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

[macd]

My Alltel phone has an 'auto answer' option (Brad had Alltel)
You simply set it and the phone will automatically connect if it is connected to a 'handsfreee' devise (wired or bluetooth, depending on the phone).

My opinion is he simply called his cell from the home line at 6:40 am, answered the call for <30 seconds and then immediately drove to HT, arriving at 6:45 am. For those who question the time due to conjested intersections and stoplights, remember, this was 6:45 am on Saturday morning....traffic and light waits would be nonexistent.

I think the cell phone company's records would include info on which tower received the phone's signal. Since the house and the store are very close together, I wonder if they are served by the same tower?

 

[reddress58]

Thank You. Picture 29 seems to be the best one of a jacket. I just do not know if it's a North Face. It looks like a style of NF, but i don't know about the logo.

Maybe someone else will know more about NF and let me know if this is one.

If he did have a NF jacket and wore it to HT, that really wouldn't matter. It was AFTER the fact.

 

[Just the Fax]

I think the cell phone company's records would include info on which tower received the phone's signal. Since the house and the store are very close together, I wonder if they are served by the same tower?

Yes they are

 

[zelmajane]

Thank You. Picture 29 seems to be the best one of a jacket. I just do not know if it's a North Face. It looks like a style of NF, but i don't know about the logo.

It looks like Mountain Hardware to me.

They're very similar, but MH has a bigger brighter logo.

 

[reddress58]

Last call for Sleuth-holics!! :detective:

PM me if you're interested in our meet-up at Java Jive and I'll give you the details. I believe I have contacted everyone so far who has showed interest to this point. If you live in or near Cary, you are welcome to join us. :grouphug: :coffeeup:

 

[SleuthyGal]

Thanks Momto3kids! I didn't see your original answer to my question (computer glitch).

Actually, I DO believe he committed this crime. It's not that I didn't believe YOU, it's that I was curious how your source obtained the info about the video--whether they saw it with their own eyes or heard about it from someone else, etc, etc., etc.

I'm very hopeful that LE will have enough evidence to solve the crime and bring the perp to justice, and I'm worried that this case will linger on and on and on like the M. Young case. So, a 'sighting' on video at the 4:20am timeframe is such a big deal that I was worried it would be too good to be true, ya know? Like HOW could this guy lie and think he wouldn't be caught on video? DOH! And while lying in and of itself doesn't prove murder, it sure does add to the hinky scale. Hence my anxious questioning.

 

[momto3kids]

Thanks Momto3kids! I didn't see your original answer to my question (computer glitch).

Actually, I DO believe he committed this crime. It's not that I didn't believe YOU, it's that I was curious how your source obtained the info about the video--whether they saw it with their own eyes or heard about it from someone else, etc, etc., etc.

I'm very hopeful that LE will have enough evidence to solve the crime and bring the perp to justice, and I'm worried that this case will linger on and on and on like the M. Young case. So, a 'sighting' on video at the 4:20am timeframe is such a big deal that I was worried it would be too good to be true, ya know? Like HOW could this guy lie and think he wouldn't be caught on video? DOH! And while lying in and of itself doesn't prove murder, it sure does add to the hinky scale. Hence my anxious questioning.

SG... no problem.
As crazy as this sounds I just don't want to believe someone who loved a spouse so much would do this. Or did he really love her?

I wonder since I am having a hard time wrapping my mind around this murder and the 'who done it' if this is the reason I keep connecting to the case. This is the reason I keep putting out there what I learn so we can try together to make sense of all this. It is not to begin a rumor but say what I have been told. Last night's conversation fell in my lap, I was approached by the person.

As I posted a few days ago....

If BC is innocent it is a horrible sentence he has gotten to look at 4 walls, lose his wife, 2 daughters, no job to go to, can't go in public without stares, etc. Even if it is only temporary until he gets his girls back and life moves on nothing can replace what he is experiencing now.

If he is guilty just sitting wondering when the knock comes to his door has got to be horrible as well. But if this is the case he deserves it. IMO

Either way I can't imagine living like this.

Believe it or not I am still on the fence with this case.

 

[SleuthyGal]

I'm sure he did love her at one time. I think he also came to hate her--for holding him back, for having needs, for 'burdening' him, for saddling him with kids and anything else you can imagine.

Whether he did this crime or not, he clearly despised her (and she probably him too). Not a happy situation at all. There are no winners. Because he was probably anxious to not have ex-wife expenses and now his lawyers will get all his money defending him--and lawyers' billable hours will burn through his savings faster than any 'greedy wife' ever could.

No matter what happens he'll always be looked at askance, as 'that guy who killed his wife.' Even if he's never charged with the crime he'll still bear the specter of it. His kids will still not ever have their mommy again; their lives are forever changed because of it. And just look at O.J.'s now 21 yr old daughter to see the affect of having your mother murdered and a narcissistic father--the daughter is in near constant emotional pain because of that murder in 1994.

Selfish. It's just plain selfish.

Nancy is forever gone; she can never spend money again, never hug her kids again, and never find a life on her own, away from a troubled marriage. And most important of all, 2 little girls had their childhoods ripped apart forever because of this selfish act.

 

[CyberPro]

Listen SG, I am not on here to ask anyone to believe me. I will not get into detail about what I found out, but YES this person DID see the video!!! I was told enough to know they saw it and why.

Every one is focused on a particular time, and all I am trying to do is say include 4am. Take it or leave it.

Obviously you believe BC had nothing to do with NC murder. Correct? You believe everything he has stated in his statement?

Mom,

I have always believed the 4AM statement that you made since the first time you posted about it. I was willing to conceede that there might have been a mistake in the timeline as it was related to how you heard about it (And I KNOW how you heard about it, but won't list it here for your reasons). I am not casting any doubt on you, or who told you about it, but since I do not know that the person who told you had first hand knowledge of it, I was willing to allow for some doubt in that.

However, I have believed that you were stating facts as you understood them from the beginning, and I still do. I have not been willing to discard the 4AM statement just because the possible perp says otherwise. After all, as far as I can tell, you do not have a dog in this fight, why would you stretch the truth?


CyberPro

 

[tarheelfan78]

Well said Cyberpro!!!!!:clap:

 

[mahmoo]

Yes they are

Glad you answered that.....I had been wondering if the house and the store would be served by the same tower. I had thought, like someone posted earlier, that possibly during one trip he did leave his cell phone in the vicinity of the store. So basically then, he could have simply called his cell phone from the land line at their residence.....right?

 

[CyberPro]

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.

RC,

Helicopters make a Heli of a racket

I would not think that even hungry Vultures would act normally when one flys nearby.

It is also likely that they were searching more in the normal area that she ran, not this far off the beaten path.

CyberPro

 

[melaki]

I'm just asking b/c I'm curious. How would his cell register that he answered the call if he's not there to answer it? A call going into voicemail doesn't show on my personal cell phone records as an answered call.

My cell shows a missed call and my detailed phone records indicate the number that called me. Since I didn't answer the phone it will list it as a minute call. On my records it wouldn't show whether or not the call was answered only that the call lasted less than 1 minute. That would be enough time for her (in his mind) to tell him to pick up the additional items.

 

[mahmoo]

SG... no problem.
As crazy as this sounds I just don't want to believe someone who loved a spouse so much would do this. Or did he really love her?

I wonder since I am having a hard time wrapping my mind around this murder and the 'who done it' if this is the reason I keep connecting to the case. This is the reason I keep putting out there what I learn so we can try together to make sense of all this. It is not to begin a rumor but say what I have been told. Last night's conversation fell in my lap, I was approached by the person.

As I posted a few days ago....

If BC is innocent it is a horrible sentence he has gotten to look at 4 walls, lose his wife, 2 daughters, no job to go to, can't go in public without stares, etc. Even if it is only temporary until he gets his girls back and life moves on nothing can replace what he is experiencing now.

If he is guilty just sitting wondering when the knock comes to his door has got to be horrible as well. But if this is the case he deserves it. IMO

Either way I can't imagine living like this.

Believe it or not I am still on the fence with this case.

mom.....I agree with so much of what you post and your thoughts....and, there is a small part of me that is on the fence.... I'm basing that on the outside chance that perhaps she was sexually assaulted and forensics detected foreign DNA on/in her body. Other than that.....I'm unable to comprehend why someone (other than her husband) would murder her.....it certainly wasn't robbery and I doubt someone was just out for a random kill that morning.

I know stranger things have happened but I would think if someone was out on the prowl for a woman to attack they would target a smaller woman to start with and it would not be in such an active area as Lochmere seems to be.......too risky.....not to mention broad daylight.

 

[melaki]

Right, for the phone records to be consistent with BC's story, the call would have to be answered and last long enough to have a conversation about juice. That could not be done with a hidden cell phone.

I suppose a lot has to do with the service he has. I have AT&T.

 

[CyberPro]

SG... no problem.
As crazy as this sounds I just don't want to believe someone who loved a spouse so much would do this. Or did he really love her?

<SNIP>

Believe it or not I am still on the fence with this case.

Mom,

IF you REALLY KNOW about the 4AM Video and are still on the fence, you are a better person than I am.

AND, I caught the part about buying detergent for a FRONT LOADING machine. If you have that level of detail about the purchase, that says a LOT.

True, buying detergent does not make you a killer, buying detergent, with or without bleach does not make you a killer. BUT Buying detergent (With bleach, without bleach, with "April Fresh Downy"... it really does not matter) On a day where the wife that you are in the process of divorcing just happens to go missing and later be found murdered. Who you did not report to LE, and were the last to report seeing alive. AND just happened to relate to the LE that "Sure, I went to the store at 6, and then again at 6:07 and 15 seconds and was witnessed by several store employees" OK, I made a bit of that last sentence up, but you get the point.

All of that stuff might be CE, but it does tend to paint you into a corner. You might have been considered as a suspect if you had an alibi as serving communion with the Pope as your witness, but all of this stuff has no easy explaination.

MOO,

CyberPro

 

[fran]

Wow, if true, I am shocked he is not behind bars at this point.
That video evidence is a smoking gun, especially if he denied being there that early.

ONE smoking gun does not make a case. This is going to most likely be a completely 'circumstantial case.' They need a mound of circumstances to make this work to a complete picture.

Many people couldn't understand how they were able to convict Scott Peterson with what little evidence they had. It was completely, totally circumstantial. Not one piece of 'hard evidence,' eehhhh.........EXCEPT the body and the 'circumstance' she washed ashore exactly where he said he was golf/fishing!

It was the SHEER VOLUME of circumstances pointing like a neon sign towards Scott Peterson. We had, here on Websleuths at least 50 items that pointed to Scott. But during the trial, that number probably doubled. There was NO WAY in heck that many things could just be explained away to create reasonable doubt. Just NO WAY, to much! oh.......and the jurors said that as well. TOO MUCH

Now, here, I believe LE is working like busy drone bees, putting all of those circumstances together, to complete this puzzle. Thank goodness Brad is so full of himself that he provided LE with so many clues.

JMHO
fran

PS......FWIW, 'finger prints' are actually considered 'circumstantial evidence.' ie the 'circumstances' that their prints would be at a certain place..... fran

 

[momto3kids]

Mom,

I have always believed the 4AM statement that you made since the first time you posted about it. I was willing to conceede that there might have been a mistake in the timeline as it was related to how you heard about it (And I KNOW how you heard about it, but won't list it here for your reasons). I am not casting any doubt on you, or who told you about it, but since I do not know that the person who told you had first hand knowledge of it, I was willing to allow for some doubt in that.

However, I have believed that you were stating facts as you understood them from the beginning, and I still do. I have not been willing to discard the 4AM statement just because the possible perp says otherwise. After all, as far as I can tell, you do not have a dog in this fight, why would you stretch the truth?


CyberPro

Thank You CP....

The only thing I would regret is if HT had such a rumor going on within its 4 walls. At this time I don't believe it is. If I hear it is rumor I will be the 1st to say it was and post immediately.

This has come from 2 entire different sources, 2 weeks apart. As you know HT is huge with 180 employees and I feel this would have to be addressed by HT if it got out of hand, but my understanding it hasn't.

In my previous post today I said the person stated they saw the video. I don't want to doubt this person since they have not given me reason to ever doubt them before. Am I close to this person? NO. I've known them for years by shopping at HT so I can't imagine they would lie to me knowing they have to see me on a continual basis. I can be totally fooled, get egg on my face, but egg and all I will come on here to state I was wrong.

 

[fran]

This is going to be key, I think. And of course it's the most provable one way or the other. Store cameras, receipt. This would be a really stupid thing to lie about due to the fact that one would get caught in such a lie poste haste. I really don't believe he made a 4am-5am visit to any store--I'd have to see the video myself to believe it. It would just be so incredibly stupid ... and then to lie about it.

Could he be THAT stupid?

YES!

:woohoo:

fran

 

[wirehair]

There is an abundance of deer in this area. It is not uncommon to see birds flying around that have spotted a dead deer. They do not fly long before they land. Only another predator would cause them to take flight. That would probably be only up as high as the tree line.