Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #25

[raisincharlie]

If MH (or anyone else for that matter) was involved either as a willing (or even an unwitting) accomplice there should be a phone call between them and BC somewhere between 1am and say, 9am, right? If no such call exists then the next time period for any calls begins with the cluster of 4 calls around the tennis plans, starting at 9:15am. LE may be trying to determine if these tennis plans really existed or not.

And then, finally, the time period of after 6:45am and up to 3pm (when Brad returns home to meet up with the LE at his house) -- any use of Nancy's phone would be a major problem since Nancy obviously didn't have her cell phone with her.

Not sure a phone contact would be required SG given the proximity of the residences and the short travel time between, speaking only of MH at this point. Since Brad was out and about between 6 & 7 am, a couple of extra minutes to swing by MH's cannot be ruled out.

I must admit to a ROFL minute re-reading MH's amended affidavit. He took it upon himself to ask Nancy at the party if it would be okay for Brad to come out and play at 9:30 the next morning ? :crazy: Seems to me, this should have been a bit of a reason for both BC and MH to be a bit concerned about where Nancy was during their three conversations Saturday morning between 9:15 and a little after 10, seeing as how she gave her approval. The last time they played tennis was in May but decided the 12th of July would be a good time to play again. Strange, very strange.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Not sure a phone contact would be required SG given the proximity of the residences and the short travel time between, speaking only of MH at this point. Since Brad was out and about between 6 & 7 am, a couple of extra minutes to swing by MH's cannot be ruled out.

True.

I must admit to a ROFL minute re-reading MH's amended affidavit. He took it upon himself to ask Nancy at the party if it would be okay for Brad to come out and play at 9:30 the next morning ? :crazy: Seems to me, this should have been a bit of a reason for both BC and MH to be a bit concerned about where Nancy was during their three conversations Saturday morning between 9:15 and a little after 10, seeing as how she gave her approval. The last time they played tennis was in May but decided the 12th of July would be a good time to play again. Strange, very strange.

Now I'm wondering if those plans were real and actually discussed Fri night as per the MH affidavit. It does seem odd that MH would feel the need to ask NC for permission. And again, how is the plan to play tennis or not related to the issue of paternal fitness in the custody case (which is what these affidavits are actually supposed to be addressing).

And if you look at the timing of the updated affidavit (signed on 9/29) it is addressing items more relating to the murder investigation. How coincidental since Judge Sasser went on record just that morning, saying she cannot exclude the murder case from what she has to consider in the custody case. BTW, this affidavit is called a 'rebuttal affidavit;' what exactly is being rebutted?

 

[Albert]

I'm not sure why you feel insulted. Is there something wrong with bisexuality?

jmflu, while married and with children, is bisexuality ok? I hope you don't believe that this is proper under those circumstances.

 

[raisincharlie]

True.



Now I'm wondering if those plans were real and actually discussed Fri night as per the MH affidavit. It does seem odd that MH would feel the need to ask NC for permission. And again, how is the plan to play tennis or not related to the issue of paternal fitness in the custody case (which is what these affidavits are actually supposed to be addressing).

And if you look at the timing of the updated affidavit (signed on 9/29) it is addressing items more relating to the murder investigation. How coincidental since Judge Sasser went on record just that morning, saying she cannot exclude the murder case from what she has to consider in the custody case. BTW, this affidavit is called a 'rebuttal affidavit;' what exactly is being rebutted?

I have to agree with you -it is more the murder case that is being rebutted, however I don't think, that given the circumstances, that the rebuttal is uncalled for. Brad is kind of between a rock and a hard place, even more so since the judge has said she must decide if he may or may not be the murderer. In civil court, it is only a preponderance of the evidence not reasonable doubt. Not defending Brad but he does, to a degree, have to provide something that can negate him from involvement in the murder especially since the judge has ruled not to limit questions. I don't see how Mr. Hiller's affidavit does that for him but who knows how his lawyer will twist it in court.

I look for another motion to obtain the ME's notes regarding the autopsy as the only thing that might sway a judge is TOD, except for the pesky fact that Brad had up until a little after 3 pm to himself and regardless cannot prove by TOD alone that he is not involved. All these lawyer bills he is running up, crazy IMO as I see absolutely no way Brad can remove the cloud of suspicion. This custody case IMO is a no brainer and a huge waste of his money that might well be better spent in the event of a criminal case.

 

[jmflu]

jmflu, while married and with children, is bisexuality ok? I hope you don't believe that this is proper under those circumstances.

Bisexuality simply means attracted to both sexes. It does not infer promiscuity.

And if a woman is married and has children and is attracted to another woman and her husband knows she is, and isn't threatened by that, if she and another woman do have an encounter, who is that hurting, exactly?

 

[SleuthyGal]

Brad is kind of between a rock and a hard place, even more so since the judge has said she must decide if he may or may not be the murderer.

I am astounded, frankly, that a judge can take it upon herself to make such a determination when the police have not named a suspect. I've just never heard of this before.

In civil court, it is only a preponderance of the evidence not reasonable doubt. Not defending Brad but he does, to a degree, have to provide something that can negate him from involvement in the murder especially since the judge has ruled not to limit questions.

I agree it's prudent that he address his involvement; my mind is trying to work through the legality of this judge's maneuver. There must be precedent established already for her to decide this issue.

I look for another motion to obtain the ME's notes regarding the autopsy as the only thing that might sway a judge is TOD, except for the pesky fact that Brad had up until a little after 3 pm to himself and regardless cannot prove by TOD alone that he is not involved.

Yep and yep.

All these lawyer bills he is running up, crazy IMO as I see absolutely no way Brad can remove the cloud of suspicion.

I know! It's giving me the vapors; I don't know how he can stand it.

This custody case IMO is a no brainer and a huge waste of his money that might well be better spent in the event of a criminal case.

No brainer in that he should just give up custody of the kids without a fight? Or setup a temporary arrangement that extends out several months?

 

[Albert]

And if a woman is married and has children and is attracted to another woman and her husband knows she is, and isn't threatened by that, if she and another woman do have an encounter, who is that hurting, exactly?

So, if in a marriage there is no sexual intimacy for 2.5 years then what harm is it if the man has an extramartial affair? Who would this be hurting exactly? According to your logic then BC's admitted encounter has no bearing on a custody hearing and is irrelevant to his parenting skills.

I am not defending BC but I am opposed to the views of jmflu that no one is hurt by these extramartial affairs.

 

[raisincharlie]

I am astounded, frankly, that a judge can take it upon herself to make such a determination when the police have not named a suspect. I've just never heard of this before.

I have little doubt there will be existing precedent. The judge cannot ignore it, it is a part of the plaintiff's filing. IMO, she relied on precedent from the beginning by removing the children to start with. Not sure that naming a suspect is essential, all LE has to say is Brad is not yet cleared.



I agree it's prudent that he address his involvement; my mind is trying to work through the legality of this judge's maneuver. There must be precedent established already for her to decide this issue.

As noted above

Yep and yep.



I know! It's giving me the vapors; I don't know how he can stand it.

No brainer in that he should just give up custody of the kids without a fight? Or setup a temporary arrangement that extends out several months?

No brainer in that he should just make a temp arrangement that can be revisited based on LE clearing him. No way he can win this fight, even with 20 lawyers. No way he is going to take the stand or be deposed either - in civil court, he must, even if he says nothing, he must. If he fails to respond the judge is allowed to make their own conclusion with respect to the possible answer, to include a negative.

LE and the DA are having a heyday with all these affidavits already, imagine the information they could glean from a deposition or actual testimony. No way is Tharrington Smith not going to ask about the murder and Brad's possible involvement. This is a done deal, just like the hearing of the 25th of July was a done deal - settled outside the courtroom.

 

[SleuthyGal]

This is a done deal, just like the hearing of the 25th of July was a done deal - settled outside the courtroom.

Which ultimately makes this a most expensive PR campaign, and perhaps even harming the client, to boot. Certainly not the best ROI.

 

[jmflu]

So, if in a marriage there is no sexual intimacy for 2.5 years then what harm is it if the man has an extramartial affair? Who would this be hurting exactly? According to your logic then BC's admitted encounter has no bearing on a custody hearing and is irrelevant to his parenting skills.

I am not defending BC but I am opposed to the views of jmflu that no one is hurt by these extramartial affairs.

I never said no one is hurt by extramarital affairs, and I never said it is ok for the man to go out and have an extramarital affair. It is not for me to judge what competent adults decide is acceptable within their own marriage.

This is a complicated topic. I know a lot of bisexual women. Many of them are afraid to tell people because of just this type of response.

At any rate, some of these bisexual (simply meaning that they are attracted to both men and women, not necessarily equally) women believe you can only be with one PERSON at a time. Others believe men and women are completely different and one cannot do what the other can, and if their spouse is not threatened by their intimacy with someone of the same gender, there is no problem.

To compare equally, it is not the same if NC had an encounter with another woman as it would be if BC had an encounter with another woman. BC would have had to have had an encounter with another MAN to put it on the same, equal playing field.

As I mentioned, this is a complicated, and touchy, subject.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Perhaps the issue of infidelity and sexual politics should be on its own thread (if there is interest in such a discussion)?

 

[raisincharlie]

Which ultimately makes this a most expensive PR campaign, and perhaps even harming the client, to boot. Certainly not the best ROI.

Much of this may be driven by Brad himself, but at some point the lawyer has to be smart enough to tell him to shut up and get a grip. Apparently that hasn't happened yet. Apparently Le hasn't cleared him either otherwise K & B would be advertising it...very expensive indeed, in more ways than one I think.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Much of this may be driven by Brad himself, but at some point the lawyer has to be smart enough to tell him to shut up and get a grip. Apparently that hasn't happened yet. Apparently Le hasn't cleared him either otherwise K & B would be advertising it...very expensive indeed, in more ways than one I think.

I don't know if it isn't the lawyers themselves suggesting this strategy, esp. given that their marketing persona is one of marked aggression. Either way the mounting cost of this proactive aggression with such obvious limitation in results, is making me nervous (and obviously this is my issue :wink. And if they haven't already, they better settle on a fixed fee STAT and soon, or else I'm going to have to get some tranquilizers!

 

[momto3kids]

I don't know if it isn't the lawyers themselves suggesting this strategy, esp. given that their marketing persona is one of marked aggression. Either way the mounting cost of this proactive aggression with such obvious limitation in results, is making me nervous (and obviously this is my issue :wink. And if they haven't already, they better settle on a fixed fee STAT and soon, or else I'm going to have to get some tranquilizers!

AND BC thought a divorce was going to be expensive This might not only cost him every $ he has, but also his children.

Bad move BC!

 

[momto3kids]

Perhaps the issue of infidelity and sexual politics should be on its own thread (if there is interest in such a discussion)?

I 2nd that :clap:

 

[SleuthyGal]

AND BC thought a divorce was going to be expensive This might not only cost him every $ he has, but also his children.

Bad move BC!

No kidding. BTW, I've never had this reaction in any of the prior cases I followed--must be the state of the economy or something.

 

[momto3kids]

I feel like BC is targeting JA and also beginning to have his friends do the same. Now MH is doing it, who is next? Why?

Is it because she obviously stood up to him, could see thru him, and knew more about his troubled marriage than he thought? Is he mad because she became involved so quickly with the LE and foiled his plan on establishing an alibi about NC murder?

Pssst...BC you are the one in trouble for NC murder, not JA. Use your time and money wisely and focus on the issue at hand..YOURSELF

 

[SleuthyGal]

Perhaps so.

But at the point that LE gets involved and starts investigating, it is no longer really about JA, regardless of what she wrote in her affidavit and regardless of her beliefs.

1. Marital discord has been established by Brad and others and is substantiated with paperwork.

2. If physical, behavioral and other evidence is leading the detectives to investigate the husband...well, that's pretty much standard protocol to start with those closest to the victim.

3. JA's 'sin,' if you will, was getting worried, calling Brad, and then calling 911 to ask what she should do. From there it was in the police's hands.

Something in her gut...her intuition...was telling her 'Danger, Will Robinson, Danger!' And she was right! A bit of divine intervention, don't you think?

 

[momto3kids]

I wonder how many neighbors are breathing a sigh of relief that they didn't get involved with the neighborhood gatherings?

As someone stated...this case is going to cause a huge crack in the community and friends, hurt some more than they ever expected, and most likely bring some items to surface where the innocent are going to get hurt as well.

 

[jmflu]

I 2nd that :clap:

Hmm. First time I've seen such an endorsement. Usually one just suggests a separate thread. I obviously have offended if clapping is required!