Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #26

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
RC - do you think they've been reading WS?

Seriously - is it possible LE themselves is one of their sources, or
would it be 'off limits' for LE to provide any 'inside info' to the plaintiffs (only).
[ If not LE, then TS must have some other source of info that would
compel them to get an affy from the pest guy. [ Or maybe in
this instance, the pest guy came to TS directly, who knows... ]

No idea if TS reads WS but I will say it has happened in other cases that lawyers do have someone checking out the message boards, but in this case, I have no idea.

I have no idea how much access to LE that TS and would have. We have read the Detective's affidavit, there seems to be an indication that LE believes at least some of Brad's statements to LE are inconsistent with statements made on the deposition. Chief Bazemore has indicated that affidavit stands on its own and that the detective was able to respond to the requirements without harming the criminal investigation. Beyond that I have serious doubt LE is sharing any details of the case with TS.

I think we need to keep in mind that there were other people at the house on the 12th - we know Jessica Adam was there, Michelle Simmons, we know Carey Clark showed up at some point. From Brad we have learned he gave the girls to Clea Morwick that day. We know LE interviewed some of them that day, we also know they have given affidavits in the custody case which means TS has had access to their perceptions of how that house looked on the day Nancy was reported missing. This would be the same info LE heard so I doubt TS needed LE to give them this information - they went to the sources IMO. With Wade Smith sitting in the background I also have little doubt he has his own input and he knows how to both understand the nuances as well as how to proceed in an investigation of a person whether it be for a criminal action or civil.
 
What I find very interesting about this whole conversation is BC said he vacuumed Nancy's car on the 28th of June, his car, and then he also cleaned and vacuumed the garage. I find it interesting as in the sw affidavit he did tell LE about cleaning his car the week before, he cleaned it because he had spilled gas in the car. In the deposition he says he cleaned the gas with shop towels and that the odor remained for a while, he also makes it plain in the deposition this occured before cleaning it on the 28th of June so there seems to be a conflict of information here.

The other interesting thing is he also says he vacuumed the garage. If it turns out that the hair found on the front right spoiler of the car and inside the left front wheel well turns out to be Nancy's hair, it is going to be very difficult to explain how it could have gotten there since he also says in this depostion there was no room for a car in the garage and his was normally parked in the drive. It just keeps getting more and more interesting and more and more inconsistent. :)

He also said he spilled the gas at least a month before, and possibly earlier than that! In his interview w/police he told them he had spilled gas a 'couple' weeks before 7/12. Police noted NO odor in his car. In his depo Brad said there was an odor for at least a month after this spill.
He was bouncing around during his depo...asking AS if he was answering her to her satisfaction. Extreme body language during this convo about the spilled gas, gas cans, cleaning of the trunk.
 
He also said he spilled the gas at least a month before, and possibly earlier than that! In his interview w/police he told them he had spilled gas a 'couple' weeks before 7/12. Police noted NO odor in his car. In his depo Brad said there was an odor for at least a month after this spill.
He was bouncing around during his depo...asking AS if he was answering her to her satisfaction. Extreme body language during this convo about the spilled gas, gas cans, cleaning of the trunk.

I know, seems to me this is one more inconsistency with respect to what he told LE. A big one. As to body language, not anything I am proficient at so I just leave that to the experts, but he was pretty wriggly.
 
I think we need to keep in mind that there were other people at the house on the 12th - we know Jessica Adam was there, Michelle Simmons, we know Carey Clark showed up at some point. From Brad we have learned he gave the girls to Clea Morwick that day. We know LE interviewed some of them that day, we also know they have given affidavits in the custody case which means TS has had access to their perceptions of how that house looked on the day Nancy was reported missing. This would be the same info LE heard so I doubt TS needed LE to give them this information - they went to the sources IMO. With Wade Smith sitting in the background I also have little doubt he has his own input and he knows how to both understand the nuances as well as how to proceed in an investigation of a person whether it be for a criminal action or civil.

All of that plus there are tons of affidavits submitted from July on that TS has to work with. Lots and lots of statements they can investigate. Brad's side also submitted a lot of affy's. They can probe into any area and would be remiss not to do so, esp each and every statement Brad made in his affys. Remember Brad talked about the VoIP system at home, Brad talked about the gas spilling in his car...Brad opened the door by mentioning lots of things in his affy. He didn't HAVE TO address any of the things in LE's probable cause affy, but he did. And TS can go after any/all of those statements to verify the truth.
 
All of that plus there are tons of affidavits submitted from July on that TS has to work with. Lots and lots of statements they can investigate. Brad's side also submitted a lot of affy's. They can probe into any area and would be remiss not to do so, esp each and every statement Brad made in his affys. Remember Brad talked about the VoIP system at home, Brad talked about the gas spilling in his car...Brad opened the door by mentioning lots of things in his affy. He didn't HAVE TO address any of the things in LE's probable cause affy, but he did. And TS can go after any/all of those statements to verify the truth.

Yep, which is why it was not a good idea to address the possible crminal aspects in affidavits made before the 25th of July hearing. He should have stuck to why he is a fit father and nothing more, he opened the door all by himself.
 
What I find very interesting about this whole conversation is BC said he vacuumed Nancy's car on the 28th of June, his car, and then he also cleaned and vacuumed the garage. I find it interesting as in the sw affidavit he did tell LE about cleaning his car the week before, he cleaned it because he had spilled gas in the car. In the deposition he says he cleaned the gas with shop towels and that the odor remained for a while, he also makes it plain in the deposition this occured before cleaning it on the 28th of June so there seems to be a conflict of information here.

The other interesting thing is he also says he vacuumed the garage. If it turns out that the hair found on the front right spoiler of the car and inside the left front wheel well turns out to be Nancy's hair, it is going to be very difficult to explain how it could have gotten there since he also says in this depostion there was no room for a car in the garage and his was normally parked in the drive. It just keeps getting more and more interesting and more and more inconsistent. :)

:clap: I couldn't agree more! I noticed how his story has changed. I just thought the visual clues were undeniable.
 
Thanks RC - makes sense. I agree that there's lot of other info and input sources that TS has at their disposal, and it would seem dicey indeed if LE was providing them, and just them any insider info to shape their line of questioning. [ I'd be surprised if this were happening for sure ]

With Wade Smith sitting in the background I also have little doubt he has his own input and he knows how to both understand the nuances as well as how to proceed in an investigation of a person whether it be for a criminal action or civil.

Agreed... as a seasoned criminal defense layer, WS will know all the tricks.

Can't wait for the custody judge to solve this one for us next week!! :D
 
Thanks RC - makes sense. I agree that there's lot of other info and input sources that TS has at their disposal, and it would seem dicey indeed if LE was providing them, and just them any insider info to shape their line of questioning. [ I'd be surprised if this were happening for sure ]



Agreed... as a seasoned criminal defense layer, WS will know all the tricks.

Can't wait for the custody judge to solve this one for us next week!! :D

For some reason I don't think the judge is going to be terribly involved. I see the same resolution as what occurred on 25 July as more of a possibility. :)
 
For some reason I don't think the judge is going to be terribly involved. I see the same resolution as what occurred on 25 July as more of a possibility. :)

Agreed...
... still though, if the NC murder investigation remains protracted (a la MY), then it's a bridge that may need to be crossed sometime. [ Finalize the custody situation, even though the criminal investigation remains open ] Agree it probably won't be crossed this week though.
 
For some reason I don't think the judge is going to be terribly involved. I see the same resolution as what occurred on 25 July as more of a possibility. :)

You think Brad will consent for another period of time?

(I have to say RC - I've been thinking about Linda Fisher through all of this.)
 
When Brad speaks of his cleaning episodes while Nancy was on vacation, he says that he "bragged" to Nancy on the phone before she returned that the house was clean and "when was (she) coming home"? Then Stubbs asks him about Nancy's satisfaction regarding the cleanliness of the home when she returned from that trip. (Brad said Nancy went to Lake Norman. I thought she went to Hilton Head? I'm confused on that.)

In that depo, Brad is pleased with himself for cleaning the house while Nancy is on vacation, but then answers Stubbs with the facts that no, he didn't clean the playroom and he didn't clean the bathrooms or floors therein. (He didn't mention cleaning his room either...Nancy had said that the sheets were, well...you know, and little brown bugs in the mattress, when she returned). He "organized" the garage, too, he said. I'd like to see a photo from LE of this "organized" garage, as well as hear testimony from the pesticide guy.

He paints himself as Cinderella, cleaning, doing everything to please his wicked stepmother :bigstick:. The stepmother returns from her vacation in a "grumpy" state, then is displeased because Cinderella-Brad didn't clean the playroom, bathrooms, bathroom floors, nor did he put out the trash in her opinion. Stepmother wants to know why there is no milk or juice or laundry detergent? Cinderella goes to the market not once, but twice within minutes to appease her. And he goes at or near dawn! Now that's dedication. We know he went, because it's on the HT video.

Another thing I have noticed is, at least one of the girls and Brad have problems with allergies. Why would anyone have pesticides applied in their home (most of the pesticides for "bugs" are neurotoxins, remaining as active residue for a long period even after they dry. Physical contact such as a child's touching a baseboard, will transfer it to the skin which absorbs it systemically). Why would they use pesticides, Pledge, cleaning products other than diluted vinegar and water that Brad mentioned when there are issues with allergies and child safety? I know that pesticides are worse enemies than many little bugs that they kill, but that's not an issue in this case. I can't be the judge of why they chose these chemicals, while going "organic" via diet. Guess we have to do what we can and sometimes don't think about the effects of other environmental hazards.

Brad has said that Nancy drank "...more than (he) would have liked." Nancy had her health issues with Crohn's. She was careful with what she ate but allowed for plentiful alcohol (not just from Brad's viewpoint about the alcohol). We already know about alcohol and Crohn's. I still wonder about very early alcohol related or possibly other toxin-related liver issues in Nancy, even though our expert on the boards thinks this may be nothing, and whose opinions are probably more educated in that area than mine. I will wonder until I know for sure.

My best observance of Brad's agitation, heavy duty pen battering, drinking from his cup and being really bothered is when Stubbs questioned him on the green dress of Nancy's and whether or not he laundered it. But oh, maybe it was an orange dress, he says! Did she wear dresses very much, being an athletic mom of two pre-schoolers? When she did, Brad can't remember what color it was, while he can remember the wet spot from the wine spill, everything he did with the children at the party, what Nancy said about "child duty for Brad". He remembered that he played outside with the kids at the BBQ and that they "played and picked up rocks and sticks". He said that he ate one of Nancy's BBQd ribs and liked it. But he couldn't remember what color her wine stained dress was that night??

The "Celine" questioning really got to him too. As well, I remember Stubbs asking him a question about whether he went anywhere BEFORE he went to Harris Teeter the first time. I remember his facial expression and slight flinching type of reaction to that. I can't say what video or where it was.

He puts himself out there as someone who has selective CRS when it's convenient. (CRS when he's in the closet boinking Heather, CRS when he's at a party the night before Nancy dies, CRS regarding a "Celine", CRS about people he works with, CRS about MANY things. I don't think a man who can speak as articulately as Brad or have the education and job expertise got there if he REALLY has a terminal case of CRS). Just some of my observances from this entire saga. "I don't recall", or "if I remember correctly", those kinds of answers get him through many tight spots. So far, that is.
 
You think Brad will consent for another period of time?

(I have to say RC - I've been thinking about Linda Fisher through all of this.)

Ms. Jilly - hello :blowkiss:

I don't know if Brad will "willingly" consent to a continuance. I do think there is added motivation for him to try and get the girls back this time and my guess is, is that what he does is based on what is more important to him when it comes time.

I too have been thinking about Linda Fisher, the DA certainly is putting her in a very bad situation. She has been strong this long - I suspect her beliefs will carry her on the right path.
 
He's already put himself out there with going forward and doing the depo...this feels a bit like a game of :chicken: and I don't know if he's gonna veer first or let Judge Sasser take it the whole way. Place yer bets!
images
 
He's already put himself out there with going forward and doing the depo...this feels a bit like a game of :chicken: and I don't know if he's gonna veer first or let Judge Sasser take it the whole way. Place yer bets!
images

How long did Brad deny having an affair ? He sure as heck is not going to admit to murdering his wife. If he wants to play chicken - I have no doubt from the 7 hours of video I just watched and from listening to the questions asked of him and hearing his inconsistent replys - he will lose. We shall see if he is just stubborn or plain stupid next week.
 
Well....aside from his fidgeting which others have observed, some of his answers are unbelievable. Take the $9K painting. We're talking about 9 Grand here and he told her she couldn't have it. She goes and gets it anyways and does he get upset? Not really. He let her know he was concerned but there was nothing they could really do about it because they couldn't take it back. If that was my dh, I would have been screaming mad!

And he probably was, Jilly, but he's not going to tell us he lost his temper in a major way, now is he?

That is, if it really happened the way he said it did.
 
And he probably was, Jilly, but he's not going to tell us he lost his temper in a major way, now is he?

That is, if it really happened the way he said it did.

I know but anybody in their right mind would expect an argument of some sort over 9 grand. When he gives a ho hum response to this it only destroys his credibility. I mean, now I'm even wondering if he's lying about saying he told her not to get the darn painting!:crazy:
 
It's often said that one doesn't win their case in the deposition room, but you sure can lose one. After reviewing - do y'all think BC lost the custody case with this deposition?
I don't think that the deposition really "lost" the custody case for him. He was never going to win it anyway. Given that the court had his children taken away from him back in July even though he wasn't charged with any crime, why would he have any reason to expect that he would get them back now? The current judge has [unbelievably] said that she gets to unilaterally decide whether he killed his wife or not. It's a fight that he is not going to win.

He appears to be getting horrible advice from his attorneys. They seem to be in way over their heads. They should cut their losses on the custody case and focus on trying to keep him out of jail. They did that earlier when they cut the temporary custody deal and should have stuck with that strategy. Their futile efforts in the custody case are going to end up digging him a deeper hole in any eventual criminal case.
 
I know but anybody in their right mind would expect an argument of some sort over 9 grand. When he gives a ho hum response to this it only destroys his credibility. I mean, now I'm even wondering if he's lying about saying he told her not to get the darn painting!:crazy:

Exactly!
 
I don't think that the deposition really "lost" the custody case for him. He was never going to win it anyway. Given that the court had his children taken away from him back in July even though he wasn't charged with any crime, why would he have any reason to expect that he would get them back now? The current judge has [unbelievably] said that she gets to unilaterally decide whether he killed his wife or not. It's a fight that he is not going to win.

He appears to be getting horrible advice from his attorneys. They seem to be in way over their heads. They should cut their losses on the custody case and focus on trying to keep him out of jail. They did that earlier when they cut the temporary custody deal and should have stuck with that strategy. Their futile efforts in the custody case are going to end up digging him a deeper hole in any eventual criminal case.

It sounds like you are blaming everyone... except Brad.
 
How long did Brad deny having an affair ? He sure as heck is not going to admit to murdering his wife. If he wants to play chicken - I have no doubt from the 7 hours of video I just watched and from listening to the questions asked of him and hearing his inconsistent replys - he will lose. We shall see if he is just stubborn or plain stupid next week.


RC, I love you.:blowkiss:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
186
Guests online
4,966
Total visitors
5,152

Forum statistics

Threads
602,818
Messages
18,147,361
Members
231,541
Latest member
Shevet
Back
Top