Threads
601,566
Messages
18,126,206
Members
231,092
Latest member
Forensic1964
Back
Top