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

[Anderson]

In my opinion, there's no way this case won't end up seeing some form of dramatization and/or documentary or both, at some point in the future.

I agree.

 

[Anderson]

Many, many people do just that. I have seen lots and lots of park benches with dedication plaques. Also some garden spots, reflection pools, and things of this nature.

When a segment of my family found the remote burial site (not in a cemetery) of our great great greats in the Smokies, we put in a bench for reflection, with dedication.

This is not unusual, and it will be a lasting contribution to the community. This is not a billboard advertising a commercial commodity or service. What a lovely, thoughtful memorial.

WHY on earth would ANYone complain about it?

I know. Park bench memorials are a very common practice and I have NEVER heard of anyone complaining about such a thing before. The people complaining on GOLO are acting as though public funds are being used, even though it is a private donation. I was joking when I suggested above that someone might complain, just because I had been reminded about the silly complaints around the birthday memorial.

I would really like to know who is complaining (about both the dedication and the JJ event), and whether or not they are at all related to the case. It doesn't seem likely, but it is so odd.

There have been a lot of NC bashers posting on the web, practically since the beginning of the case. This reaction seems to be more of the same. I think this may have initially been a response to Brad's first affidavit, which I read for the first time on the same day as her funeral, and I believe that is when it was made available. I found that very odd as well. This was a young woman who had just been murdered and was clearly loved by her friends and family. Her friends responded very quickly and I think this was because they were in tune with the situation. JA turned out to be right about her concern for NC, as many of us have pointed out so many times. But some people seemed to naturally gravitate to BC's position.

 

[ncnative]

Quoting Anderson: "JA turned out to be right about her concern for NC, as many of us have pointed out so many times. But some people seemed to naturally gravitate to BC's position."

BC's "position". NC's "position" is: murdered, thrown out on the ground as garbage. BC's "position"...defending himSELF, not openly grieving his "beloved" wife's death, the death of his children's mother, speaking negatively of her friend whose suspicions were spot on, calling her circle of friends a "clique"? (Well, BC's lawyers did.) And why does BC feel that he needs to do this? Because he knows he is suspect. He also knows who killed his "beloved" wife. He is not out there gathering forces to find her killer. Once she was found, he became a recluse. He was not at her memorials. His children will figure it all out when the time comes.

I hope RKAB is called to be a character witness if BC ever gets to trial. (Yeah, I know, RKAB. It's not what you want, but it's what you experienced.)

Meanwhile, BC is holed up in his house all to himself with every blind closed in a dark house. Mold and mildew grow without sunlight. I see his house several times a day, so I know what I am talking about. Talk about "private person who grieves in his own private way". Grieves for what? Himself.

 

[MCDRAW]

Quoting Anderson: "JA turned out to be right about her concern for NC, as many of us have pointed out so many times. But some people seemed to naturally gravitate to BC's position."

BC's "position". NC's "position" is: murdered, thrown out on the ground as garbage. BC's "position"...defending himSELF, not openly grieving his "beloved" wife's death, the death of his children's mother, speaking negatively of her friend whose suspicions were spot on, calling her circle of friends a "clique"? (Well, BC's lawyers did.) And why does BC feel that he needs to do this? Because he knows he is suspect. He also knows who killed his "beloved" wife. He is not out there gathering forces to find her killer. Once she was found, he became a recluse. He was not at her memorials. His children will figure it all out when the time comes.

I hope RKAB is called to be a character witness if BC ever gets to trial. (Yeah, I know, RKAB. It's not what you want, but it's what you experienced.)

Meanwhile, BC is holed up in his house all to himself with every blind closed in a dark house. Mold and mildew grow without sunlight. I see his house several times a day, so I know what I am talking about. Talk about "private person who grieves in his own private way". Grieves for what? Himself.

When I grieve I just lay in the bed. If I didn't have Children I probably would never have gotten out of bed. I didn't skip the funeral because it never occured to me. But My husbands Uncles didn't go to their Mother's funeral. They said they couldn't handle it. Before that I didn't even know that was an option. My Dad died six years ago and one of my brothers is just starting to grieve. One hasn't even started yet. They just pretended it didn't happen. Everyone does grieve differently and at their own time.

 

[jumpstreet]

...My husbands Uncles didn't go to their Mother's funeral. They said they couldn't handle it. [...] My Dad died six years ago and one of my brothers is just starting to grieve. One hasn't even started yet. Everyone does grieve differently and at their own time.

Agreed. Which is why I mentioned before... if he's guilty, I don't see why he wouldn't have attended (at least some of) these things [ if nothing else for the optics ]. If he's innocent, it still would make some sense to attend of course (for the same reason innocent people go to memorials/services/funerals all the time)... but as you mention, there's perfectly valid reasons why innocent people don't attend these things all the time.

If he's guilty though, (and crafty/cunning enough to plan alibi phone-calls, and a couple of trips to HT to cover his tracks), why not attend at least some of these things?

 

[Anderson]

Agreed. Which is why I mentioned before... if he's guilty, I don't see why he wouldn't have attended (at least some of) these things [ if nothing else for the optics ]. If he's innocent, it still would make some sense to attend of course (for the same reason innocent people go to memorials/services/funerals all the time)... but as you mention, there's perfectly valid reasons why innocent people don't attend these things all the time.

If he's guilty though, (and crafty/cunning enough to plan alibi phone-calls, and a couple of trips to HT to cover his tracks), why not attend at least some of these things?

Yes, JS, I think you are right in your logic. But I also think that you left out one option. If he is guilty, then he may have been ashamed to attend these events. Shame is much different than guilt. Just wanted to cover all the bases.

 

[Albert]

Monday morning quarterbacks!!!!! It is very easy to say what "I" would do in any given situation, however what "I" would actually do if that situation occurred is another thing. Imagine for a moment that BC is not guilty. Imagine now for a moment that you are BC. Would you attend any public service knowing that you are entering a very hostile environment?

I am not proclaiming either guilt or innocence on behalf of BC. However I will proclaim that there are many on this list that feel they have a right to JUDGE someone else's actions.

There are those that keep asking for an arrest. Are these same people aware of double jeopardy? This case will eventually be solved but it may not be quick enough for our impatient society. The case will not be solved on WS nor in the press. Let the LE and DA handle this case as they are the professionals and they all share the same goal of catching a killer. Let's try to refrain from judging any actions till such time that our justice system has run it due course. Speculating on what "I" would do, what "I" would say or what "I" would have done is not relevant as this is simply "Monday morning quarterbacking"

 

[Anderson]

Monday morning quarterbacks!!!!! It is very easy to say what "I" would do in any given situation, however what "I" would actually do if that situation occurred is another thing. Imagine for a moment that BC is not guilty. Imagine now for a moment that you are BC. Would you attend any public service knowing that you are entering a very hostile environment?

Hi Albert,

First of all welcome to websleuths! !

I think that most here are aware that this is a website and that BC can not be convicted or determined guilty here. Please don't feel offended by the conversation. It is simply that, a conversation, and there is room for all opinions!

With all due respect, I think you are also speculating on what BC may have done: "Imagine for a moment that BC is not guilty. Imagine now for a moment that you are BC. Would you attend any public service knowing that you are entering a very hostile environment?"

Yes, that is one scenario, and that may be true. But there are also others . . .

 

[SleuthyGal]

Welcome to Websleuths, Albert!

All opinions are welcome, so pull up a virtual chair if you will.

As for the "Monday morning quarterbacking," the granite bench dedication has not yet happened so there is nothing to quarterback there.

Imagine now for a moment that you are BC. Would you attend any public service knowing that you are entering a very hostile environment?

Well you asked the question and I think by answering this very question that will make me a "Monday morning quarterback" by your definition. :wink:

However, since you asked, no I would not want to attend any event in which I felt (or knew) would be a hostile environment for me; that would be uncomfortable. I could and would do it in certain cases and deal with my own discomfort, especially if it was to support a loved one, and even though it would be difficult.

I hate to point this out but since no one has I will: it's also possible that an individual is absolutely innocent of a crime when the intimate partner is murdered AND the remaining spouse isn't sorry that their partner/spouse is dead. Uncaring and emotionally heinous? Yes/perhaps. But it's possible to be innocent of a crime AND devoid of grief in such a situation. I don't believe that is the case in the Cooper situation, but I wanted to point it out because those two things can both coexist and be true.

 

[jmflu]

certain[/I] cases and deal with my own discomfort, especially if it was to support a loved one, and even though it would be difficult.

I'd just like to add that BC had no reason to feel he was in a hostile environment RIGHT OFF THE BAT. It was with time, and his lack of apparent concern, that many people began to feel hostile!

 

[jumpstreet]

Bottom line (to me) is that him attending (or not attending) any of the memorials shouldn't necessarily make one feel that he is more (or less) likely to be guilty. Anyone disagree with this? {ducks}

Seems that some maybe translate/infer that him not attending as ding on the 'hinky meter'. That shouldn't be the case. Based on what little we know about the case, it should basically be a 'no-op'. (in my opinion).

 

[ncnative]

I don't see Mom here as much as she used to be. Today I felt like Mom because I passed BC in his white BMW, not once but twice. Once when he was turning onto Lochmere Dr., again about an hour and a half later turning from Cary Pkwy. onto Tryon toward where...maybe THE HT. Of course he was wearing sunglasses, even though it had been raining and was very cloudy.

I have been very busy today as usual, but haven't listened to any news. I suppose nothing has happened in the BC case, nor the MY case as far as making it public goes?

 

[Anderson]

Bottom line (to me) is that him attending (or not attending) any of the memorials shouldn't necessarily make one feel that he is more (or less) likely to be guilty. Anyone disagree with this? {ducks}

Seems that some maybe translate/infer that him not attending as ding on the 'hinky meter'. That shouldn't be the case. Based on what little we know about the case, it should basically be a 'no-op'. (in my opinion).

As you must know JS, I certainly respect your rational approach. I agree that from a logical/legal standpoint, it doesn't make sense to say that he is probably guilty because he didn't attend these events.

However, from my point of view, the fact that he did not attend these events (in combination with many other things), does raise my suspicions of BC. As you can see from my posts above, I do have strong opinions about this. But, I understand that they are just my opinions.

'Hinky' is a new word for me. I have become acquainted with it through websleuths. It appears to be a slang word for suspicious.

Here is the merriam webster definition:

"1slang : nervous , jittery
2slang : suspicious"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hinky

Here is another definition:

"strange: unusual in a way that is hard to describe
something a little hinky in his behavior"
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_701706552/hinky.html

This is the sort of thing that Columbo style detectives may have responded to and then found more substantial evidence to support their case. 'Hinky' seems to be subjective, rather than rational. So, I do think that his behaviour regarding memorial events puts a ding on the hinky meter for me!

But there is no need to duck!!

 

[jumpstreet]

This is the sort of thing that Columbo style detectives may have responded to and then found more substantial evidence to support their case. 'Hinky' seems to be subjective, rather than rational. So, I do think that his behaviour regarding memorial events puts a ding on the hinky meter for me!

But there is no need to duck!!

Thanks Anderson - and fair enough! Like you said, it's all subjective for now, and all we can do is roll up everything into any opinions we happen to form.

I don't (personally) read a whole lot into him not attending (if anything it makes me feel like he may be less guilty [ per my earlier logic - which of course may very well be quite flawed! ], but that's just me ]

PS: Hinky was a new one for me too...

 

[ncnative]

Monday morning quarterbacks!!!!! It is very easy to say what "I" would do in any given situation, however what "I" would actually do if that situation occurred is another thing. Imagine for a moment that BC is not guilty. Imagine now for a moment that you are BC. Would you attend any public service knowing that you are entering a very hostile environment?

I am not proclaiming either guilt or innocence on behalf of BC. However I will proclaim that there are many on this list that feel they have a right to JUDGE someone else's actions.

There are those that keep asking for an arrest. Are these same people aware of double jeopardy? This case will eventually be solved but it may not be quick enough for our impatient society. The case will not be solved on WS nor in the press. Let the LE and DA handle this case as they are the professionals and they all share the same goal of catching a killer. Let's try to refrain from judging any actions till such time that our justice system has run it due course. Speculating on what "I" would do, what "I" would say or what "I" would have done is not relevant as this is simply "Monday morning quarterbacking"

Albert: You said "...imagine for a moment that BC is not guilty..." Have you judged that none of us have imagined that? Well, you would be wrong.

"However I will proclaim that there are many on the list that feel they have a right to JUDGE someone else's actions." You proclaim? We have a right to discuss the case, make our own opinions, compare notes, disagree and participate in Websleuths. Some are very opinionated one way or the other, some are on the fence, it varies and changes. Your use of the word JUDGE :gavel: comes across as a bit pedantic and judgmental, (fingerwagging?) :nono:as to how you think some of us are. That's fine, but so is the fact that others have OPINIONS and carry no gavels. JMHO

 

[raisincharlie]

Bottom line (to me) is that him attending (or not attending) any of the memorials shouldn't necessarily make one feel that he is more (or less) likely to be guilty. Anyone disagree with this? {ducks}

Seems that some maybe translate/infer that him not attending as ding on the 'hinky meter'. That shouldn't be the case. Based on what little we know about the case, it should basically be a 'no-op'. (in my opinion).

Alone, the fact that he did not attend memorials etc means little to me. However, when keeping that thought in mind while reading his affidavits, makes it relatively easy to ring up three or four dings on the hinky meter easily. :crazy: Bitter, self absorbed man.

 

[Anderson]

PS: Hinky was a new one for me too...

Glad that I am not the only one!!:crazy:

 

[Anderson]

Alone, the fact that he did not attend memorials etc means little to me. However, when keeping that thought in mind while reading his affidavits, makes it relatively easy to ring up three or four dings on the hinky meter easily. :crazy: Bitter, self absorbed man.

Well said. The sum total of his actions needs to be taken into account.

 

[Topsail Girl]

Anderson and JS - everyone has a hinky meter. Some people just don't pay it no mind.

 

[Anderson]

Anderson and JS - everyone has a hinky meter. Some people just don't pay it no mind.

I wonder if LE responds to their hinky meters. They must, don't you think? Even though they will then have to find material evidence.