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

[Apex-mom]

HI all, been lurking for a week, now jumping in. The thing that bothered me from the beginning was the trip(s) to Harris Teeter... if BC is supposed to be SO SMART, how could he be so STUPID as to go to the store -- he'd KNOW there would be a record of his visit(s). That was a huge red flag.

But he just answered that question in his affidavit.... just think for a sec... she comes home, he kills her... but thinks 'oh man i can't take her somewhere to dump her NOW in the middle of the night'... so he waits a little bit and combines the trip to leave her somewhere with a trip to the store..but he KNOWS he'll be recorded, so he fakes a call from the home phone to his phone for "juice for Katie" and runs back out to make the second purchase, which does 2 things: (1) gets the detergent he needs for doing all the laundry of items that may have been soiled in the attack (sheets, etc), and (2) establishes his alibai that she was home at 6:30am calling him on his cell phone.

Now I understand the pattern, and it makes sense. He is not a dumb guy... he is logical and very smart....and was trying to make it look like she made that call.

On another note, I wonder if there is footage of an area gas staion showing him accompanying her to the gas pump to fill up? Maybe that would show an official record of their demeanor and interaction with each other.

I have also benn thinking of the 'dump site'.... why there??? Well, if he came out onto Holly Springs Road from Cary Parkway, that subdivision was the last place he could have turned into before needing to make the right onto Lily Atkins Road to go back home... remember the kids were most likely home by themselves, and he couldn't afford them waking up and wandering out of the house.... so it had to be quick and if he didn't dump her there, he would have gone too far down Holly Springs Road and been gone maybe another full 10 minutes. Just a thought (one of many).

Apex-mom

 

[fran]

I think it is interesting that Brad doesn't have anyone saying he is superdad in any of the affidavits.

I read somewhere the Heather M is saying she hasn't been with Brad in 4 years and was upset about being accused of having an affiar with him now. Is there another woman other than Heather M or is she just saying that?

I'm not sure about Heather. But, according to the friend's affidavits, there were three previous affairs. I don't know if that's including an interlude with SOMEONE when he went to Europe and later went away for a weekend while they were in NC.

JMHO
fran

 

[d99gr81]

Since Mommy was dead, you would assume they were asleep at 6 -7 am he was gone.

Since nancy did not work, I bet the older girl did not go to pre-school until 9 or so......prolly not very early risers

My boys 4 and 7 wake up at 6 am like clock work

 

[Onescout]

good point



Too much speculation IMO, she very well could have called him and asked for juice. They were close to the store, seemed like a normal thing to run and grab stuff.




Yep, this has my hinkey meter dial leaning to the right.

BTW..for you and all newbies.

Thanks for the welcome.

I wish there wasn't a need for this forum in so many ways, especially when you see all the mostly women and children listed.
But I am so glad there are folks out there working as a collective to solve and hold up those without a voice.

 

[d99gr81]

Just as an observer from the outside, Brad's 2 statements in the affadavit bother me.
One being that Nancy was a big spender, wanted expensive jewelry etc...yet any photo I see of her, she barely has any jewelry on and she wears very casual clothes.
He also makes the claim that she called him while he was out on the morning in question to get juice...anyone who has been in a hostile end of the marriage environment doesn't have those "Hey hon can you get some juice?" kind of phone calls. This was merely to set up alibi.
He and his mouthpiece are attempting to paint a picture and it really isn't consistent with the steadfast claims of others.
As it always is with his "type", he is trying to control perception and history of the marriage.
He is certainly not spending one second on finding the killer of his children's mother, is he?
Has there been one mention from his counsel that they are offering a reward or persuing a private investigation? I truly don't recall such actions.

Again from statements on both sides I believe they were in a stage I was in in my bad marriage. My ex like I said did the cheating but towards the end even I who was wronged went out of my way to do things. I worked very hard my entire marriage to fix it but even towards the end I worked so so hard.

 

[RoughlyCollie]

I don't think that has any bearing on when NC's children woke up. My kids have always slept late (until around 9 a.m.), even when they were babies. I was the only mother I knew who had to wait for her kids to awaken to get started on Christmas Day.

My boys 4 and 7 wake up at 6 am like clock work

 

[christine2448]

christine:

Brad wants everyone to believe they were trying to work it out. But after you read all the friends affidavits, you'll see that the divorce was on hold ONLY because Nancy's green card application was through Brad's employer, Cisco Systems. She was under the impression, and it may have been true, that the divorce proceeding, could jeopradize her ability to get legal residancy in the U.S.

While married, Nancy was allowed to reside in the U.S., only as Brad's wife. Her immigration status was tied to Brad and his employer.

Nancy was TRAPPED.

JMHO
fran

PS........anyone wanting to know the REAL deal, reading the affidavits will be able to see what was going on behind those closed doors.....imo, fran

mornin' fran! As always..enjoy your posts and opinions. Trying to catch up. I saw Brads doc last evening...missed the others. I noticed you all now have a doc thread up :clap: I am headed over there now to catch up, thanks. Hard to understand it all w/o reading everything!

 

[momto3kids]

Someone wondered if HT has any cell phone reception. Yes, it does. You can be in any part of the store and receive or make a call.

 

[d99gr81]

I don't have time to give these a thorough reading or to go through point-by-point, but most what I see is that Nancy had a mother-in-law that she complained about; Brad wasn't very sociable (or at least toward her friends and likely to a similar degree as most techies); He worked a lot, furthered his education, enjoyed working out and traveled for business.

They had money problems, which may or may not were due to Nancy's spending (none of her friends dispute his claim) and a household budget was set, which apparently Nancy didn't feel was adequate and she complained to her family and friends.

But, something which jumped out at me from Michelle Simmons affidavit was #16, the bit about how Nancy was taken off of the joint account, had no debit card and would have to go inside to pay for gas; Apparently, based on everyone's affidavit's, Nancy was being given a cash budget. All she would've had to do was walk into any bank, anywhere with a minimum deposit and a driver's license and they'd mail her a debit card within a week.

Have to say my ex stole &18,000 from me at the end so again I see why...I wish I would have done something to protect myself.

 

[raisincharlie]

LMAO! I thought exactly that when reading the prior posts about no reward and the fact that Brad isn't showing interest in finding his wifes killer...I bet we will see a reward and something rather quickly since now it is mentioned here. (Tricia, owner of WS, invited him and attorney to post here with us recently in a radio interview )

It is definitely what I thought when I read Brad's affidavit - honest.

 

[raisincharlie]

OK being that I went through a bad divorce and towards the end I try to go above and beyond to do things my ex complained about. Adams clearly states he didn't ever do laundry. I can easily see him trying to do laundry now because he said he wanted to stay married to her. So really people I know because I have been there. Even though my ex did the cheating I still wanted to save my marriage for my boys sake. So I went out of my way to do extra things...especially ones she complained about. He stated he was giving Mommy Day offs... Oh my do I know about that. So much of these affidavits ring a bell of some of the things I went through. I can assure you, he could easily been trying to make things right and do things he didn't normally do.

I think this is a very good perspective. It seems from the documents we have and the timing presented in them that there was a considerable amount of vascillation about whether to proceed or not with the separation. It is quite possible that what Brad did or did not do vascillated as well and may have been dependent on the status of the proceedings at the time. Good point.

 

[IMHO63]

Well, he is the one that said they were living beyond their means and could barely afford to pay the mounting credit card debt.

"6 figures" is not a lot of money for a family of 4 (wife not working at all) ...especially with luxury cars, alot of credit card debt, a $379k home, club memberships and private school.

CCIE with 10 years experience would make $101,000 - $120,000

BTW, the affidavit was meant to make him 'look less guilty"...that was the point.

Like you said, still doesn't mean anything yet.

This is a much more accurate quote of a Cisco salary for someone with a CCIE. This is a good company to work for but I have to laugh at all of the perks people think they get. Yes, the health benefits are good, but no they are not giving out free lunches and company cars. That being said with an income like the one stated above, they definitely would be having financial troubles and it would be a very stressful situation, which would make money look like motive.

 

[OtisCampbell]

Just as an observer from the outside, Brad's 2 statements in the affadavit bother me.
One being that Nancy was a big spender, wanted expensive jewelry etc...yet any photo I see of her, she barely has any jewelry on and she wears very casual clothes.
I agree and also he says Nancy liked to buy $8000 paintings..well in the property settlement HE gets 9 paintings and she gets 7~so HE must like them himself

It's possible she didn't want all 16 of the paintings. Unless she was moving to an equally large home like the one in Cary she may not have enough room for them. Since they were dividing up the property if she took all 16 paintings she would have lost something. If they are in fact $8,000 paintings then she would have to give up a substantial amount of other items in the house if she decided she wanted all of the paintings.

For all we know BC might have planned to sell the pictures and keep the money. Just because you get something in a divorce settlement doesn't mean you actually like it or even plan to keep it.

 

[fran]

Again from statements on both sides I believe they were in a stage I was in in my bad marriage. My ex like I said did the cheating but towards the end even I who was wronged went out of my way to do things. I worked very hard my entire marriage to fix it but even towards the end I worked so so hard.

See, you're judging how YOU were during your marriage. THAT is NOT what happened here, IMO.

The affidavits we've seen have shown that Brad was a manipulative and controlling person who schemed on how he could insight discomfort and pain to Nancy, his wife. He may have ACTED the part as you did, when it suited him. But then he'd get angry over something and take it out on Nancy. Like calling her to bring the kids over a friend's house for dinner, she's not invited, and he leaves her waiting for him to arrive for over an HOUR.

He takes the kids for a day at the zoo with HIS parents, leaving Nancy at home sick in bed. Having made prior arrangements to return home in time for a family dinner, they return well after the dinnertime hour, had already eaten, had avoided Nancy's phone calls througout the day, and didn't even bother to bring her home something to eat.

Calling Nancy at a friend's home, insisting she return the children home because HE wanted to have dinner with them. When she returned, he was angrily waiting outside for her arrival.

When Nancy started painting to earn money because she didn't have enough to make ends meet, he then withheld part of her already budgeted amount, because 'she already had money.'

THAT does NOT sound like a man trying to work things out. That sounds like a man attempting to inflict as much pain and suffering during the last days of a dying marriage. It worked! to the very end

JMHO
fran

 

[Topsail Girl]

D99GR81,

Good morning. I wanted to go back and address the Cisco perks. I was typing befoe thinking last night. What I was meaning to say was that my friend Robert and I were going to class for an MCSE (which doesn't even exist now under that name). We were studying an MCP qualified course. I can't recall if it was Server or TCP/IP or which one. So we were studying for ONE particular test that would lead to MCSE. As I posted last night I'm 5'6 and 110 pound so a handfull of grapes and a bagel and bottle of water WOULD qualify as lunch for me. - As someone pointed out it would not qualify for Brad.

 

[pamlet]

I've been trying to catch up on this case... and have been reading WAY fast...

One thing I noticed in the friends affidav... all have said he took her name off the bank account. I was surprised to see that only because I thought in order to remove someone from the account you needed that person's signature .. in person or notarized (at least in Illinois) ...

 

[Apex-mom]

A question for those of you with legal backgrounds.. when they do a search of the house, do they photograph every room? I am wondering about the 'need' for laundry detergent and juice (and bread and milk for that matter)... would the police have photographed the kitchen contents, including the refrigerator? Would they have photographed the laundry room to note the availability of cleaning supplies? WOuld they go into the attic looking for items recently stashed there? Is that a part of normal protocol?
Just curious...thanks

 

[d99gr81]

I actually agree with this.

However, if it is true that she has a shopping addiction and drove them into the poorhouse (as he implies), and if it is true that he really was going to have to pay 2100 per month in childcare, plus tuition to private school for two, plus alimony (and I doubt his take-home after taxes is more than 4-5K per month, so that would probably be about 3/4 of his salary plus the house, etc,), then those claims do increase his motives for murder. Honestly, if one of my friends were being taken to the cleaners in a divorce like that, I'd think the wife was pretty greedy (though not deserving of murder, of course!).

Anyway, making her look money-hungry, while it makes her look like less than a perfect wife, it does make him look more guilty, IMO.

See this is what is starting to upset me. So many people talk like they know everything .... I can guarantee he makes twice that a month. Before anyone else comments on how much he makes please rather than me explain what a CCIE is and how many actually have accomplished that go research it. Then research how much a CCIE makes. I make more than 5k a month and I do not have my CCIE.

 

[d99gr81]

Well, he is the one that said they were living beyond their means and could barely afford to pay the mounting credit card debt.

"6 figures" is not a lot of money for a family of 4 (wife not working at all) ...especially with luxury cars, alot of credit card debt, a $379k home, club memberships and private school.

CCIE with 10 years experience would make $101,000 - $120,000

BTW, the affidavit was meant to make him 'look less guilty"...that was the point.

Like you said, still doesn't mean anything yet.

I CCIE with 1 year experience makes that. You are wrong. Especially working for Cisco.I know for a fact that guys with CROS which is Cisco Remote division which is VOIP make close to that and they don't have a CCIE>

 

[raisincharlie]

Thinking a bit more and going back to Mr. Adam's affidavit - he references the VoIP system. I don't know anything about this but he states that Brad could use this system for several things related to the home phone - to include the initiation of a phone call from the home phone which could be done from a remote location.

Now I sure am wondering if this is so, it seems possible to me that Brad could have indeed initiated a phone call from the home phone to his cell phone. In which case it may well look like Nancy called him at Harris Teeter on Saturday morning but it could be it wasn't nancy calling but Brad initiating the call himself.

I find this information interesting and also am wondering the possibilites of such a system. From the affidavits it appears some friends think Brad was monitoring phone activity generated by the home phone - could he not also use such a system to the extent of calling his own cell from the home phone without Nancy having to do it. Mr Adam clearly indicates that calls from the home phone could be initiated by Brad from a remote location. W

If so - his 640 am phone call from nancy could have been of his own doing, rather than any verification that Nancy was alive and on the phone with him at 640 am. Any thoughts ?