State v Bradley Cooper 04/04/11

[wuffin]

Yes, I watching and listening to everything that each witness has to say. That's part of the problem.

For personal reasons, I would love for Brad to be PROVEN to be guilty of murder. Believe it or not, I'm with you on that one. But golly, gee whiz, from the outside of the Lochmere circle looking in, I just don't see it...yet. My mind is wide open and I do hope something sways in the pros favor.

By the same token, I do not want an innocent man in jail.

Nothing I personally can do about it, either way.

 

[Palomine]

also Brad was getting a copy of all his wifes email, that is how he found out about the separation agreement..that ended his wife being able to move to Canada

 

[uncfan]

I don't need any more testimony to convince me that the marriage was bad or that both BC and NC were ready for it to end. Several witnesses now have tried to paint a picture of NC's state of mind. That's really only important as far as it goes to affecting BC's state of mind. I don't know that Krista's testimony today told me anything new to convince me that something was changing or coming to a critical juncture that could have pushed BC over the edge on the evening of July 11. Since the prosecution seems forced to try and convict him on circumstantial evidence, they need to convince me of the specific circumstances on July 11/12.

Based on the testimony, it seems to me that BC's state of mind about the divorce was somewhere between these two extremes: 1) I still want to be able to see my kids regularly, so I don't want NC to take them and run to Canada or 2) I don't care what happens to NC or the kids, I'm just worried about how much I have to pay. I want the prosecution to show me that there was an e-mail or something the night of July 11 that pushed either of these buttons.

 

[RaleighNC]

Nancy didn't think Brad would kill her. Her parents ASKED if she was afraid for her life. Krista saw them going at it with each other - not just Brad yelling at Nancy - she may have even instigated some things.

I think they all knew it was bad. I think that because he had not been physical with her before that somehow she thought that he never would be and that she could hold her own with him in a yelling match. She sounded stubborn and more than a little spoiled.

Honestly - I believe that is why she stayed. She was maybe even a little aggressive in some situations - but you don't poke a mad dog - she just didn't see him as being a murderer.

The personality types that have catathymic crisis are those that are controlling, and yet dependent (I think this was Brad - after all he LET her get away with a lot of things and she carried them "socially") but who have a turning point when it looks like they are being abandoned and they plan to kill the person that is leaving - I posted a link earlier.

I see this as playing out that she came home from the party, slightly aggressive from the liquid courage, he confronted her about something in the emails he had read and she told him he was going to pay & she was less than pleasant back to him (we've established that they did in fact yell AT each other frequently) and he then killed her.

His behavior afterward is also explained by this psychiatric condition / definition. And oh - many of these killers have no history of violence either. (And often have threatened or tried suicide when they feel someone is going to adandon them)

Wonder if calgary123 can shed some light on Brad's personality as it relates to the personality type associated with a catathymic homicide.

 

[ncsu95]

Nancy didn't think Brad would kill her. Her parents ASKED if she was afraid for her life. Krista saw them going at it with each other - not just Brad yelling at Nancy - she may have even instigated some things.

I think they all knew it was bad. I think that because he had not been physical with her before that somehow she thought that he never would be and that she could hold her own with him in a yelling match. She sounded stubborn and more than a little spoiled.

Honestly - I believe that is why she stayed. She was maybe even a little aggressive in some situations - but you don't poke a mad dog - she just didn't see him as being a murderer.

The personality types that have catathymic crisis are those that are controlling, and yet dependent (I think this was Brad - after all he LET her get away with a lot of things and she carried them "socially") but who have a turning point when it looks like they are being abandoned and they plan to kill the person that is leaving - I posted a link earlier.

I see this as playing out that she came home from the party, slightly aggressive from the liquid courage, he confronted her about something in the emails he had read and she told him he was going to pay & she was less than pleasant back to him (we've established that they did in fact yell AT each other frequently) and he then killed her.

His behavior afterward is also explained by this psychiatric condition / definition. And oh - many of these killers have no history of violence either. (And often have threatened or tried suicide when they feel someone is going to adandon them)

Wonder if calgary123 can shed some light on Brad's personality as it relates to the personality type associated with a catathymic homicide.

I'm not ashamed to admit I had to go look that word up.

 

[SleuthyGal]

If SODDI I would expect one of 2 things:

1. The necklace to be gone (as in stolen) or
2. The necklace to still be around NC's neck or found on/near her body.

I would not expect it to be in the home, in Brad's possession, given the testimony by many people that she always had that necklace on. That is one huge coinky dink that I don't believe is a mere coincidence.

 

[ncsu95]

If SODDI I would expect one of 2 things:

1. The necklace to be gone (as in stolen) or
2. The necklace to still be around NC's neck or found on/near her body.

I would not expect it to be in the home, in Brad's possession, given the testimony by many people that she always had that necklace on. That is one huge coinky dink that I don't believe is a mere coincidence.

So if the defense produces several pictures of her not wearing the necklace in 2008, will you simply not believe it?

 

[SleuthyGal]

So if the defense produces several pictures of her not wearing the necklace in 2008, will you simply not believe it?

I'll believe it when I see it and it is verified. Until then... nope.

 

[SleuthinNC]

If he was guilty and he ripped it off her, wouldn't he have hidden it? It's small, it would be easy to stick in a coffee can or something.

Or dispose of with the HT shoes?

 

[borndem]

I dread hearing this testimony. This is going to be horrible for Mr. & Mrs. Rentz.

Yes, you're right -- it looks like Mrs. Rentz (and her sister, maybe?) are leaving the courtroom. Poor Dad is still there. His little girl -- oh, how awful and just plain sad for that man. But I'll bet you couldn't drag him out of there.


BTW, I think it's Hannah P. with the blonde hair with the Rentz family.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Hummm..I think it might be helpful to review just what is Circumstantial Evidence versus direct evidence....and it appears this particular case is based mainly on circumstancial evidence NOT direct..NO ONE saw Brad move her body, no one saw Brad, strangle her, no one has a video of him doing either of these things...However there is a long list of circumstantial evidence directly pointing at Brad..and no one else..

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-circumstantial-evidence.htm

Circumstantial evidence is evidence in a case which can be used to draw inferences about a series of events. It is also known as indirect evidence; the opposite is direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence is an important part of any criminal trial, and both sides in a trial will generally try to find circumstantial evidence to support themselves. Contrary to popular belief, it is possible to obtain a conviction with the use of circumstantial evidence, if it is backed up by corroborating evidence and other factual information.


I am sure there are some who NEED direct evidence in any trial..however it is NOT neessary in order to obtain a conviction....

My list of a few of the circumstances
1)Brad last one to see Nancy alive
2)Brad in possession of items he should not have had..i.e. keys, phone, computer, necklace
3)Brad delay in calling about her missing status
4) Brad's out of character activities that particular morning
5) Brad's hx of controlling behaviors of his wife and children
6) Brad's explanations being shown to be somewhat OFF
7) Mysterious missing items of clothing ala 2 lefts of jogging shoes, his shoes
8) Activities in the garage that morning by 645AM..neighbour sees door open which was unusual
9) The state of Nancy when found..no pants, underwear, no poneytail, no hat, no necklace, no shoes and her bra all askewed as if put on after the fact..
10) No credible witness seeing Nancy leaving her house that morning all dressed for jogging
11) Well documented testimony how Brad treated Nancy...
12) Brad's losses IF divorce went thru..Money was very important to him..but I think it was the Control factor too
13) Brad's disregard to nancy's family after death of his wife
14) Bug evidence showing high possibility she was dead before he ever went to HT
15) Hx of Brad reading her emails and possibility of text messages
16) theres more..but the most important item is..WHO ELSE had the opportunity, means and reasoning to do this?

 

[SleuthyGal]

Or dispose of with the HT shoes?

Throw away a nearly $3K diamond necklace? LOL. He wouldn't have done that, and obviously didn't!

 

[gorealtors]

Who gave Nancy the diamond studs she was wearing when her body was discovered? Anyone know??

 

[sunshine05]

If SODDI I would expect one of 2 things:

1. The necklace to be gone (as in stolen) or
2. The necklace to still be around NC's neck or found on/near her body.

I would not expect it to be in the home, in Brad's possession, given the testimony by many people that she always had that necklace on. That is one huge coinky dink that I don't believe is a mere coincidence.

By the same token, if he killed her I would expect
1)he would hide it very well.
2) he would pitch it

If he was innocent but it's in the house
1)she takes it off when she showers and places it in her jewelry box and does not jog with it on
2)he has nothing to hide, so does nothing with it other than keep it stored with the rest of her jewelry.

 

[ncsu95]

I'll believe it when I see it and it is verified. Until then... nope.

Obviously you wouldn't believe it until then.

 

[gracielee]

Thank you, SleuthyGal!! That is why I mentioned the Hello Kitty camera and the other camera when I asked! I just do not like the looks of that pic. It was all dark in the background, Nancy's hair was mussed, and she looked distressed.

Just my thoughts, tho.

*Got high winds and storms here in La. right now. The video is constantly buffering.

That weather is supposed to blow through the Raleigh area first thing in the morning tomorrow. Between 6:00 to 10:00 a.m. Tuesday. Batten down the hatches LaLaw.

 

[gracielee]

I didn't say anthing about a check (although Walmart will cash a check). I said a money order or western union.

Just a question, because I don't know they answer. Walmart will cash company checks and government checks, but will they cash 'personal' checks?? A lot more risk involved in personal checks.

 

[NCEast]

Hummm..I think it might be helpful to review just what is Circumstantial Evidence versus direct evidence....and it appears this particular case is based mainly on circumstancial evidence NOT direct..NO ONE saw Brad move her body, no one saw Brad, strangle her, no one has a video of him doing either of these things...However there is a long list of circumstantial evidence directly pointing at Brad..and no one else..

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-circumstantial-evidence.htm

Circumstantial evidence is evidence in a case which can be used to draw inferences about a series of events. It is also known as indirect evidence; the opposite is direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence is an important part of any criminal trial, and both sides in a trial will generally try to find circumstantial evidence to support themselves. Contrary to popular belief, it is possible to obtain a conviction with the use of circumstantial evidence, if it is backed up by corroborating evidence and other factual information.


I am sure there are some who NEED direct evidence in any trial..however it is NOT neessary in order to obtain a conviction....

My list of a few of the circumstances
1)Brad last one to see Nancy alive
2)Brad in possession of items he should not have had..i.e. keys, phone, computer, necklace
3)Brad delay in calling about her missing status
4) Brad's out of character activities that particular morning
5) Brad's hx of controlling behaviors of his wife and children
6) Brad's explanations being shown to be somewhat OFF
7) Mysterious missing items of clothing ala 2 lefts of jogging shoes, his shoes
8) Activities in the garage that morning by 645AM..neighbour sees door open which was unusual
9) The state of Nancy when found..no pants, underwear, no poneytail, no hat, no necklace, no shoes and her bra all askewed as if put on after the fact..
10) No credible witness seeing Nancy leaving her house that morning all dressed for jogging
11) Well documented testimony how Brad treated Nancy...
12) Brad's losses IF divorce went thru..Money was very important to him..but I think it was the Control factor too
13) Brad's disregard to nancy's family after death of his wife
14) Bug evidence showing high possibility she was dead before he ever went to HT
15) Hx of Brad reading her emails and possibility of text messages
16) theres more..but the most important item is..WHO ELSE had the opportunity, means and reasoning to do this?

Very good...and don't forget the biggy--motive.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Obviously you wouldn't believe it until then.

Why would I believe Nancy sometimes didn't wear her necklace when that hasn't been shown and so far there is no evidence or testimony to it?

 

[gracielee]

Besides looking heartbroken, she looks very angry.

I'd be livid if it was my daughter who was murdered.