Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #21

[EntreNous]

it has been bothering me for sometime about nancy's so called embellishments.

We have all come into contact with people who 'embellish' through work, socializing etc. They are the people that we avoid at all costs, that we roll our eyes as they start another tale and mutter,'here we go again' when we are stuck in a conversation with them.

Nancy seems to have had so many close friends with whom she spent a lot of time. I cannot believe that they would have remained friends for long, nor would they have stood up for her if they felt she was continually lying or exaggerating.

To her friends, she was full of life, fun and caring. Not a liar !

Jmo

bingo!

 

[SleuthyGal]

jm flu isn't contagious is it ?

I know JMFlu in real life and have been bugging JmFlu to join WS for the past couple of weeks.

JMFlu may be a bit habit forming, but otherwise is not contagious in a bad way! :crazy:

 

[raisincharlie]

I know JMFlu in real life and have been bugging JmFlu to join WS for the past couple of weeks.

JMFlu may be a bit habit forming, but otherwise is not contagious in a bad way! :crazy:

Okay, no problem. Ummmm you did warn jmflu about good ole Bubba here right ?

 

[SleuthyGal]

Okay, no problem. Ummmm you did warn jmflu about good ole Bubba here right ?

No I didn't! :chicken:

 

[raisincharlie]

No I didn't! :chicken:

uh oh :crazy:

 

[jmflu]

Bubba?

 

[Skittles]

Hi, all...
I'm the one who posted on WRAL about my coworker who has the friend who went down to CPD to apply for her PI license. I had heard you all had read that and were batting some thoughts about. I have spent the last few days lurking and catching up on your chatter so I wouldn't be ignorant when I finally posted. Some very interesting and intelligent folks on here! Much better than WRAL, where the posters seem to be more "pro Brad" than actually in touch with reality. I could hardly stand it when there were actually people putting down Nancy and her family and standing up for Brad. I'm really glad to have found WS and happy to be part of the discussion.

Yesterday I went by BC's house for the first time. I work in Waverly Place and Lochmere is right behind here. I was pretty shocked not to see a white bow on the mailbox as I saw all around the neighborhood. I'm not really sure I saw white bows on the other houses in the court, actually, so I'm going back today to take a look.

jmflu

Welcome, jmflu!!

We're mostly harmless around here.

 

[jumpstreet]

Hi, all...
I'm the one who posted on WRAL about my coworker who has the friend who went down to CPD to apply for her PI license. I had heard you all had read that and were batting some thoughts about. I have spent the last few days lurking and catching up on your chatter so I wouldn't be ignorant when I finally posted. Some very interesting and intelligent folks on here! Much better than WRAL, where the posters seem to be more "pro Brad" than actually in touch with reality. I could hardly stand it when there were actually people putting down Nancy and her family and standing up for Brad. I'm really glad to have found WS and happy to be part of the discussion.

Yesterday I went by BC's house for the first time. I work in Waverly Place and Lochmere is right behind here. I was pretty shocked not to see a white bow on the mailbox as I saw all around the neighborhood. I'm not really sure I saw white bows on the other houses in the court, actually, so I'm going back today to take a look.

jmflu

Welcome to jmflu!..
... BTW, what's the link to the wral site (just curious)? [ I've "discussions" at the end of sevaral of their news articles, but those seem to close out as the article ages. Thanks. ] What's the scoop on your co-worker who went down to Cary PD to apply for PI license. Any observations, etc? (Sorry - I haven't read the wral site you mentioned, but feel free to share a link)

 

[jumpstreet]

Not much time for the DA to figure how this case is unusual or different, extraordinary or anything else.

Given the warrants in the Young case were sealed for 2 years, and are now just now being opened, it is reasonable to assume that there is substantially less of substance (circumstantial or otherwise) in the BC warrants than what's in the JY warrants? Or not necessarily.

I mean, the contents of the JY warrants compelled a judge to keep them sealed for all this time. Having not followed that case incredibly closely, I wonder what has precipitated them being opened. [ Does the judge just feel like 2 years is long enough? ].

In the BC case, it's shaping up to be 6 week interval as being "long enough" - so is it likely that there's less implications/information in the BC warrants than the JY warrants? Anyone care to speculate?

 

[raisincharlie]

Given the warrants in the Young case were sealed for 2 years, and are now just now being opened, it is reasonable to assume that there is substantially less of substance (circumstantial or otherwise) in the BC warrants than what's in the JY warrants? Or not necessarily.

I mean, the contents of the JY warrants compelled a judge to keep them sealed for all this time. Having not followed that case incredibly closely, I wonder what has precipitated them being opened. [ Does the judge just feel like 2 years is long enough? ].

In the BC case, it's shaping up to be 6 week interval as being "long enough" - so is it likely that there's less implications/information in the BC warrants than the JY warrants? Anyone care to speculate?

There will be considerably less in BC's warrants. Since you didn't follow Michelle's case - what you saw in the affidavait was basically the building of the case from beginning to the point it was at when the warrants were served. In other words, each warrant issued contains this repetition of the causes to the point of issuance. Laid out in those warrant s was just over a years worht of work.

In this case - remember the warrants were served on the 16th, 21st and 25th - not much can be analyzed in that short amount of time. However from the 16th warrant something was obtained in evidence that allowed for a probable cause to search Cisco Systems, Brad's office. There will be nothing in these warrants about DNA IMO.

 

[raisincharlie]

Bubba?

Quess no one told you about Bubba the serial killer who presides on death row - that's me :crazy:



Just teasing you jmflu - i accidentally inherited that particular description - all in fun and I refuse to allow the person who said it to forget it - again - all in fun !

 

[fran]

Thanks SleuthyGal! Hi RC! Serious and silly, I can partake in both!

Ok, I went by the house again on the way home. There still is NO bow on the mailbox. Actually only 2 bows in the whole court. (I wonder if some of the neighbors are afraid to put the bows out in case it is construed as "for Nancy, against Brad?" Hmm...) White beamer in the driveway. Newspaper still in the grass. All the shades closed.

jmflu!

:Welcome-12-june:

It really bothers me about the bow being gone from the mailbox too. She's only been gone for a month! Has he forgotten all about her already?

If I lived in that neighborhood, I'd keep a bow on my mailbox for a year! Pooey on Brad and HIS friends.

I'm not surprised he's hidden behind closed shades. He knows the rumor is he's the 'guy who killed his wife.'(<-allegedly ) Bet he feels strange when he does go out, like all eyes are on him. Especially the hidden CAMERAS! Bet he's driving all over town trying to figure out where he was seen that day Nancy went missing. :takeoff:

Guess he'll just have to wait until they come to get him, to find out where all the town's hidden cameras are. :smiliescale: Then he'll have some 'splainin' to do!:behindbar

JMHO
fran

 

[EntreNous]

Welcome to the board jmflu!

 

[fran]

he seems amazingly calculated & clever in figuring out *SOME* of what he did (this would not include his 4:20 HT trip & his attempt to have Nancy's card swiped at LTF).

but, what on earth was he thinking when he answered the phone when Jessica called? I guess he figured if he didn't answer, she would come over & he absolutely didn't want her at the house.

which makes me think something happened at the house AND he had some important errands to run while "looking" for her.....

I honestly think he HAD to get RID of something and MAYBE wash his car. Wonder if LE has gone to the car washes around there on Saturday, about the time Brad was 'looking for Nancy,' (between 1 - 3 pm) to check if it was anyone's normal routine and they may have seen him there that day?

That COULD be informative.

JMHO
fran

 

[raisincharlie]

Everyone must be out following Brad :woohoo:

 

[fran]

SH's relationship with Brad seriously bothers me. I can't figure that one out to save my life.:crazy:

This supposed friendship is definitely weird on BOTH sides.:crazy:

Who would be friends with someone who stabbed you in the back and had an affair with your wife?:steamed:

:chicken:OTOH, who would be friends with someone, who you'd had an affair with their wife?:talker:

Strange, very strange. :shocked2:

JMHO
fran

 

[DogWood]

Thanks SleuthyGal! Hi RC! Serious and silly, I can partake in both!

Ok, I went by the house again on the way home. There still is NO bow on the mailbox. Actually only 2 bows in the whole court. (I wonder if some of the neighbors are afraid to put the bows out in case it is construed as "for Nancy, against Brad?" Hmm...) White beamer in the driveway. Newspaper still in the grass. All the shades closed.

Hi, jmflu! Welcome!

Did you happen to notice if there were stickers on the license plate of the White BMW sedan in the driveway?

Anything else you noticed about the plate?

 

[fran]

Everyone must be out following Brad :woohoo:

Looks like it doesn't it!?

JMHO
fran

 

[jumpstreet]

There will be considerably less in BC's warrants. Since you didn't follow Michelle's case - what you saw in the affidavait was basically the building of the case from beginning to the point it was at when the warrants were served. In other words, each warrant issued contains this repetition of the causes to the point of issuance. Laid out in those warrant s was just over a years worht of work.

In this case - remember the warrants were served on the 16th, 21st and 25th - not much can be analyzed in that short amount of time. However from the 16th warrant something was obtained in evidence that allowed for a probable cause to search Cisco Systems, Brad's office. There will be nothing in these warrants about DNA IMO.

Thanks, and this makes sense. If nothing else I guess we'll find out more on the mystery 3rd warrant, as well as what the heck was in all those big brown bags being toted out of the house. [ Assuming nothing "unusual and extraordinary" occurs of course ]

 

[fran]

Given the warrants in the Young case were sealed for 2 years, and are now just now being opened, it is reasonable to assume that there is substantially less of substance (circumstantial or otherwise) in the BC warrants than what's in the JY warrants? Or not necessarily.

I mean, the contents of the JY warrants compelled a judge to keep them sealed for all this time. Having not followed that case incredibly closely, I wonder what has precipitated them being opened. [ Does the judge just feel like 2 years is long enough? ].

In the BC case, it's shaping up to be 6 week interval as being "long enough" - so is it likely that there's less implications/information in the BC warrants than the JY warrants? Anyone care to speculate?

It took longer to get the answers back from some of the stuff on the JY case, like about the shoe manufacturer.

It'll be interesting to see if they release the contents of these sw's on Sept 2, or get an extention. Between DNA evidence and computer search, maybe they expect to have it back in time. I hope so. Aug 25 is the next gj. Hopefully they'll hear it then. :behindbar

JMHO
fran