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

[carolinalady]

Supposedly he was out of the country while Nancy was home with the newborn which was Bella? She just turned 2 in late July. I wonder if the phone records from that long ago are still available.... Or do I have the girls names/ages mixed up? Either way would the records still exist from 2 years ago?

Katie is the baby.

Not sure what FCC regulations are for telephone records. For some reason I'd think it would be longer than 2 years, but possibly not for the actual call records. Hmmm, I'll do a google search to see if I come up w/ anything.

ETA...I only see some sites referencing NSA and trying to get 2 years of records. I don't see anything concrete right now.

 

[reddress58]

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3337583/

Nothing we didn't already know. I hope WRAL posts the affidavit. I'm curious to see what else Carey has to say.

 

[stillblv]

Fran and others,

Given the situation before Nancy's death, these two were in the process of dissolving their marriage. That was no secret to anybody. The love had died; she was going back to Canada, and he was moving on with his life. I doubt very much if she had died of natural causes Brad would have made much of a fuss about who got Nancy's remains or where she was buried. And I also doubt he would have put up much of a fight about the children going to Canada to attend a service with their mother's family members.

The only reason he took the passports to begin with (preventing the children from going to Canada) was in fear of Nancy fleeing with them and therefore getting more favorable custody provisions. He admits her attorney told her that would be the case. Remember: this was ALL about money...as in an unfavorable separation agreement as it stood at TOD. Unfavorable for Brad.

If she had died of natural causes, there would be no custody battle...so kids would go to Canada with family to bury Nancy. Brad may not have attended EVEN THEN! Does this make sense?? So, to answer Fran's question, he didn't/doesn't care enough about Nancy to give a hoot about her ashes, where she's buried or anything else. But I do believe he wants his children.

I admit I'm a little fearful of responding to you, reddress, as I don't want to get on your bad side, too; however, I can't believe that if Nancy "fled" to Canada with her kids that that would give her better custody provisions. Just the opposite. However, if Brad had agreed to her taking the kids to Canada, then I would say that would have been true as he is essentially, for better way of saying it, giving the sign that he doesn't necessarily want custody of them. (at least in the eyes of the law and the whole bogus way the courts treat divorces, etc.).

 

[Onescout]

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3337583/

Wonderful find Jumpstreet, just what lots of folks have been waiting for.

 

[reddress58]

I admit I'm a little fearful of responding to you, reddress, as I don't want to get on your bad side, too; however, I can't believe that if Nancy "fled" to Canada with her kids that that would give her better custody provisions. Just the opposite. However, if Brad had agreed to her taking the kids to Canada, then I would say that would have been true as he is essentially, for better way of saying it, giving the sign that he doesn't necessarily want custody of them. (at least in the eyes of the law and the whole bogus way the courts treat divorces, etc.).

Geez. First off, no one is on my bad side. I am not angry with anyone? What made you write that? I belive it's more that someone is angry with me.

 

[mahmoo]

As I've been reading the last few days, I was curious about a couple of things. Maybe someone will remember or know the answers to help me out.

3) How long had Nancy been back from her family vacation in South Carolina? Did she arrive home on Monday, July 7th or ?????

Tink.....I don't recall reading the date she returned from Hilton Head although her friend, Hannah Prichard, does state in her affidavit that NC returned 5 days prior to her death. So your July 7th date sounds accurate.

 

[carolinalady]

I admit I'm a little fearful of responding to you, reddress, as I don't want to get on your bad side, too; however, I can't believe that if Nancy "fled" to Canada with her kids that that would give her better custody provisions. Just the opposite. However, if Brad had agreed to her taking the kids to Canada, then I would say that would have been true as he is essentially, for better way of saying it, giving the sign that he doesn't necessarily want custody of them. (at least in the eyes of the law and the whole bogus way the courts treat divorces, etc.).

I agree. I posted earlier that I would honestly hope that Nancy's attorney did not advise her to flee to Canada for custody. Those children are North Carolina residents (or were at the the time the statement was supposedly made) and US Citizens (still not sure if the dual citizenship papers were ever filed for the Canada side) and the custody decisions would need to decided in the NC courts, not the Canadian courts.

 

[jumpstreet]

Nothing we didn't already know. I hope WRAL posts the affidavit. I'm curious to see what else Carey has to say.

Right, from the CM interview, we already somewhat knew that Carey had no plans to run, but I guess this makes it "official".
Even that proves very little (BC could have been mistaken w.r.t NC's plans, or NC could have mistakenly (or intentionally) mentioned Carey to BC before leaving).
[ You are right, will be interesting to see what else (if anything) is mentioned there. ]

Things I'm a little fuzzy on though:
- Article says the affidavit was taken on July 24th, but filed late Tuesday. What's the point of filing the affidavit now? Is it related to the custody hearing (set for October?)
- Why the long delay in hearing anything from Carey?

- ME says the autopsy isn't complete. Is that normal (> 2 weeks for completion of the report)
- BC attorney's subpoena HT records. (Including video tapes I wonder?). Once and for all trying to prove their client wasn't at HT at any point in time other than his stated times there?
- BC attorney's subpoena TW records (perhaps to confirm the phone call from home to mobile? (assuming they may have used TWC for phone service at home))

 

[carolinalady]

Right, from the CM interview, we already somewhat knew that Carey had no plans to run, but I guess this makes it "official".
Even that proves very little (BC could have been mistaken w.r.t NC's plans, or NC could have mistakenly (or intentionally) mentioned Carey to BC before leaving).
[ You are right, will be interesting to see what else (if anything) is mentioned there. ]

Things I'm a little fuzzy on though:
- Article says the affidavit was taken on July 24th, but filed late Tuesday. What's the point of filing the affidavit now? Is it related to the custody hearing (set for October?)
- Why the long delay in hearing anything from Carey?

- ME says the autopsy isn't complete. Is that normal (> 2 weeks for completion of the report)
- BC attorney's subpoena HT records. (Including video tapes I wonder?). Once and for all trying to prove their client wasn't at HT at any point in time other than his stated times there?
- BC attorney's subpoena TW records (perhaps to confirm the phone call from home to mobile? (assuming they may have used TWC for phone service at home))

The autopsy, yes it can take a few months. That is totally normal.

I think what will be interesting is to see when BC's attorney received the affidavit.

 

[Topsail Girl]

Katie is the baby.

Not sure what FCC regulations are for telephone records. For some reason I'd think it would be longer than 2 years, but possibly not for the actual call records. Hmmm, I'll do a google search to see if I come up w/ anything.

ETA...I only see some sites referencing NSA and trying to get 2 years of records. I don't see anything concrete right now.

Ok I have it straight now - Bella is 4 and Katie just turned 2. I thought I'd google and see what I can come up with too. I would think it would be longer than two years too. There is no need for proof of what was said in the calls 2 years ago. Just need to prove the calls actually happened. If records are kept and those calls were not made then that is another nail in Brad's coffin.....

 

[reddress58]

Right, from the CM interview, we already somewhat knew that Carey had no plans to run, but I guess this makes it "official".
Even that proves very little (BC could have been mistaken w.r.t NC's plans, or NC could have mistakenly (or intentionally) mentioned Carey to BC before leaving).
[ You are right, will be interesting to see what else (if anything) is mentioned there. ]

Things I'm a little fuzzy on though:
- Article says the affidavit was taken on July 24th, but filed late Tuesday. What's the point of filing the affidavit now? Is it related to the custody hearing (set for October?)
- Why the long delay in hearing anything from Carey?

- ME says the autopsy isn't complete. Is that normal (> 2 weeks for completion of the report)
- BC attorney's subpoena HT records. (Including video tapes I wonder?). Once and for all trying to prove their client wasn't at HT at any point in time other than his stated times there?
- BC attorney's subpoena TW records (perhaps to confirm the phone call from home to mobile? (assuming they may have used TWC for phone service at home))

The part about the subpoena of the HT video is VERY interesting! Sounds like Brad is defending the 4:20 AM accusation!

 

[raisincharlie]

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3337583/

Thanks jumpstreet - I see this was just updated a short time ago. I find it interesting that Carey did file an affidavit on 24 July - before the scheduled custody hearing.

I hope WRAL will post the affidavit at some time - not sure why it hasn't been, but all this time I have been wondering why there was no word on this young lady. Maybe we will find out.

So we now know that both CM and CC agree - Nancy did not make plans to run with CC on Saturday morning. Good Job !

ETA - I see your question about the autopsy report - the ME at Chapel Hill typically takes up to 2 months to complete an autopsy report - nothing unusual about it not being done in 2 weeks.

 

[reddress58]

I admit I'm a little fearful of responding to you, reddress, as I don't want to get on your bad side, too; however, I can't believe that if Nancy "fled" to Canada with her kids that that would give her better custody provisions. Just the opposite. However, if Brad had agreed to her taking the kids to Canada, then I would say that would have been true as he is essentially, for better way of saying it, giving the sign that he doesn't necessarily want custody of them. (at least in the eyes of the law and the whole bogus way the courts treat divorces, etc.).

My point was, I don't think he cared one way or the other about her burial or her ashes. Would you please tell me why you're fearful of responding to a post I've made?

 

[raisincharlie]

Although, according to BC's own affadavit, they were in the process of working it out....hmmmm.

I have a suspicion that this back and forth - go/leave - steal passports/ work it out and go /leave again is part of the reason behind the claim that Brad was inconsistent with his obligations as a parent. Just my thought about it. Seems stay or leave was decided on his whim and mood apparently.

 

[raisincharlie]

The part about the subpoena of the HT video is VERY interesting! Sounds like Brad is defending the 4:20 AM accusation!

Being my usual anal self - I don't see in the article where it indicates that Brad subpeona'd HT for a video tape - just that he had a subpeona issued to them. I would not doubt however the tape was included. Venturing a guess, it was to late for that - LE would have already had the tape in their possession - Brad and his lawyer could huff and puff all they wanted but they would not get it.

 

[reddress58]

Back to the purse; something I've been thinking about: Nancy comes home from the party sometime after midnight. NC & BC argue and the intensity esculates. Whether from fear or anger, Nancy decides to leave the house and maybe go stay with a friend. She grabs her purse, runs to the car, and Brad follows. He pulls her out of the car and either strangles her or hits her with a blunt object that is close at hand in the garage.

It is eaisier to clean a concrete garage floor than fabric from bed linens and carpet...thus his willingness to allow LE to search the house. (knowing they'd find nothing in the house; and the garage was cleaned thoroughly) The laundry run could be for his and NC's clothes. He could possibly use it to clean the garage floor, also, in case there were blood/and or body fluids resulting from the struggle. This would explain her purse in the car.

 

[reddress58]

Being my usual anal self - I don't see in the article where it indicates that Brad subpeona'd HT for a video tape - just that he had a subpeona issued to them. I would not doubt however the tape was included. Venturing a guess, it was to late for that - LE would have already had the tape in their possession - Brad and his lawyer could huff and puff all they wanted but they would not get it.

You are right, Raisin. They may also be looking for receipts or witnesses.

 

[raisincharlie]

Back to the purse; something I've been thinking about: Nancy comes home from the party sometime after midnight. NC & BC argue and the intensity esculates. Whether from fear or anger, Nancy decides to leave the house and maybe go stay with a friend. She grabs her purse, runs to the car, and Brad follows. He pulls her out of the car and either strangles her or hits her with a blunt object that is close at hand in the garage.

It is eaisier to clean a concrete garage floor than fabric from bed linens and carpet...thus his willingness to allow LE to search the house. (knowing they'd find nothing in the house; and the garage was cleaned thoroughly) The laundry run could be for his and NC's clothes. He could possibly use it to clean the garage floor, also, in case there were blood/and or body fluids resulting from the struggle. This would explain her purse in the car.

Best theory about why the purse was in the car that I have seen and very plausible. :clap:

That purse for some reason has me mesmerized as well.

 

[raisincharlie]

You are right, Raisin. They may also be looking for receipts or witnesses.

I do believe it is possible that if Brad went out at 420 am - he went to one HT and by 6 am decided to go to the other for purposes of an alibi. By doing so he may have thought LE would only look at the one where he made purchases between 6 and 7 am and he told them about - effectively, in his mind, hiding an earlier purchase at a different location. I think this is possible - he did make it a point in his affidavit to say the one at Waverly Place as he called it.

 

[reddress58]

Best theory about why the purse was in the car that I have seen and vert plausible. :clap:

That purse for some reason has me mesmerized as well.

Now, if only someone could testify whether the car was in the garage or the driveway after midnight...