Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #14

[raisincharlie]

I agree with this completly and keep wondering the same thing myself.
I also have wondered why perhaps the search helicopters did not locate the body. Although the people on foot had not searched that area yet, I am certain the choppers were covering a broader area.

The helicopter question is a good one and I do wonder about it. If it is true, and there is no reason to doubt it, that the person who found the body noticed it because of the vultures - one would think the vultures didn't walk there and perhaps a helicopter pilot might have noticed them. It is strange - perhaps there were no helicopters on Monday - the day she was found.

 

[fran]

Does anyone know or remember if a cadaver dog was brought to the Cooper residence?

I honestly don't know the answer to that one. BUT, IF there WASN'T, it may behoove LE to take one over there even now. It MAY show LE the trail that poor Nancy's body took within that home. OH, and perhaps WHICH car was used.

Just and idea,
fran

 

[RoughlyCollie]

That is not true. The vast majority of lawyers don't ask their clients if they are guilty because it doesn't matter and because clients lie. Often, the lawyer pretty much knows what happened because of the evidence against the client. The client is entitled to a zealous defense even if s/he murdered someone.

What does matter is whether the government has enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the client committed the murder.

We've only had a few murder cases in which we thought the client *might* be factually innocent. In two of them, it later turned out that the clients were guilty. In one, the evidence against the client was so flimsy that to this day we cannot figure out how the client could have been found guilty of murdering his wife, although we don't know whether he did it or not. In that case, the evidence in the client's favor was fairly strong -- especially in view of the fact that it is hard to prove a negative -- and the investigation and the autopsy were shoddily done.

Believe me, that lawyer does NOT want to know the truth.

He ONLY wants to hear he's innocent.

That's the ONLY way he can defend him. He MUST believe he's innocent, even IF he DOESN'T.

That's the law of our land. The defendent is entitled to a proper defense. To the very end...............

JMHO
fran

 

[fran]

The cops have the videos.
He cooperated and obviously told them where he was.
This guy is certainly no dummy.
If the cops had a video of him at 4 am and he had no explanation, he would be charged last week at the latest.

Nah, don't count on it. He may be very intelligent, but that doesn't mean he's SMART.

Just watch as this unfolds. You'll see what I mean. Especially IF it goes to trial with him as the defendent.

You'll see.

JMHO
fran

PS......I'm about 100 posts behind on this thread, gotta run........catch you'all later!...maybe I'll read futher into this thread before I post anymore. Great discussion..........fran

Oh, HI Brad!

 

[momto3kids]

Great discussion..........fran

Oh, HI Brad!

:floorlaugh: I needed that Fran, especially before I head out in this heat.

I wonder if BC has a front loader washing machine...that is the detergent he bought.
Maybe BC had to run a 2nd time to buy more detergent since the 1st detergent didn't have enough suds and he thought the items weren't clean enough.

 

[raisincharlie]

I'm with you on this thought.

Real Estate agent told them to de-clutter in order to sell. First place everyone takes their items is to the garage. Having two young kids with all their items, I bet it looks like my neighbors!

I'm not saying the SUV is not in the garage, but he is parked outdoors now.

I did find that video. I could be wrong but in this report Ed Crump does say the investigators have left and LE is closing down the scene. The SUV is in the drive so for the 11 or so hours LE was there - they did not remove it.

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/media?id=6269508

 

[EntreNous]

Nah, don't count on it. He may be very intelligent, but that doesn't mean he's SMART.

Just watch as this unfolds. You'll see what I mean. Especially IF it goes to trial with him as the defendent.

You'll see.

JMHO
fran

PS......I'm about 100 posts behind on this thread, gotta run........catch you'all later!...maybe I'll read futher into this thread before I post anymore. Great discussion..........fran

Oh, HI Brad!

Oh, that is sooo true! Lot's of educated idiots walking around out there in the world!

 

[raisincharlie]

That is not true. The vast majority of lawyers don't ask their clients if they are guilty because it doesn't matter and because clients lie. Often, the lawyer pretty much knows what happened because of the evidence against the client. The client is entitled to a zealous defense even if s/he murdered someone.

What does matter is whether the government has enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the client committed the murder.

We've only had a few murder cases in which we thought the client *might* be factually innocent. In two of them, it later turned out that the clients were guilty. In one, the evidence against the client was so flimsy that to this day we cannot figure out how the client could have been found guilty of murdering his wife, although we don't know whether he did it or not. In that case, the evidence in the client's favor was fairly strong -- especially in view of the fact that it is hard to prove a negative -- and the investigation and the autopsy were shoddily done.

I think most lawyers do not ask because they could well loose their license if they subjourn perjury on behalf of a client they know is guilty.

 

[reddress58]

I'm with you on this thought.

Real Estate agent told them to de-clutter in order to sell. First place everyone takes their items is to the garage. Having two young kids with all their items, I bet it looks like my neighbors!

I'm not saying the SUV is not in the garage, but he is parked outdoors now.

As of 1:35PM, NC's car IS now in the driveway.

 

[raisincharlie]

As of 1:35PM, NC's car IS now in the driveway.

Thanks ! There goes the undisclosed location theory...:crazy:

 

[IMHO63]

This guy obviously knows HT has recorded video everywhere in the store.
Remember, he and his attorney heard and read about the 4 am rumor before he made a sworn statement on his civil affidavit that the trips were 6:15 and 6:45. If he was at the store at 4 am, his attorney would have made him come up with an excuse for being there at that time.

I would hope he could figure that out. There is a sign when you walk into the store that says they have video surveillance. It is very hard to miss.

 

[minachica]

As of 1:35PM, NC's car IS now in the driveway.

Interesting timing! It's almost as if he's trying to end all our speculating...

 

[reddress58]

Interesting timing! It's almost as if he's trying to end all our speculating...

Didn't think of that...but you may have something here.

 

[melaki]

Bingo!

I hope this hasn't already been mentioned but what if on the first trip to HT he left his cell phone there so that he could go home place a call to his cell from his home. Then the second trip was to grab his cell phone.

 

[stillblv]

You have a link to this phone interview?

Yes, I posted it right after this post, I believe.

 

[raisincharlie]

Interesting timing! It's almost as if he's trying to end all our speculating...

Well I would suspect he has his agent 99 - there is a poster here with the nic of Kurtz & Blum.

I don't think he would be worried about us. If he is, he has a big problem I think. LE is the big bad wolf he needs to keep his eye on. We are , um , specs in the universe.

 

[reddress58]

I hope this hasn't already been mentioned but what if on the first trip to HT he left his cell phone there so that he could go home place a call to his cell from his home. Then the second trip was to grab his cell phone.

Yep. Someone came up with that on the last thread and we dissected it thouroughly. Quite plausible. Good thought.

 

[KTaylorsc]

so I have a question...and don't laugh...

Would BC's lawyers know what is in the sw even though they are sealed?

 

[raisincharlie]

so I have a question...and don't laugh...

Would BC's lawyers know what is in the sw even though they are sealed?

Only the search warrant served on the house as it was Brad's property. Brad has not been named a suspect - therefore he is not entitled to any information about the other warrants.

 

[raisincharlie]

From: Agent 99

To: Brad

Complete the following tasks immediately. stop.

Move SUV to drive, after you put those dumb stickers on the plates

Drive to *advertiser censored* and dispose of Northface lightweight jacket

Go to HT and see if they will let you look at video - tell them you are an insurance adjuster - that'll work

Will assign more tasks soon. stop.

Complete ASAP