Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #16

[FlowerChild]

Ok, everyone has gone night/night so I'll pose this question for the early risers.

We've discussed at great length, Nancy's family gaining temporary custody of the children. They had to get a court order AND appear again in court

Brad Cooper was Nancy's husband. He was her next of kin. WHY did Nancy's parents get custody of Nancy's remains and take her to Canada to be buried? It seems to me, it was Brad's responsibility and right to do what he wanted with her. Was there a court order? no........Was there a verbal agreement?

Has this been asked and answered? Why did Nancy's parents take control? Why not Brad?

curious,
fran

They probably split the cremated remains between them...Brad can have his portion for his own service/memorial and Nancy's parents and family can have their portion. This way each party can do what they wish. And yes, it would be BC's decision - he could just as easily kept ALL the remains himself. While he and Nancy's family are obviously at odds at present, her parents and family did need to memorialize and honor Nancy in their own way and BC must have worked out a way they could do that - either with all or part of the remains.

I did find it a little odd that the children were at the memorial. At ages 2 and 4 I would have opted for a private "family" time for them to be introduced to the concept of their mother's death and found a appropriate sitter for them and their small cousins during the actual service. I believe children need to be told about death and grieving, I do not believe it's appropriate to have a 2 and 4 year old at a service where they cannot possibly understand the situation or the emotions of those present. While it might have been comforting for Nancy's family to have them there, a reminder of Nancy's legacy, K & B are facing so much turmoil, losing their mother, being separated from their father, being in an unfamiliar place - I just don't feel the service was something I would have subjected them to.

My Opinion

 

[maconrich]

I remember seeing sharing urns when we were looking for one for my father. Didn't like the idea at all! But what you said is logical, and if BC initiated the idea or even agreed to it, it's a plus for him (as a human being).

With the memorial, if it had been an open casket funeral I'd totally agree, but the way it was done I don't see any reason the children shouldn't have been there. There's more than enough about all of this to traumatize the girls; but attending the memorial service isn't something I'd count as one of them.

 

[MoonFlwr]

They probably split the cremated remains between them...Brad can have his portion for his own service/memorial and Nancy's parents and family can have their portion. This way each party can do what they wish. And yes, it would be BC's decision - he could just as easily kept ALL the remains himself. While he and Nancy's family are obviously at odds at present, her parents and family did need to memorialize and honor Nancy in their own way and BC must have worked out a way they could do that - either with all or part of the remains.

I did find it a little odd that the children were at the memorial. At ages 2 and 4 I would have opted for a private "family" time for them to be introduced to the concept of their mother's death and found a appropriate sitter for them and their small cousins during the actual service. I believe children need to be told about death and grieving, I do not believe it's appropriate to have a 2 and 4 year old at a service where they cannot possibly understand the situation or the emotions of those present. While it might have been comforting for Nancy's family to have them there, a reminder of Nancy's legacy, K & B are facing so much turmoil, losing their mother, being separated from their father, being in an unfamiliar place - I just don't feel the service was something I would have subjected them to.

My Opinion

Maybe they could've been torn about it.

Maybe they were thinking about when the girls were older and looked back at the pictures of the memorial service. If it was me, I might wonder if maybe when the girls get older, they would ask why they weren't present at their mom's service.

It's a difficult one to call.

Maybe they just did what they thought was best.

 

[fran]

IMO, I personally can't see Brad 'sharing.' It just doesn't sound like his type of thing, but I could be very wrong and he may have a decent bone in his body. I really don't want to sound mean and I know I do. But, it is the way I feel. Just a guess.

IMO, I feel he's got a narcissistic personality and from what I've seen was abusive. They look on EVERYTHING under their power as a possession. This includes people. Wife, kids, even pets if there are any, are not looked at by this type as a living being, but something that belongs to them. They OWN IT!

Often times, that's why a spouse is killed by their abuser when they're attemting to sever a relationship. See, they BELONG to the abuser, no one else is going to have them, they're NOT going to leave their control. Thus the term ERASED!

It is possible, that Brad let them take control of Nancy's remains because:
He didn't want to argue (maybe because he knows he's responsible?)
He didn't want to pay? (I know that sounds down-right mean of me as well to suggest this, but he seems to be quite concerned with HIS money)


As far as the girls attending the service for their mom. Well, the smallest one didn't really know what was going on and the older one, most likely did understand and personally, I would have had both of them with me. As a matter of fact, I took my two young children to my mom's and it worked out just fine.

Thanks for the input all. Perhaps we'll see a 'press release' tomorrow with an explanation from the NOT suspects lawyer's office.

JMHO
fran

 

[Deduction]

if nancy's spending becomes an issue at the murder trial, i would think a forensic accountant would find evidence of brad's spending money on his plethora of mistresses

Perhaps we better get a forensic mistresses hunter downer to prove he had a plethora of mistresses before the forensic accountant can testify.:waitasec:
Never heard of a forensic accountant but learn something new every day.

 

[raisincharlie]

Good question! I guess there are a few possible scenarios.

One scenario could be: If there was immediate animosity between Brad and Nancy's family when Nancy's body was found, it would have served both parties well for 1 of them to back down. There must have been at least some tension in the air. Some people back down in situations like that....perhaps Brad was like that.
Or, because of the animosity, maybe he blew up and said he wasn't interacting with anyone from the family and that they could handle the funeral arrangements.

A second scenario could be: Brad is a nice guy and decided to let Nancy's family do what they wanted with her remains, as she was their flesh and blood.

A third could be: Brad didn't care about her enough anymore to worry about her remains.

A fourth: He killed her and didn't want to be involved in the funeral arrangements.

Who knows what was said behind closed doors!

I think it is reasonable to consider your first scenario, the animosity angle, as the prime reason. Brad does not contact Nancy's parents to inform them she is missing. Nancy's parents arrived, Brad no longer attends the pressers. There is an open animosity in the pressers when Mr. Rentz says"if the person has a decent bone in their body". Two days after Nancy is found the Ex Parte is executed, the document contains a statement that Nancy did not go running on Saturday morning. Then there is Brad's lawyer doing a statement and the demand for the sutopsy report to refute the insinuation. I do not see how one could even imagine Brad and his in-laws were getting along at all. Just my observations from what is known and not worrying about behind the scenes.

 

[carolinalady]

Interact I knew nothing about until it was discussed on here. It is like anything, if you or someone you know isn't discussing it or needing it you know little about it. I have to admit I know little about where the shelters or organizations are.

Interact bought the old YWCA building on Oberlin Road in Raleigh (right near where Wade Ave. comes into Oberlin going towards Cameron Village).

 

[carolinalady]

I think it is reasonable to consider your first scenario, the animosity angle, as the prime reason. Brad does not contact Nancy's parents to inform them she is missing. Nancy's parents arrived, Brad no longer attends the pressers. There is an open animosity in the pressers when Mr. Rentz says"if the person has a decent bone in their body". Two days after Nancy is found the Ex Parte is executed, the document contains a statement that Nancy did not go running on Saturday morning. Then there is Brad's lawyer doing a statement and the demand for the sutopsy report to refute the insinuation. I do not see how one could even imagine Brad and his in-laws were getting along at all. Just my observations from what is known and not worrying about behind the scenes.

I would think the animosity would have been present prior to her even going missing. I'm sure they got an earful regarding separation proceedings while together at Hilton Head.

 

[Star12]

I think it is reasonable to consider your first scenario, the animosity angle, as the prime reason. Brad does not contact Nancy's parents to inform them she is missing. Nancy's parents arrived, Brad no longer attends the pressers. There is an open animosity in the pressers when Mr. Rentz says"if the person has a decent bone in their body". Two days after Nancy is found the Ex Parte is executed, the document contains a statement that Nancy did not go running on Saturday morning. Then there is Brad's lawyer doing a statement and the demand for the sutopsy report to refute the insinuation. I do not see how one could even imagine Brad and his in-laws were getting along at all. Just my observations from what is known and not worrying about behind the scenes.

Whether there had been trouble or suspicions or not, BC had taken their little girl far away, to a different country, hadn't protected or cared for her properly, and now she is dead. I'm certain that Papa Rentz was running the show and giving the orders of just how things were going to be. And then trying fiercely to protect what was left of Nancy - her children. And I don't think BC would even waver about releasing the body to them.

BTW, I don't recall that the ME actually released the body. Was the Canadian service actually a funeral, with burial or disposition of ashes, or was it a memorial service only?

 

[raisincharlie]

<snip>


Thanks for the input all. Perhaps we'll see a 'press release' tomorrow with an explanation from the NOT suspects lawyer's office.

JMHO
fran

Fran - thanks for posting the Cisco statement in the media thread. Very non commital but interesting, assisting authorities in the investigation.

 

[raisincharlie]

I would think the animosity would have been present prior to her even going missing. I'm sure they got an earful regarding separation proceedings while together at Hilton Head.

As I said, my observations were based only on what is known.

 

[raisincharlie]

Whether there had been trouble or suspicions or not, BC had taken their little girl far away, to a different country, hadn't protected or cared for her properly, and now she is dead. I'm certain that Papa Rentz was running the show and giving the orders of just how things were going to be. And then trying fiercely to protect what was left of Nancy - her children. And I don't think BC would even waver about releasing the body to them.

BTW, I don't recall that the ME actually released the body. Was the Canadian service actually a funeral, with burial or disposition of ashes, or was it a memorial service only?

I do not recall hearing of the release of Nancy's body by the ME either. With all the media attention one would think it would have been mentioned somewhere but...

 

[carolinalady]

For Full Disclosure: Here's the link. The affair while Brad Cooper was working on his MBA, (and there's another I haven't found yet regarding the France trip).

On the affidavits of: Clea Morwick, Item #7, Michael Morwick's affidavit Item #8, Hannah Prichard's affidavit Item #10.

abcnews.go.com/images/US/IMG_0001.pdf

Now I'll look for the other.

Again, her friends are conveying what Nancy told them happened. I'm not saying they are lying, but they are repeating what Nancy has told them. The affair w/ Heather is a different situation b/c Brad admits to it (at least a 1 time encounter), Nancy told her friends, and Heather told some of the their friends as well.

And, I'm not saying he didn't have other mistresses. I'm sure if there were other women, they'll (LE or investigators) find out.

There are some things that are factually questionable in Nancy's friends' affidavits. Several of her friends were quite clear in their affidavits that there was no boat show in North Carolina on the weekend when Brad said he went to a boat show. There was, it was an Overton's Boat Show in Greenville, NC. Also, all of the stuff about the trips out of the country following Katie's birth. His passport shows no records of trips out of the country when he was "unavailable." If he is lying and conveniently didn't copy those passport stamps, that will be found out as well.

 

[Star12]

Fran - thanks for posting the Cisco statement in the media thread. Very non commital but interesting, assisting authorities in the investigation.

Wow. Very noncommital. I thought there would have been a show of support for their employee, specifically.

 

[carolinalady]

As I said, my observations were based only on what is known.

He wasn't keeping the girls from seeing Nancy's family. It was stated that they had already visited the girls and had dinner plans the night of the Ex Parte hearing. So, they were communicating on some level.

 

[raisincharlie]

He wasn't keeping the girls from seeing Nancy's family. It was stated that they had already visited the girls and had dinner plans the night of the Ex Parte hearing. So, they were communicating on some level.

He was communicating with Nancy before her death on some level as well. I'm not sure communicating implies getting along.

 

[carolinalady]

He was communicating with Nancy before her death on some level as well. I'm not sure communicating implies getting along.

I'm not implying they were getting along.

 

[raisincharlie]

I'm not implying they were getting along.

I see. I'm easily confused, I was talking about getting along and could not figure why communicating was brought into the conversation. Duh

 

[Onescout]

IMO, I personally can't see Brad 'sharing.' It just doesn't sound like his type of thing, but I could be very wrong and he may have a decent bone in his body. I really don't want to sound mean and I know I do. But, it is the way I feel. Just a guess.

IMO, I feel he's got a narcissistic personality and from what I've seen was abusive. They look on EVERYTHING under their power as a possession. This includes people. Wife, kids, even pets if there are any, are not looked at by this type as a living being, but something that belongs to them. They OWN IT!

Often times, that's why a spouse is killed by their abuser when they're attemting to sever a relationship. See, they BELONG to the abuser, no one else is going to have them, they're NOT going to leave their control. Thus the term ERASED!

It is possible, that Brad let them take control of Nancy's remains because:
He didn't want to argue (maybe because he knows he's responsible?)
He didn't want to pay? (I know that sounds down-right mean of me as well to suggest this, but he seems to be quite concerned with HIS money)


As far as the girls attending the service for their mom. Well, the smallest one didn't really know what was going on and the older one, most likely did understand and personally, I would have had both of them with me. As a matter of fact, I took my two young children to my mom's and it worked out just fine.

Thanks for the input all. Perhaps we'll see a 'press release' tomorrow with an explanation from the NOT suspects lawyer's office.

JMHO
fran

Interesting subject Fran, I imagine the family either had access to NC's remains because, as in the custody case, they "could". They seem to be able to accomplish some amazing things. Kudos to them.
OR, the other scenario would be that BC's attorney urged him to be cooperative, it would help with his media perception.
Chances are they split the remains, which is not uncommon.

AS for the children, since there was no casket, it seems like it was okay. I don't know how much the children actually take in (at their age) and to what level.
I imagine in later years, they may be grateful that they got to "say goodbye".

 

[carolinalady]

I see. I'm easily confused, I was talking about getting along and could not figure why communicating was brought into the conversation. Duh

I was never disagreeing w/ you, I was just stating that things were probably tense b/w sides before Nancy ever went missing. I was adding to your post.

Communicating was in regards to his lack of contact w/ family following Nancy going missing and then the family "communicating" w/ the murderer via the press conference statements.