State v Bradley Cooper 4-5-2011

[BrownRice]

So I misspoke. Daycares often are not regulated and operate on very lax standards, and offer wwwaay less in the way of academics. PS teachers have early childhood training, college degrees. Young professionals want their children socialized, to share age-appropriate academics, to eat nutricious lunches and snacks. Some parents work, some don't. You pay for quality. That's what you want for your child, isn't it.

This is not true at all. I had my son in daycare in Charlotte for a couple of years and they are regulated by the state and go by the 5 star (or less) rating system. 5 stars will get you teachers who have their early childhood education degrees, among other things. The program we chose was more like an all day preschool - learning based rather than watching tv, hanging out etc. My experience (only) has been preschool is less regulated by the state.

 

[BrownRice]

I'm not proud (at all) to admit this, but a couple of years ago my husband and I were going thru a very rough patch in our marriage due to finances and his business closing. Extremely stressful. One night we got into a very loud argument and I thought our son was upstairs asleep. I looked over at the stairs because I heard something, and the poor thing was sitting there with his hands covering his ears, sobbing. Made me feel about 1" tall. We have never had that type of argument again.

My point, I know emotions get high, take over, etc., but how can parents repeatedly do this in front of their kids? In a car? That breaks my heart esp hearing the girls were crying as well.

 

[uncfan]

Brad is a lying liar who lies.

Some of you may have missed this, but here are just 8 examples from his affidavit compared to witness testimony yesterday & today.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - State v Bradley Cooper 4-5-2011

Neither BC or KL provided proof of their statements to the number of visits, dates, etc. So yes, one or both of them might be mistaken about the actual number of visits. This point was more important to the custody hearing than the murder trial.

As far as proving he is guilty of murder, I'd be much more interested in evidence showing he lied about his activities of July 11/12.

 

[gracielee]

So both of those witnesses were supposed to be testifying about the same incident? I am very confused

I don't think they were the same incident. The way I understood it, one incident happened in the morning, on the way *to* preschool. A second incident, from this last witness, occurred *after* preschool one day. MOO

 

[gracielee]

apparently just me

No, me too on the buffering today. I imagined weather related.

 

[borndem]

Is there a way to grab a picture of those sticks? I have been thinking they might be the murder weapon.

Hmmmmm....now that's interesting, CPro......

 

[borndem]

Right, but you are assuming that the spackling was done proper. From what has been testified earlier the spackling was done in a very exaggerated manner.

Murderer or not (and I think without a doubt, he was/is), BC was just plain mean. And yes, NC could also dish it out, but not without exacerbation. He pushed and pushed and pushed her. He pushed some more, and then he cold-bloodedly killed her. MHOO.

 

[borndem]

IMO Kurtz is already being a putz. don't like his tone one bit.

I agree, especially today.

He's as arrogant as his client is, IMO.

 

[gorealtors]

I wonder if both cars were in BOTH names or JUST BRAD'S?

These controlling spouses take their possessions very seriously! Home, cars, wife, kids! POSSESSIONS!

Diamond necklaces!

JMHO
fran

Both cars were in Brad's name.

 

[borndem]

I think he's fine. We learned about the $700. There's been so much talk about him leaving her penniless.

I'm skeptical about that $$. I'd like to see the source of that info. Not sayin' it's not true, but just wonder about the source.

 

[gracielee]

Both cars were in Brad's name.

HUGE SURPRISE! :maddening:

 

[borndem]

So both of those witnesses were supposed to be testifying about the same incident? I am very confused

I think they were different incidents. One occurred around 9:00am when school started for the day -- the witness was getting things set up for the party, and the 2nd one occurred around noon when nearly everyone else had already gone home. Probably the same week, but may not have been on the same day.

 

[SleuthyGal]

I don't think they were the same incident. The way I understood it, one incident happened in the morning, on the way *to* preschool. A second incident, from this last witness, occurred *after* preschool one day. MOO

Correct. They were two different incidences. Cummings effed up again, failing to clarify the times to bring home the point that this was not only ONE incident.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Murderer or not (and I think without a doubt, he was/is), BC was just plain mean. And yes, NC could also dish it out, but not without exacerbation. He pushed and pushed and pushed her. He pushed some more, and then he cold-bloodedly killed her. MHOO.

Agree there ..I actually believe pros isnt just bringing on all these witness to show Brad was a CAD..but to show the escaltions of things..Things suddenly became much more vocal and tension filled post confession of his affair, then the divorce/separation arrangments..first money, then what these witnesses are describing..to Nancy's call to Realtor to get out ASAP (july8th) to going missing to odd aberrant behaviors to lies etc..to body found etc...

I only wish she had of called "Interact" that day she called the Realtor..I am sure she would be alive today IF she had done that!!! :maddening:

I am certain Nancy never fathomed he would kill her...Boy was she mistaken:shakehead:

 

[SleuthyGal]

Brad saw everything as possessions.

HIS money

HIS cars

HIS house

HIS wife

HIS kids

They were there to be props in HIS life and he treated them (esp the kids) as such.

 

[Amster]

Is court over for the day?

 

[borndem]

Splitting up the kids, he takes one, she takes one. Splitting of the possessions.

Yeah, and remember, he needs one (at least) for a distraction. Oh yes, it's All About Brad, folks, All About Brad.

 

[LaLaw2000]

Correct. They were two different incidences. Cummings effed up again, failing to clarify the times to bring home the point that this was not only ONE incident.

Kinda off topic but not quite: I have just been hoping against hope that Cummings will NOT be the one doing the closing statements in this trial. Zellinger or A. Fitzhugh either one could wrap it up and bring it home to the jury.

MOO

 

[SleuthyGal]

Brad NEVER doubted his paternity of both kids. This was a RUMOR made up by a desperate defense team. Here are Brad's own words, under oath:

 

[SleuthyGal]

Kinda off topic but not quite: I have just been hoping against hope that Cummings will NOT be the one doing the closing statements in this trial. Zellinger or A. Fitzhugh either one could wrap it up and bring it home to the jury.

MOO

My hope is that both ADA Fitzhugh and Zellinger do closing. Fitzhugh on all the behavioral testimony, and Zellinger on all the science, tech and other stuff. Cummings must be left on the bench if they have a prayer of reaching this jury. IMHO.