The "Affair"

[Tink56]

I totally agree. I asked before, what is a "non sexual" extramarital relationship? I think you call that a friend. It happened one time. Maybe she had lunch with her friend once? In reality, this was probably just a red herring thrown out at the behest of BC's lawyer. Irrefutable due to the "no one knew his name". Ridiculous.

I have 3 children of my own and the idea that Nancy - who by all accounts had the children 99% of the time - was carrying on an affair in the midst of all of that is very hard to imagine.

:clap: Right on! My husband and I used to laugh when we talked about someone we knew who was "having an affair."

Where did they find the time and energy while tending to the needs of small and not-so-small children?! IMO, the idea that Nancy was seeing someone else is "silly."

 

[boxy]

[/COLOR]

:clap: Right on! My husband and I used to laugh when we talked about someone we knew who was "having an affair."

Where did they find the time and energy while tending to the needs of small and not-so-small children?! IMO, the idea that Nancy was seeing someone else is "silly."

It's difficult to understand what Brad meant by his description of NC's indiscretion. Literally, it could have been flirting, or perhaps physical contact (kissing, etc.) short of sexual contact. Another possibility is an online affair or cybersex. Brad will have to expound if he has the chance.

 

[boxy]

[/COLOR]

:clap: Right on! My husband and I used to laugh when we talked about someone we knew who was "having an affair."

Where did they find the time and energy while tending to the needs of small and not-so-small children?! IMO, the idea that Nancy was seeing someone else is "silly."

Brad said it happened before children. Plus, the children were in preschool at the time of her death. I understand how much time and energy children require, still a lot of people do have affairs.

 

[Tink56]

It's difficult to understand what Brad meant by his description of NC's indiscretion. Literally, it could have been flirting, or perhaps physical contact (kissing, etc.) short of sexual contact. Another possibility is an online affair or cybersex. Brad will have to expound if he has the chance.

I, personally, would like to hear Brad explain this further. I wonder if he is not amplifying a flirtation. His entire affidavit seemed to be a justification for his own behaviors.

We'll probably hear more about this "affair" if Brad is charged with Nancy's murder.

 

[carolinalady]

I, personally, would like to hear Brad explain this further. I wonder if he is not amplifying a flirtation. His entire affidavit seemed to be a justification for his own behaviors.

We'll probably hear more about this "affair" if Brad is charged with Nancy's murder.

I would doubt we'll hear anymore from Brad if he is charged (assuming his attorney would tell him to keep his mouth shut).

 

[Tink56]

I would doubt we'll hear anymore from Brad if he is charged (assuming his attorney would tell him to keep his mouth shut).

Agreed.

 

[SusieClue]

Brad said it happened before children. Plus, the children were in preschool at the time of her death. I understand how much time and energy children require, still a lot of people do have affairs.

Very true. Maybe I should amend this to say that what with all of the time she spent with her very large group of BFFs, I don't see how she had time for an affair.

 

[Bob&Bob]

They don't take that long.

 

[boxy]

They don't take that long.

Experience? :waitasec:

 

[fran]

I, personally, would like to hear Brad explain this further. I wonder if he is not amplifying a flirtation. His entire affidavit seemed to be a justification for his own behaviors.

We'll probably hear more about this "affair" if Brad is charged with Nancy's murder.

To be honest, IMO, IF Brad is charged, I doubt we'll ever hear anything more about this affair. Oh, they MAY tout it in the opening statement, but nothing else will come of it.

I do not believe 1/2 of what he had on that affidavit is the truth. Of course it was supposed to be (like with penalty of purjury), but IF he's charged, does he care he lied under oath? Ehh......no.

We saw this same type of stuff during the Peterson trial. Big promises of things to come by the defense. Yet, when it was the defense' turn to present this exonorating evidence, 1/2 said during the opening never materialized. No witnesses at the marina that talked to the suspect, no witnesses that saw the victim that morning, and there was more, but you get my point.

It was a sign of desparation, all of that garbage spewed in those affidavits. Desparate people do desparate things.

Question: What person in their right mind would admit to an affair, that happend one time, years prior, there was NO sex, and wonder of wonders :waitasec:........no one knows his name? gimme a break!

Sorry, THAT statement has :liar: written all over it like it was advertised for a 'blue light special.' It's truly THE most ridiculous statement I've ever heard a NOT supsect make.

JMHO
fran

 

[fran]

I'm thinking that Brad put that out there to deflect. Connvenient that he says no one knew his name - there are numerous affidavits, some with a lot of information which he probably didn't think someone knew either. It happened only once according to Brad, it wasn't sexual - wth ? For some reason I get the feeling this was one of those in your face comments. I could well be wrong but that is what I think of this comment. And from the "talk" it seems Brad achieved exactly what he wanted - people thinking there is someone else and therefore someone else who could have reason to murder Nancy.

LOL, I just now recalled that during the Laci Peterson search and during the trial of her husband for her murder, he made many 'implications' that Laci had had an affair, and that possibly Conner was NOT 'his' child. I recall that the first thing LE said after announcing the identity of the mother found on the shores of the Bay was in fact Laci, that the infant found, WAS Laci's child Conner, and he WAS Scott Peterson's biological child.

See,.........I can't believe I FORGOT that little tidbit of the Laci Peterson case, he ALSO implied his sweet dead wife had cheated on him.

Seriously, is this an actual 'mold?' script, word for word? or is it just part of a personality disorder?

Whatever it is, it's transparent!

JMHO
fran

 

[raisincharlie]

LOL, I just now recalled that during the Laci Peterson search and during the trial of her husband for her murder, he made many 'implications' that Laci had had an affair, and that possibly Conner was NOT 'his' child. I recall that the first thing LE said after announcing the identity of the mother found on the shores of the Bay was in fact Laci, that the infant found, WAS Laci's child Conner, and he WAS Scott Peterson's biological child.

See,.........I can't believe I FORGOT that little tidbit of the Laci Peterson case, he ALSO implied his sweet dead wife had cheated on him.

Seriously, is this an actual 'mold?' script, word for word? or is it just part of a personality disorder?

Whatever it is, it's transparent!

JMHO
fran

Its always easy to blame someone who can no longer defend themselves.

 

[fran]

Its always easy to blame someone who can no longer defend themselves.

EXACTLY charlie.

That's why WE are here. The voice for those silenced.


fran

 

[SusieClue]

They don't take that long.

Gee, that sounds lovely.

 

[Bob&Bob]

It was ok.

Nothing to write home about.

 

[Tink56]

It was ok.

Nothing to write home about.

If all of your efforts in life are as abbreviated as your verbiage, I'm sure it wasn't.

 

[Bob&Bob]

If all of your efforts in life are as abbreviated as your verbiage, I'm sure it wasn't.

I thought I wasn't supposed to say very much????

 

[Tink56]

i thought i wasn't supposed to say very much????

when?

 

[Bob&Bob]

when?

All the time

 

[2Daughters1Dog]

Very true. Maybe I should amend this to say that what with all of the time she spent with her very large group of BFFs, I don't see how she had time for an affair.

change it to whatever fits the theory.