Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #15

[reddress58]

yeah - unless he took it off. i mean, i have to believe his adrenalin was rather high at this point. but, if he thought it through enough to try and disguise himself, maybe he remembered to take the ring off.

I doubt at that point in their relationship/marriage he even wore a wedding band given the anger and pending separation. He probably put it on for the news conference for effect.

 

[Zoe]

I doubt at that point in their relationship/marriage he even wore a wedding band given the anger and pending separation. He probably put it on for the news conference for effect.

Good point.

 

[reddress58]

I actually think they were attacking the person who posted on a different thread about the retention pond or as I call it silt basin. They made sure to let us know they were an 'environmental engineer'.:boohoo:

This person has jumped around to other cases before NC so I don't think it is BC...just a person looking start problems. :loser:

Mom, please look at my post on page 9. This is exactly what i was bringing to RC's attention.

 

[Sewing_Buddy]

Jonesmouse,

First welcome. I have a question maybe you can study on the answer. You reference the cameras at the self checkouts, do you think it is possible that those cameras would show a person's hand in the frame as they were placing the items on the scale / scanner ?

The reason I ask is in the 14 July 630 press conference, the camera does several zoom in shots of Brads hands. These shots focus on his wedding band and give a pretty good view of it. Do you think there is any possibility that the check out cameras may also have picked up a shot or two of this wedding band ?

The shots are at 5:15 through 5:19 and another at 9:33 in the press conference noted above and if this link works you can view that here:

http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/3207082/

Just curious

Did Brad always wear his wedding band?
It could be that sometime before the first press conference, he decided to put it on so everyone would think he was still concerned about Nancy and saving their marriage.
Just a thought.....

 

[FullDisclosure]

Fulldisclosure....I think with all the talk about long sleeves on here it has most everyone suspecting something.

Personally I can see if he was going to be gone for hours and not knowing the weather conditions he would grab his jacket...for a just in case reason. In and out of the store just doesn't sound reason enough to put a jacket on, IMO.

As you probably read it has been discussed he might have scratch marks on his arms. I don't know who began that or why, but it is a possible scenario.

The jacket might or might not be key is what we are wondering.

Yes, Mom, I picked up on that. I did read the posts about the long sleeves (and saw it myself on the local news) which, at mid-day outside, is more suspicious to me than in the grocery store in the early morning hours...and by early morning I mean between 6 and 7. I'll believe the 4:20 time when LE has some proof of that.

As for everyone questioning why he went back to HT to get the record and saying THAT makes him look guilty--I disagree. If there were such speculation about me, even if I hadn't been named as a suspect or a POI, I'd do the same thing. I would WANT to just sit tight, but I think I'd feel compelled to do whatever I could to prove my innocence IF I DIDN'T do it.

JMHO

 

[raisincharlie]

I doubt at that point in their relationship/marriage he even wore a wedding band given the anger and pending separation. He probably put it on for the news conference for effect.

I quess all those friends that filed affidavits would know. I'm kinda surprised they wouldn't have mentioned it , him NOT wearing a wedding band, since they pretty much mentioned everything else. :crazy:

 

[momto3kids]

Let me try to explain this HT....

You have to enter on the right side of the store (facing the store), the left side is locked around 11pm. Once you enter...produce on right, about 24 registers (including U-Scan) on your left and a few display shelves (picnic items or whatnots). Pass the shelves and turn left...approx 10 aisles down on his right is the detergent. While walking he can SEE the detergent, it sits right there facing him (you can't miss it)...the aisles are very wide in HT. The 1st product being in this aisle is TIDE.

He get's it and now has to check out. Is he familiar with U-Scan or is it open?, I don't know. But what I do know is U-Scan is the furthest check out from where he has to get back outside. Yes, it is possible he used it, but if not...he goes to the cashier with the lit sign, waits for them to come since they might be stocking and not sitting waiting for him...then out the door.

Problem...no outside camera's!

 

[raisincharlie]

Yes, Mom, I picked up on that. I did read the posts about the long sleeves (and saw it myself on the local news) which, at mid-day outside, is more suspicious to me than in the grocery store in the early morning hours...and by early morning I mean between 6 and 7. I'll believe the 4:20 time when LE has some proof of that.

As for everyone questioning why he went back to HT to get the record and saying THAT makes him look guilty--I disagree. If there were such speculation about me, even if I hadn't been named as a suspect or a POI, I'd do the same thing. I would WANT to just sit tight, but I think I'd feel compelled to do whatever I could to prove my innocence IF I DIDN'T do it.

JMHO

FullDisclosure,

I quess I have trouble with it because he is simply not named a suspect or even a POI. What does he have to prove at this point - there is not one single word spoken by LE saying he is a suspect.

I believe he used that information in his affidavit to get out that he he went to the store at a certain time. He described those times in great detail.

My brain is asking why in an affidavit relating to the custody of his children, is he even remotely thinking this has anything to do with his ability as a parent. Beyond me.

 

[DB in FV]

FD,

Welcome! (even though I'm basically new myself)

Your jacket, by itself, wouldn't necessarily cause any alarm.

15 years ago, I was the grocery manager for a 24hr store, which meant a lot of overnights. Everyone was taught to see everyone who entered the store. Someone in a light jacket, unzipped, who seemed normal, would not seem unusual.

IF (big IF) all the speculation is true, and he went to the store at 4:20am, bundled up in a jacket with a hat pulled over his face, he would have been noticed. When I was working that shift, the cashier would have made it a point to alert me to his presence, and we would have known where he was at all times, even if we didn't "watch him" 100% of the time. It's probably safe to assume that if all the speculation is true, BC probably wouldn't have seemed normal. He probably would have been quiet and nervous, which would cause more red flags for the store personnel. They would have been glad to see him leave.

The store employees would have noticed him out of self-preservation, and then when he was shown on WRAL they would have probably recognized him in about 3 seconds.

 

[reddress58]

Yes, Mom, I picked up on that. I did read the posts about the long sleeves (and saw it myself on the local news) which, at mid-day outside, is more suspicious to me than in the grocery store in the early morning hours...and by early morning I mean between 6 and 7. I'll believe the 4:20 time when LE has some proof of that.

As for everyone questioning why he went back to HT to get the record and saying THAT makes him look guilty--I disagree. If there were such speculation about me, even if I hadn't been named as a suspect or a POI, I'd do the same thing. I would WANT to just sit tight, but I think I'd feel compelled to do whatever I could to prove my innocence IF I DIDN'T do it.

JMHO

I have to agree with you about the receipts and the jacket. I ALWAYS freeze in the GS regardless of the outside temp, and I carry a jacket or sweater for the same reason. Also, if I were writing an affidavit to defend myself, even if I knew the general time I was at a location, I'd check whatever source was available to support my time frame. If anyone were to question his affidavit, he could point to the receipts to backup the items he bought and the time he bought them. In other words, it's the chicken & egg scenerio.

 

[reddress58]

I quess all those friends that filed affidavits would know. I'm kinda surprised they wouldn't have mentioned it , him NOT wearing a wedding band, since they pretty much mentioned everything else. :crazy:

Maybe none of them noticied his hands during the conference and it didn't occur to them to mention he didn't wear his band in the affidavits. Or...one or more may have noticed, and pointed it out to LE after the conference.

 

[raisincharlie]

I have to agree with you about the receipts and the jacket. I ALWAYS freeze in the GS regardless of the outside temp, and I carry a jacket or sweater for the same reason. Also, if I were writing an affidavit to defend myself, even if I knew the general time I was at a location, I'd check whatever source was available to support my time frame. If anyone were to question his affidavit, he could point to the receipts to backup the items he bought and the time he bought them. In other words, it's the chicken & egg scenerio.

There you go - an affidavit to defend ones-self. Brad's affidavit was suppose to be about his ability as a parent - not to defend himself about a simple visit to the store that he is apparently very concerned about in how that is perceived by the public.

He took the opportunity to defend himself rather than show he should keep his kids. Now to me, that doesn't make a lot of sense. The time to defend himself about Nancy's murder will come - but I can't find the relevance in a child custody action. The plaintiffs did indeed say Nancy did not go for a run - but how does his visit to the store defend him against that subtle accusation ?

 

[FullDisclosure]

FullDisclosure,

I quess I have trouble with it because he is simply not named a suspect or even a POI. What does he have to prove at this point - there is not one single word spoken by LE saying he is a suspect.

I believe he used that information in his affidavit to get out that he he went to the store at a certain time. He described those times in great detail.

My brain is asking why in an affidavit relating to the custody of his children, is he even remotely thinking this has anything to do with his ability as a parent. Beyond me.

I hear exactly what you're saying, RC. He isn't named, but there is MUCH speculation--you need look no further than this board! That's why I said that, if it were me, I'd WANT to sit tight, but I'd feel compelled to defend myself in light of all the SPECULATION. Maybe not the right thing to do when not yet named, but remember, he's been described HERE as very concerned about appearances/image, etc.....that may be reason enough to feel the need to defend himself, IMO.

As for the affidavits, I believe that he was already defending himself regarding all the speculation...which, IMO, maybe wasn't the smartest move on the part of his atty's...

 

[momto3kids]

Mom, please look at my post on page 9. This is exactly what i was bringing to RC's attention.

RDD58....this is what I was referring to. Thanks for pointing it out. I thought the retention basin was discussed on a different thread...photo's or theories? I was wrong, it was on this thread I see.

 

[raisincharlie]

<snip>

As for the affidavits, I believe that he was already defending himself regarding all the speculation...which, IMO, maybe wasn't the smartest move on the part of his atty's...

Do I ever agree with you on this !

 

[reddress58]

Let me try to explain this HT....

You have to enter on the right side of the store (facing the store), the left side is locked around 11pm. Once you enter...produce on right, about 24 registers (including U-Scan) on your left and a few display shelves (picnic items or whatnots). Pass the shelves and turn left...approx 10 aisles down on his right is the detergent. While walking he can SEE the detergent, it sits right there facing him (you can't miss it)...the aisles are very wide in HT. The 1st product being in this aisle is TIDE.

He get's it and now has to check out. Is he familiar with U-Scan or is it open?, I don't know. But what I do know is U-Scan is the furthest check out from where he has to get back outside. Yes, it is possible he used it, but if not...he goes to the cashier with the lit sign, waits for them to come since they might be stocking and not sitting waiting for him...then out the door.

Problem...no outside camera's!

On a previous post I mentioned a 2am run to HT I made recently with a friend who needed a glucose kit. There was only one checkout open and it was the one closest to the right side entrance. Nothing else, not even the self-scanner was open. There were quite a few employees in the store at the time...mostly stocking shelves. The girl who checked us out was not waiting behind the counter, but actually had to leave a stocking job to wait on us.

 

[FullDisclosure]

FD,

Welcome! (even though I'm basically new myself)

Your jacket, by itself, wouldn't necessarily cause any alarm.

15 years ago, I was the grocery manager for a 24hr store, which meant a lot of overnights. Everyone was taught to see everyone who entered the store. Someone in a light jacket, unzipped, who seemed normal, would not seem unusual.

IF (big IF) all the speculation is true, and he went to the store at 4:20am, bundled up in a jacket with a hat pulled over his face, he would have been noticed. When I was working that shift, the cashier would have made it a point to alert me to his presence, and we would have known where he was at all times, even if we didn't "watch him" 100% of the time. It's probably safe to assume that if all the speculation is true, BC probably wouldn't have seemed normal. He probably would have been quiet and nervous, which would cause more red flags for the store personnel. They would have been glad to see him leave.

The store employees would have noticed him out of self-preservation, and then when he was shown on WRAL they would have probably recognized him in about 3 seconds.

Thanks for the welcome!

Good point--I wear a jacket, but I think I usually act fairly normal... :waitasec:

I'd be interested to know if he was noticed by personnel (acting suspiciously) before NC's body was found, or if people only noticed "after the fact." Hmmmmm....

 

[reddress58]

There you go - an affidavit to defend ones-self. Brad's affidavit was suppose to be about his ability as a parent - not to defend himself about a simple visit to the store that he is apparently very concerned about in how that is perceived by the public.

He took the opportunity to defend himself rather than show he should keep his kids. Now to me, that doesn't make a lot of sense. The time to defend himself about Nancy's murder will come - but I can't find the relevance in a child custody action. The plaintiffs did indeed say Nancy did not go for a run - but how does his visit to the store defend him against that subtle accusation ?

Because WE on this site had already alerted the general population of his run to the store for detergent (it was noted as bleach at the time). I'm sure Brad felt he needed to clear that matter up for LE, the family, family attorney...anyone who would use that against him to take his children away.

 

[momto3kids]

On a previous post I mentioned a 2am run to HT I made recently with a friend who needed a glucose kit. There was only one checkout open and it was the one closest to the right side entrance. Nothing else, not even the self-scanner was open. There were quite a few employees in the store at the time...mostly stocking shelves. The girl who checked us out was not waiting behind the counter, but actually had to leave a stocking job to wait on us.

OK..so you just confirmed what I have been saying. Right side entry, check out with cashier, cashier stocking, etc. Thanks so much because I haven't gone lately past midnight..since things do change this setup could have also.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Hi Reddress!

LOL. I love going to the refrig/frozen foods section in grocery stores, esp in the summer! I don't handle this NC heat very well so those colder areas are like an oasis for me! I could not imagine putting on a jacket to go into the grocery store. Now, if I were to go to a restaurant where they pump out the AC and I'd be there for an hour+ then yes I'd want a jacket or sweater just in case. Most men tolerate cold better than women so any guy putting on a jacket in the summer would (IMHO) be kind of strange. Unless it was my 82 yr old father, who is on blood thinners and is always cold.