State v. Bradley Cooper - 3-15-2011 (after Lunch) - 3.?

[ncsu95]

That is how the prosecution would like this detail to be viewed, but since Nancy didn't have plans to paint until 12 hours later, it's surprising that the running friend testified that Nancy claimed to have the plan before it was a plan. I think it's also possible that Nancy did not say that she was painting or did not give a time for painting, but the running friend and the painting friend compared notes such that the running friend (who spoke in absolutes) made her story match the other story.

This is what I believe happened, especially since CC didn't mention anything about painting on the day she went missing, but did mention it several days later when re-interviewed.

 

[CrimeAddict]

According to evidence presented by the defense, she went to BJ's. He went to Harris Teeter. We have no evidence that she shopped at Harris Teeter.

A couple of her friends testified this week that she roller bladed and walked with a backpack to the grocery store. People keep saying she didn't always have a car all the time. I am familiar with Cary, lived there for 10 years, BJs is too far for her to rollerblade from lochmere or walk to and then have to carry bulk items back. So I believe the only grocery stores nearby are Harris Teeter and Whole foods (even more expensive) She could have went to food lion or Kroger, but they are like 15 mins from her., but maybe she did!

 

[ncsu95]

I think juries have problems with inaccurate or conflicting testimonies. One person says plans were made at 5 in the morning, the person making the plans contradicts that information by saying that plans were not made until 12 hours later. That's a problem when it comes to knowing the facts and believing a witness.

Yes. And the prosecution had a chance to get this cleared with her (ie, what did she tell you Friday morning), but didn't.

 

[otto]

I hope so. I hope that the good guys are those who are willing to be objective. So far the evidence has not favored Brad. Actually, the defense may have scored more points for the prosecution than the prosecution has. We have a long way to go. Maybe there is something that will tip the scales but right now it's weighted down on the side of the prosecution.

I'm convinced that the marriage sucked, and that both Brad and Nancy contributed to the failure of the marriage. I'm also convinced that they married for convenience in 2000 so she could go to NC with him, and that they may have never had a marriage in a traditional sense. I'm not convinced that Brad planned to murder Nancy and then carried out the plan. I do think Brad did laundry like a typical guy, with clothes draped over every railing in the house.

 

[CrimeAddict]

Yes. And the prosecution had a chance to get this cleared with her (ie, what did she tell you Friday morning), but didn't.

To be honest, I am not sure I think the prosecution is that great... I just hope he gets a fair trial.. and also hope that IF he did this, he will be put away and the prosecution won't screw this up.

 

[Cheyenne130]

A couple of her friends testified this week that she roller bladed and walked with a backpack to the grocery store. People keep saying she didn't always have a car all the time. I am familiar with Cary, lived there for 10 years, BJs is too far for her to rollerblade from lochmere or walk to and then have to carry bulk items back. So I believe the only grocery stores nearby are Harris Teeter and Whole foods (even more expensive) She could have went to food lion or Kroger, but they are like 15 mins from her., but maybe she did!

I guess I was referring to the more recent years after she had a car and after she was cut off from all accounts and put on an allowance. The exhibit introduced by the defence only made reference to BJ's.

 

[rwesafe]

Ok here's the thing. You believe he is innocent (until proven guilty, at least). Bit you can't just defend him with reasons? You have to tear down others to do it? Nancy? Her friends? Her parents?

I have not torn any of them down. I have not even spoken of her parents, at all. I'm sorry, anyone arrogant enough to send out an email stating that unless loyalties resided solely on NC side, then friendships would be severed...really? I think you know very well that NC and DD had more downs than they had ups.

A fair trial does not mean that everyone else gets to only appear to be perfect saints with no human flaws or bad or suspect character traits to suit those who "think" or "suspect" he might be guilty. He deserves a fair trial whether her friends like it or not.

A bunch of friends gave deps stating she ALWAYS wore a diamond necklace while she ran, yet the 1 person she ran with 3-4 times a week, could not recall if she did or not.

The person she ran with 3-4 days a week said she always wears Asics (sp) and then immediatly aftewards pointed out that she wore Saucony (sp) the last time they ran...People make mistakes...sometimes those mistakes include assuming someone killed someone, when just maybe they did not.

It was horrible that BC could not recall what color dress Nancy had on...but it was a ok that DD and BC could not recall despite the fact that both of them had spent hours with her and they all report that BC was not there more than an hour or so...

I'm not tearing them down because I see them as HUMANS. They are not infallible or incapable of making mistakes nor are they any more capable than anyone else of KNOWING if he did it, unless they were there, of course. They loved her. They disliked him. They are biased. They demanded loyalty...why would you even have to send an email like that...hmmm?

 

[jilly]

She actually wasn't going to be paid for painting that Saturday morning. Also, Nancy spent $27,000 in one year on credit, the family finances were a mess. Because of the debt, and the fact that they were in the process of divorce, Nancy was receiving $300/wk for groceries, gas and pocket money. I think $300 a week should have been enough for those necessities, but Nancy wanted to spend the money on pedicures/manicures for herself and the pre-schoolers. I get the impression that Nancy was living far beyond their means, and was unwilling to work with Brad to curb their spending.

In my reply regarding the calendar, I don't think it matters if she was going to be paid or not.

I can see that they probably both overspent and the need for a budget. It appears Brad was the one who drafted the budget which allowed the $300/wk for Nancy.
The fact that he subsequently deducted the extra money she made from painting just seems a little mean to me.

 

[belimom]

She actually wasn't going to be paid for painting that Saturday morning. Also, Nancy spent $27,000 in one year on credit, the family finances were a mess. Because of the debt, and the fact that they were in the process of divorce, Nancy was receiving $300/wk for groceries, gas and pocket money. I think $300 a week should have been enough for those necessities, but Nancy wanted to spend the money on pedicures/manicures for herself and the pre-schoolers. I get the impression that Nancy was living far beyond their means, and was unwilling to work with Brad to curb their spending.

I haven't been following since the early days, so I don't know the reasons for the credit card bills. Did she have a spending problem or was it the family's problem? When we ran into financial trouble a few years ago, we started putting everything on credit cards - utilities, groceries, bills - everything. MY credit cards b/c my husband didn't really have any. It was OUR debt but on MY cards. It didn't take long to run up my credit cards just trying to make our mortgage payment and keep our house and pay my student loans and car payment. We failed in that regard, sold the house, and got (mostly) out of credit card debt. Starting over now. But I can tell you that I didn't have manicures/pedicures, no new clothes or shoes, bought my kids' clothes at consignment sales - and still had to use our credit cards to survive. It was a terrible time.

So I can't throw any stones at anyone for credit card debt without knowing their whole financial situation. That past several years have been a financial nightmare for many people.

JMHO...

 

[Cheyenne130]

I'm convinced that the marriage sucked, and that both Brad and Nancy contributed to the failure of the marriage. I'm also convinced that they married for convenience in 2000 so she could go to NC with him, and that they may have never had a marriage in a traditional sense. I'm not convinced that Brad planned to murder Nancy and then carried out the plan. I do think Brad did laundry like a typical guy, with clothes draped over every railing in the house.

I can't agree that that is typical. I fired my husband from laundry early on when something white came out pink and something that used to fit me came out "Barbie Doll" sized. (I think it was intentional) He hasn't done laundry since but he does do ALL of the grocery shopping. (So that's not typical either by most couple standards.) I think the laundry he did was not typical. I will agree that I don't think he planned to kill her prior to the point where he may well have had his hands around her neck.

 

[otto]

This is what I believe happened, especially since CC didn't mention anything about painting on the day she went missing, but did mention it several days later when re-interviewed.

It's a possibility, especially since the friends compared notes prior to trial. I find that problematic.

 

[CrimeAddict]

In my reply regarding the calendar, I don't think it matters if she was going to be paid or not.

I can see that they probably both overspent and the need for a budget. It appears Brad was the one who drafted the budget which allowed the $300/wk for Nancy.
The fact that he subsequently deducted the extra money she made from painting just seems a little mean to me.

Jilly.. that's a hard one depending on how you look at it. Earned money is earned money so why does he have to use his paychecks for all the bills and spending money for everyone in the family and then when she earns money she gets to decide how it's spent? Money is money, both spouses contribute to the household, especially if you are trying to straighten out your debt.

I have a part time job after 2 years of staying home with my child and every penny goes to the household bills and groceries, this money does not go to just me.. see what I am saying? I think it's just as mean IF she was hiding that money from him and not telling him she was being paid for work.

 

[SleuthyGal]

The financial strain was obviously bad and problematic and they clearly had an issue with managing monies.

That said, I think it's important to separate out the feelings one may have about their spending habits from the fact that a woman was murdered.

No matter how awful Nancy may have appeared to some, no matter how flirty or inappropriate or whatever some see her, no matter how cliquish her group(s) may have been, no matter how much she charged on a credit card, she didn't deserve to be murdered.

I think that basic fact gets lost in the criticism of their spending habits, friendships and whatever else people have an issue with.

She was murdered.

I suspect some think she may have deserved it.

 

[LaLaw2000]

If you can throw stones at Nancy's parents...you will truly lose any credibility with this group. That is one fine family, and to disagree would speak volumes about YOU... Not them.

Thank you for stating this. These are the parents of the victim here, and no one needs diss them. GB their hearts!

 

[ncsu95]

RWESAFE, yes, Nancy went on vacation with her neighbor friends. AND, Brad was supposed to come down and stay part of that vacation. He would say he was coming, then never showed up.

It's in the legal docs. You don't seem to have read all of them. I have. You seem a tad...snitty, to tell you the truth.

I'll let it ride. Maybe you had a bad day or whatever. But you need to back up your statements that seem accusatory, with facts like are in the legal docs.

I believe her point was that when people thing of controlling behavior, it usually involves isolating the spouse from family and friends. Brad did not isolate her from anyone.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Jilly.. that's a hard one depending on how you look at it. Earned money is earned money so why does he have to use his paychecks for all the bills and spending money for everyone in the family and then when she earns money she gets to decide how it's spent? Money is money, both spouses contribute to the household, especially if you are trying to straighten out your debt.

I have a part time job after 2 years of staying home with my child and every penny goes to the household bills and groceries, this money does not go to just me.. see what I am saying? I think it's just as mean IF she was hiding that money from him and not telling him she was being paid for work.

You are looking at things from a functional relationship. Brad and Nancy were not functional by any definition. My husband had a previous wife. They had his money and her money. His money was to pay all the bills. Her money was for whatever she wanted. When that relationship destructed and we met and married, it was OUR money. Huge difference. I'm not sure that it's fair to place blame on her alone for the money problems. We have not heard anything about what "toys" he had.

 

[raisincharlie]

I seriously doubt that Nancy was the only one running up that credit card debt. We have evidence presented by the defense that Brad was pretty lousy with finances. I have to believe it was mutual. I can appreciate Brad wanting to get the family finances under control but if he was only controlling half of the problem then I can certainly understand why sparks would fly.

I agree with you on this. According to Brad (depositions) it was he who bought Nancy a $2800 necklace. We have learned that it was Brad who offered to pay for an interview outfit that was either $400 or $600 dollars. There are several of these instances, one would think he would just say no and heck yes I will get right on CISCO to get you that green card right away that I have failed to get them to do for the past 8 years.

I'm not buying that the supposed $24K of credit card debt was Nancy doing all the buying, not at all. Add in two growing kids who need clothes and shoes and dollars disappear quickly.

 

[ncsu95]

To be honest, I am not sure I think the prosecution is that great... I just hope he gets a fair trial.. and also hope that IF he did this, he will be put away and the prosecution won't screw this up.

With regards to this statement, I wholeheartedly agree. And I hope if he did it, he's convicted based on the evidence and not gut feelings.

 

[jmflu]

I have not torn any of them down. I have not even spoken of her parents, at all. I'm sorry, anyone arrogant enough to send out an email stating that unless loyalties resided solely on NC side, then friendships would be severed...really? I think you know very well that NC and DD had more downs than they had ups.

A fair trial does not mean that everyone else gets to only appear to be perfect saints with no human flaws or bad or suspect character traits to suit those who "think" or "suspect" he might be guilty. He deserves a fair trial whether her friends like it or not.

A bunch of friends gave deps stating she ALWAYS wore a diamond necklace while she ran, yet the 1 person she ran with 3-4 times a week, could not recall if she did or not.

The person she ran with 3-4 days a week said she always wears Asics (sp) and then immediatly aftewards pointed out that she wore Saucony (sp) the last time they ran...People make mistakes...sometimes those mistakes include assuming someone killed someone, when just maybe they did not.

It was horrible that BC could not recall what color dress Nancy had on...but it was a ok that DD and BC could not recall despite the fact that both of them had spent hours with her and they all report that BC was not there more than an hour or so...

I'm not tearing them down because I see them as HUMANS. They are not infallible or incapable of making mistakes nor are they any more capable than anyone else of KNOWING if he did it, unless they were there, of course. They loved her. They disliked him. They are biased. They demanded loyalty...why would you even have to send an email like that...hmmm?

It's easier to forget...when you're not trying to remember it so you can cover your *advertiser censored* later.

 

[rwesafe]

The financial strain was obviously bad and problematic and they clearly had an issue with managing monies.

That said, I think it's important to separate out the feelings one may have about their spending habits from the fact that a woman was murdered.

No matter how awful Nancy may have appeared to some, no matter how flirty or inappropriate or whatever some see her, no matter how cliquish her group(s) may have been, no matter how much she charged on a credit card, she didn't deserve to be murdered.

I think that basic fact gets lost in the criticism of their spending habits, friendships and whatever else people have an issue with.

She was murdered.

I suspect some think she may have deserved it.

That is a terrible thing to say.

It is horrible that she was murdered.

It would also be horrible if he spent 2.5 years in jail and lost everything if he did not do it.

It is horrible that two children have lost both parents.

It would be horrible if a killer got away with murder.