Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #28

[jumpstreet]

What would CPD have to say about it? The woman acknowledges that on the 13th LE took her statement. Is LE obligated to go any further with her if they have evidence which is not consistent with her statement ? I don't understand why anyone would think LE should follow up with her if evidence indicates that she was mistaken based on her description.

My guess is we'll get the "party line". (ie, "we are pleased with the progress of our strong and robust case" ... "everything is going according to plan" ]

This would make the most sense. It would leave the custody judge then to presumably take the testimony of the eyewitness at face value, which is a plus for K&B. [ T&S are scrambling right now on this one I suspect... unless they have a trump card... which wouldn't surprise me either ]

 

[Roy23]

What would CPD have to say about it? The woman acknowledges that on the 13th LE took her statement. Is LE obligated to go any further with her if they have evidence which is not consistent with her statement ? I don't understand why anyone would think LE should follow up with her if evidence indicates that she was mistaken based on her description.

Charlie,

The police said that no one had seen Nancy that morning. Not exactly true to an extent.

 

[jmflu]

I think they can handle criticism, as it must be part of the job on a daily basis. But seriously, why would they give away any info or confirm or deny any theory? They would listen to the info and see if it's something they need to followup. Lots of kooky calls come in when there's a high profile crime (not saying this witness is kooky at all), just that the police are privy to evidence neither we nor this witness has. Hopefully she wasn't merely overlooked by CPD and was purposely ignored...okay that didn't come out right, but you know what I mean...

I guess I'm sensitive when someone's accused unfairly.

(Hope I don't owe Brad a big 'ole apology, huh! lol)

 

[jumpstreet]

I'd recommend one of those nice non-committal letters that HR depts send out to applicants to let them know their 'info was received and if interested you'll hear from us.' :smile:

Sure, couldn't hurt... even a "little thing" like that would have likely saved them a fair amount of grief (in the form of PR if nothing else).. ah well... live and learn I guess...

Hopefully they'll at least get right on that (the form letter) for any other witnesses that have called in who saw NC that morning also...

 

[jmflu]

Charlie,

The police said that no one had seen Nancy that morning. Not exactly true to an extent.

Well, it's true if that woman saw someone else who was not Nancy, and she just believes she saw Nancy, right?

 

[raisincharlie]

Bolding is mine.

I was just hoping they would say exactly that to squash all the bashers.

They don't have an obligation to say anything. LE has said nothing about evidence collected from the beginning - to say anything, no matter what they say will be telling of something.

I take this position for a couple of reasons - but will ask you this - put aside everything you know about this case for one minute and answer this question :

A body is found in/near a drainage pond in a semi remote area. The body has little clothing, in fact the only clothing is a sports bra pulled up over the breast.

Outside of the person being murdered, what is your first thought about what might have happened to her given she was found with little clothing ?

 

[cygnusx1]

As for CPD not getting back to the woman...this may fall under the 'absolutely no comment' restriction. Info comes in (perhaps seems to fall into a black hole), but the police are not going to share any details with anyone outside of the investigation, even with a witness who came forward.

Then LE should not be surprised when witnesses like this go to the media or elsewhere to get their message out after being ignored.

 

[jumpstreet]

Charlie,

The police said that no one had seen Nancy that morning. Not exactly true to an extent.

That's a great point. When was the presser when the chief made that statement (at the latest point) and how does it compare with the timestamps of when the witness shared her sighting with LE?

 

[jmflu]

They don't have an obligation to say anything. LE has said nothing about evidence collected from the beginning - to say anything, no matter what they say will be telling of something.

I take this position for a couple of reasons - but will ask you this - put aside everything you know about this case for one minute and answer this question :

A body is found in/near a drainage pond in a semi remote area. The body has little clothing, in fact the only clothing is a sports bra pulled up over the breast.

Outside of the person being murdered, what is your first thought about what might have happened to her given she was found with little clothing ?

(Why do I feel like I am going to fail this test?)

Uhh... my first thought is, she was raped.

 

[raisincharlie]

Charlie,

The police said that no one had seen Nancy that morning. Not exactly true to an extent.

I know Roy - I've harped on that several times. Which leads me to believe they already knew if there were legitimate sightings or not. I will have to look again - but it seems to me I recall Chief Bazemore saying that after the body was found. I'll look.

 

[Daphne69]

I'd recommend one of those nice non-committal letters that HR depts send out to applicants to let them know their 'info was received and if interested you'll hear from us.' :smile:

Or how about this?

"We've determined that your information is not a good fit for us at this time."

 

[Roy23]

Too many people here who have an axe to grind. This is not a contest. Try and let the evidence define your theory. Most people are on one side or another and refute all valuable information. It is all about being right. The fact is we do not have enough information to prove a murder. Him being a fibber and a cheater doesn't mean squat. The either have evidence that he killed her or they don't. And NCSU is making some good points but this new evidence today also doesn't prove a thing either.

I can say the police screwed up big time if this is true.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Then LE should not be surprised when witnesses like this go to the media or elsewhere to get their message out after being ignored.

Perhaps they're not surprised at all. It seems to happen regularly enough in other high profile cases that have come and gone before (Laci, O.J., Caylee, Stacy Peterson, just to name a few). There's usually some eyewitness to someone that the witness swears is THE person and they usually feel slighted when it seems like the investigation is headed elsewhere. In fact I can't right now think of a high profile case in which there hasn't been at least one eyewitness who swore they spotted the victim or someone around the time of crime.

 

[jumpstreet]

They don't have an obligation to say anything. LE has said nothing about evidence collected from the beginning - to say anything, no matter what they say will be telling of something.

Indeed... it's win-win for K&B. If LE says something to discredit/explain the witness, then K&B gets a glimse of info they wouldn't otherwise have.

If LE sticks to the party line ("everything is going according to plan"), then eyewitness account flys into the custody hearing unopposed.

Brilliant.

 

[raisincharlie]

(Why do I feel like I am going to fail this test?)

Uhh... my first thought is, she was raped.

Exactly.

I have not ruled out the possibility that Nancy's clothes were found in the area where her body was found. I have not ruled out the possibility that the disposal that included some staging to make it look like a rape. I have not ruled out those possiblities at all.

 

[cygnusx1]

They don't have an obligation to say anything. LE has said nothing about evidence collected from the beginning - to say anything, no matter what they say will be telling of something.

I take this position for a couple of reasons - but will ask you this - put aside everything you know about this case for one minute and answer this question :

A body is found in/near a drainage pond in a semi remote area. The body has little clothing, in fact the only clothing is a sports bra pulled up over the breast.

Outside of the person being murdered, what is your first thought about what might have happened to her given she was found with little clothing ?

That she was abducted while out on a run, sexually assaulted, and dumped in a remote area.

And if there had been no strife in this family, that's how LE most likely would have pursued it.

 

[raisincharlie]

Indeed... it's win-win for K&B. If LE says something to discredit/explain the witness, then K&B gets a glimse of info they wouldn't otherwise have.

If LE sticks to the party line ("everything is going according to plan"), then eyewitness account flys into the custody hearing unopposed.

Brilliant.

The custody case stands on its own. LE has no obligation to be involved, to give or take credibility of any witness put forth in the custody case - this is up to TS. Since we don't know what TS has, I'm not so sure this witness will be unopposed. That is if it actually proceeds to a hearing.

 

[jmflu]

Exactly.

I have not ruled out the possibility that Nancy's clothes were found in the area where her body was found. I have not ruled out the possibility that the disposal that included some staging to make it look like a rape. I have not ruled out those possiblities at all.

So you think he thought it would be long enough until they found her that, because of decomp, a rape kit would not have been able to determine that she was not even raped?

 

[Bob&Bob]

Late Monday, Cooper's attorneys requested copies of Cary police's entire investigative file into his wife's murder to help prepare for Thursday's custody hearing.

Dear N&O

The files were requested Friday, October 10, 2008.

I would provide a link but I'm not supposed to do that anymore.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Or how about this?

"We've determined that your information is not a good fit for us at this time."

:clap: :clap: :applause:

hee! followed of course by the ever hopeful, "but as our needs change investigation continues, if we feel your background/qualifications info is a good fit we will contact you.