Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #9

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Topsail Girl said:
Did you read #15??? Heather is already involved in an Alienation of Affection suit now??? Did I read that rigth?????
Click to expand...

LOL, I caught that! Yeah!

Heather is in the middle of a divorce!:eek:

She also said she will not testify in the Cooper matter!:chicken:

fran
 
Originally Posted by caryresident
In #13, did they forget to cross our Ms. Meteor.

Fuquaylj said:
This is HUGE...someone's head is gonna roll!
I'm very new at this and certainly not well versed in law, but the motion to disqualify seems like a good argument--among other things.
Click to expand...

Is that THE Heather?:eek::confused::waitasec:

fran
 
carolinalady said:
How about #14, second sentence...that Ms. Cooper had an extramarital affair?
Click to expand...

Yeah, they had to throw that in. I got it but don't believe it. IF it's true, I don't care.

Nancy is a victim and what she did didn't deserve a death sentence.

It's Brad I'm concerned with. He's the one having the continued affair. He made it look like the affair was "OLD" and from what we've seen and heard, it was ongoing

IMHO, that attorney filed that motion to make the victim look bad.

That's just me.

But, I get it. Brad is AFRAID of what this attorney knows about HIM.

Just my opinion
fran
 
fran said:
Ok, wait, I think I get it after reading further.

So...........he wants Nancy's attorney disqualified because she knows the 'dirt' on ole Brad. She MAY be called as a witness to testify about stuff that isn't disputed, ie he's a fit parent (part of her divorce info), eventhough it's basically privileged, IF it's not disputed she can testify to it.

Am I getting this right?

On the other hand, she knows the dirt, and since he'd most likely contest that part, she couldn't testify about that because it's privileged. He want's to insure that she doesn't use the 'dirt' knowlege against his client but anything good said about him by her late client, he wants that brought out.

Ok, I get it. Double Lawyer Speak.................Skirt around the bad behavior of the client and only tell the good things. Hide behind the law.

gotcha!
I think
:rolleyes:
fran
Click to expand...

OK you and many here just don't get it... since I was married to a person who cheated let me explain something to you people. NC is a no fault state... meaning infidelity weighs ZERO in custody cases. I know this for fact for I went through it. I have 50/50 physical custody of my boys and she was the unfaithful one. I assure you outside of having proof of being a bad parent. Cheating is not weighed in for child custody.
 
Fuquaylj said:
Saw that....first I've heard of it. Didn't read like there was anything to back that up.
Click to expand...

That lawyer knew that this was going to be public record and he did that as part of the 'sleaze factor' that many defense attories know all too well.

He's made himself very clear. He's going to get in the mud for his client.

He's ..................
nevermind,
spttttttttt...........pffftt

IF that attorney thinks this kind of cra* is going to make his client look better, he better think again! It makes him look WORSE!!!!!! Now we know Brad and his attorney will stop at NOTHING to get his client off!!!!!

JMHO
fran

PS. I can't see where that little tid bit had ONE THING to do with removing the other attorney or custody. He did it for spite!!!!!!!!!
 
fran said:
Yeah, they had to throw that in. I got it but don't believe it. IF it's true, I don't care.

Nancy is a victim and what she did didn't deserve a death sentence.

It's Brad I'm concerned with. He's the one having the continued affair. He made it look like the affair was "OLD" and from what we've seen and heard, it was ongoing

IMHO, that attorney filed that motion to make the victim look bad.

That's just me.

But, I get it. Brad is AFRAID of what this attorney knows about HIM.

Just my opinion
fran
Click to expand...


Again .... NC = NO fault state = doesn't matter if he had an affair when it comes to custody

Looks like she had an affair to but its OK that she did? wow guys.
 
fran said:
Yeah, they had to throw that in. I got it but don't believe it. IF it's true, I don't care.

Nancy is a victim and what she did didn't deserve a death sentence.

It's Brad I'm concerned with. He's the one having the continued affair. He made it look like the affair was "OLD" and from what we've seen and heard, it was ongoing

IMHO, that attorney filed that motion to make the victim look bad.

That's just me.

But, I get it. Brad is AFRAID of what this attorney knows about HIM.

Just my opinion
fran
Click to expand...

No, she most certainly didn't deserve a death sentence! Just found it interesting that it's in there.

But, we don't know that BC had a continued affair w/ HM either. From what I read, he's not implicated in the alienation of affection lawsuit and you certainly would think he would be in there if it was an ongoing affair.
 
excelguy said:
Speculation about the passports......

The passports were found in NCs car.
Click to expand...

I'm almost absolutely sure that the idea of the passports being found in the car was mostly a misimpression created from the custody petition, which said that Brad had removed them from the car some months ago.

I haven't seen anything about where LE found the kid's passports, so that they could be returned.

Brad did not have access to the house and it's kind of unlikely that they would've noiselessly let him take them after they had served the warrant. Unless I missed something somewhere, the idea of the passports being found in the car after Nancy's death was an evolution from the allegation made in the custody petition. Otherwise, if they were actually in the car after things broke goofy, then that'd really underline the idea that he was and is a flight risk.

As to how Nancy might've gotten the kids to Canada without passports: First of all, I believe the idea came from a secondhand source and it may be a misunderstanding or a media mischaracterization of Nancy's earlier plans to take the children away. After all, we had heard earlier that she had wanted to go to her relatives and I assume that's why Brad supposedly hid the passports in the first place.

Though, there was a fairly famous group out of Durham which used to spirit women and children from abusive relationships to other countries. I don't know how much of a damper 9/11 put on their operations, but I'm sure that if they're still in existence and if they can no longer smuggle people to Europe, they'd definitely be aware of the legal alternatives.

Also, there's dozens, if not hundreds of border crossings that are only manned for a few hours a day or a couple of days a week. When the border is "closed" a gate is swung across the road and all anyone would have to do is walk around it to get into another vehicle, or maybe ride bikes to the nearest bus station. It's really not hard to physically get into Canada and passports aren't even required for land crossings according to posters on this board, anyway. (Reportedly, she'd need Brad's permission, but an unstaffed crossing would avoid the question, all the same)

Still, I think the thing this morning was most likely a quote that was misheard or misreported, or that the speaker didn't realize that the plan was no longer current.

Once again, IMHO.
 
d99gr81 said:
OK you and many here just don't get it... since I was married to a person who cheated let me explain something to you people. NC is a no fault state... meaning infidelity weighs ZERO in custody cases. I know this for fact for I went through it. I have 50/50 physical custody of my boys and she was the unfaithful one. I assure you outside of having proof of being a bad parent. Cheating is not weighed in for child custody.
Click to expand...

I get it. California is the same. You have to prove the other person unfit before custody can be denied. Cheating on a spouse has no bearing on the decision.

Gotcha!

He wants to remove the other attorney, NOT because she knows about his cheating ways, but because she KNOWS EVERYTHING else that went on, that was wrong, behind those closed doors.

Withholding passports........it's called control
Withholding $$ ...............AGAIN, called control

IF he would withhold money from his own wife and kids, what the heck is he going to do to them when there's no Nancy to protect them?

THAT's what he doesn't want this other attorney to discuss. NOT the cheating. AND he only put that in about Ms Cooper's infidelity to make the VICTIM look bad in the public's eye.

But it didn't work. I don't believe him. Even IF it were true, what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

I'm furious over this........spittin' mad!:furious:

JMHO
fran
 
fran said:
From what I read earlier, it's my understanding that on one hand they want her disqualified because she previously represented the victim and has inside information she should not have.....................on the other hand, they want this information to use as a defense.

So, he wants his cake (information) and eat it too(disqualify the information from the other side by disqualifying the attorney of record)

Colore me
:confused::confused::confused:
fran
Click to expand...

From the affidavit "She is an indespensable witness"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 160 more.
Total: 3,074 (members: 161, guests: 2,913)

Online statistics

Members online
161
Guests online
2,913
Total visitors
3,074
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,038
Messages
18,166,814
Members
231,917
Latest member
Nothing67
Back
Top