State v Bradley Cooper 3.11.2011

[SleuthyGal]

The jury is going to quickly get bored with all the details of the financial stuff.

I agree. I actually think the jury is going to get bored with any deep level of detail. What people cooked/ate/drank is going to go right by them. Details of finances is going to get lost. I hope the prosecution finds a way to keep their direct more brief and on point and just get to the facts of their case. While I know it all adds up and one needs to understand the totality of this couple's issues to see how it led to murder, I don't know if the jury is going to want (or be able) to stay focused when it's BlahBlahBlah for 6 hrs every day. There are a lot of details but they'll remember the big things the most.

 

[CyberPro]

Come on now. The only people that have commented about Brad's mannerisms after the disappearance are her friends and law enforcement, which had him as suspect #1 immediately. I'm not saying they weren't correct, but they obviously were biased to some extent.

(bolding mine)

The significant other is ALWAYS suspect #1 immediately. While it is true that there are some murders done by strangers, the majority of them are done by someone who is well-acquainted with the victim. Take the JLY case as an example. It looks like he might have traveled out of town, checked in to a hotel and driven back to commit the crime. Then reversed the trip again to give himself an alibi. (my read on the evidence, possibly incorrect).

I travel a lot for business. If I were killed while out of town, the immediate suspicion would be on my wife. Now, not that she does not have sufficient reasons to have me killed (leaving laundry, etc.) but then they would find (gasp!) her DNA in the room, even when she is not there. This does not really prove anything at that point, but the fact is that the spouse or boyfriend/girlfriend is an immediate suspect. LE sees a LOT of human reactions, and they understand the "normal" range. Do one thing that seems out of the ordinary, probably not that big of a deal, continue to do strange things, you raise the suspicions. At that point, you are either the victim of a tragic situation, or a perp. Even if you did not do it, you might have hired someone else. Now, suspicions are just that, and you cannot be convicted on suspicions alone, but if they start finding evidence and can put a solid story together, you have problems.

 

[CyberPro]

They did say it was shared. Perhaps he set up the account for Nancy and had her password. They were husband and wife, not that unusual to have access to a home email account (unless one party was trying to hide it behind hotmail). Was Nancy's email account part of the ISP features, or did Nancy have a hotmail account. Hotmail is not usually a spousal share account (I mean, hotmail is typically an anonymous act).

I might be wrong, but I took it that BC had configured the ISP mail service to copy all messages from one account to another account. I know this is possible, I have seen the configuration ability.

 

[Just the Fax]

Brad's persona seems very robotic and unemotional (depositions and witness accounts).
Nancy was far from his "beloved wife". They were divorcing, he had an affair, slept in another bedroom and hadn't been intimate in years. With that, it would be hard to know what behavior would be expected afterwards, including the memorials, ect. I would like to know more about what Diana meant when she said he was "false....acting".

 

[carolinalady]

I might be wrong, but I took it that BC had configured the ISP mail service to copy all messages from one account to another account. I know this is possible, I have seen the configuration ability.

You can easily modify email settings to not delete messages from the server upon download. That's how you can get the same emails to multiple computers, cell phones, etc. I guess we'll hear if they were forwarded from the server, copied, or whatever at some point.

 

[CyberPro]

I stand corrected....just asked my wife, and she said she sometimes sleeps in hers and keeps them in several days at a time. Ok, back to why the necklace was in the desk.

More to the point. I can understand someone wearing studs for several days, but since she was found wearing ONE earring, it makes me curious if they happened to find one in a strange location, like, oh, I dunno, maybe in the trunk of the car?

 

[LaLaw2000]

If a new trial thread is started, there needs to be notification in the last thread. Thats what happened today. A new thread was started for 3/11/11 and not everyone was aware.

I do not think a new thread should be started for each day of the trial - just my thought, though.

 

[Cheyenne130]

More to the point. I can understand someone wearing studs for several days, but since she was found wearing ONE earring, it makes me curious if they happened to find one in a strange location, like, oh, I dunno, maybe in the trunk of the car?

It may have been in the vacuum bag if they thought to check it.

 

[jmflu]

I find it curious there was no DNA under Nancy's fingernails. Wouldn't there be, if there had been a struggle? Unless Nancy was surprised from behind by a cloth with something on it that knocked her out before she had a chance to react. I don't know if evidence of that would show up or not...but I can't imagine being strangled and not trying to tear out the eyes of the person doing it. A scenario of this sort would also prevent any noise of a struggle from waking the kids. And give credence to the Murder 1 charge.

 

[SleuthyGal]

If Nancy were asleep and he attacked her after she went to bed then there wouldn't be a struggle like what we imagine.

 

[Just the Fax]

I find it curious there was no DNA under Nancy's fingernails. Wouldn't there be, if there had been a struggle? Unless Nancy was surprised from behind by a cloth with something on it that knocked her out before she had a chance to react. I don't know if evidence of that would show up or not...but I can't imagine being strangled and not trying to tear out the eyes of the person doing it. A scenario of this sort would also prevent any noise of a struggle from waking the kids. And give credence to the Murder 1 charge.

We don't know if they found his DNA or not under her nails. The autopsy report just said they clipped the nails...the results would not be published. Per Kurtz, we do know 2 CPD detectives wrote reports about seeing scratches on his neck. Also, Kurtz said CPD lied in a report, as he was actually in short sleeves when interviewed, not long.

 

[SleuthyGal]

We don't know if they found his DNA or not under her nails

In his opening Kurtz said NO DNA was found under Nancy's fingernails. Granted, he could be lying about that, but that would be a pretty big (and easily refutable) lie.

 

[Just the Fax]

In his opening Kurtz said NO DNA was found under Nancy's fingernails. Granted, he could be lying about that, but that would be a pretty big (and easily refutable) lie.

I missed that, thanks. He has all the lab reports, so it must be true.
I could not listen to all his opening. Something about his voice and mannerisms gives me the woolies.

 

[panthera]

More to the point. I can understand someone wearing studs for several days, but since she was found wearing ONE earring, it makes me curious if they happened to find one in a strange location, like, oh, I dunno, maybe in the trunk of the car?

Or if it has been found at all. Something that small could be lost anywhere; which also makes me wonder if she had removed it or if it fell out maybe when pulling an article of clothing over her head. :waitasec:

 

[jmflu]

I think there's a smoking gun. I think there's a reason they arrested BC and have had him in jail for 2.5 years. Young was never arrested.

 

[Just the Fax]

I think there's a smoking gun. I think there's a reason they arrested BC and have had him in jail for 2.5 years. Young was never arrested.

I too suspect there is a smoking gun.....
FYI, Jason Young has been in the Wake County jail since 12/09:woohoo:

 

[jmflu]

God, has it been over a year already?! I knew he had finally been arrested, just making the point that it took years...not so with BC.

 

[BrownRice]

I think there's a smoking gun. I think there's a reason they arrested BC and have had him in jail for 2.5 years.

Wouldn't the defense have to know about the smoking gun though via discovery? If there is, is it necessary to have all of these witnesses (esp take up an entire day with 1 of them - DD)?

Interesting....

 

[BrownRice]

I'm still curious about Nancy's $300 weekly allowance, that was hers free and clear after bills were paid. Did she buy groceries with money other than this? It doesn't sound like they were a family that sat down nightly for dinner together or anything like this does it?

Remember back in 2008 it was said he would follow her to the gas station and pay for her gas (to apparently ensure she was using the $ for gas). Was this ever confirmed?

If the $300 didn't include groceries or gas, that's a lot of money just to hang out with. And her friends said she often ate at their houses because of no money. I don't get it?

 

[Just the Fax]

I'm still curious about Nancy's $300 weekly allowance, that was hers free and clear after bills were paid. Did she buy groceries with money other than this? It doesn't sound like they were a family that sat down nightly for dinner together or anything like this does it?

Remember back in 2008 it was said he would follow her to the gas station and pay for her gas (to apparently ensure she was using the $ for gas). Was this ever confirmed?

If the $300 didn't include groceries or gas, that's a lot of money just to hang out with. And her friends said she often ate at their houses because of no money. I don't get it?

Kurtz said that was for food too.
I assume it meant family food?, or you would think he would have stressed it was for her personal dining out with friends. Gas was no biggie, since she did not work and lived her life within a 5 mile radius, most of the time. Brad only had the remaining 20% of his take home pay (after bills), so cash money for a family of 4 was tight.

To put in perspective....obviously their bills were way over the top.

Nancy got $300/week
Brad got $75/week

Daddy made $135,000/yr, yet this family of 4 was living on net $375/week?
Yep, this fact only bolsters the motive for murder.
Keep it coming Kurtz!



.