I do not agree with this opinion. Probably one of the most compeling witnesses of the NC crowd who seemed to have the most veracity with both sides posting on WS was Dr. Theresa Hackeling. Her affidavit is among the most compelling.
Dr. Hackeling states that NC told her that she N was afraid of BC. That's why she had been sleeping in the girls' room. Dr. Hackeling refers to BC as having a narcissistic personality, being selfish, and demeaning of NC. She says that prior to his attempt to change his relationship after their decision to divorce (really a goofy concept, IMO) he had little time for the girls or NC. BC went on several European trips other than infamous French Connection and did not contact his wife during any of these trips.
It's starts on p. 37 in the following link. As a side note, Dr. H is a graduate of Harvard and was awarded the Harvard-Radcliffe Women's Foundation award for soccer.
She states that her husband tried to establish a relationship with BC as NC and his wife were becoming very close friends. He told his wife after each time that he couldn't create any kind of connection/friendship with BC.
http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/07/23/3258895/1216912148-Plaintiff_affidavits2.pdf
The other affidavits on the site discuss the well known issues. The truth is simple. BC was controlling and was enraged that he couldn't get his "wife" to obey him.
Okay, this is a PERFECT example of what I am talking about. To begin with, her title of "Dr." means NOTHING, because if she WAS testifying as a "professional, she couldn't talk about what her and NC talked about. Second, many of the things listed in the affidavit are PATENTLY false, which indicates that she was not getting a TRUE account of what was going on in the household. Let me go number by number:
1, 2 and 3 are just statements about the doctor. But in number three, she states her PROFESSIONAL opinion about a MENTAL disorder, after NOT EVER speaking with BC on a professional level.
4. States he didn;t call for a dinner party cancellation (unknown) and that it was told to her that he would got away for WEEKS at a time for work and NEVER call. But we KNOW he called her, we have the phone records.
5. BC lied about the affair. Okay, yes, he did. But in order to remain CONSTANT, and provide a FAIR "standard", both were guilty of lying about an affair (NOT bashing NC, simply stating a fact).
6. SHe was told BC called NC a "dumb {blank}". Again, NO witnesses, just second hand info.
7. "stole the passports". How do you steal something you OWN? And we know NC kept the passports locked in the car. Wasn't she doing the same thing? Again, NOT bashing NC, just holding her to the same standard. If SHE didn't "steal" the passports, neither did he.
8. BC was a loner. SO WHAT?
9. "took her off the credit cards and refused to give her money for gas or food" we KNOW this is false.
10. "School crying" issue. NOT uncommon for youngsters to get upset, and someone has to take the kid to school. BC relented and let NC drive her, then HE carried her in. All three of mine cried at the beginning of school, its NORMAL. Yet this "doctor" sees something ominous in it.
11. House in shambles when she got back from vaca. Okay, so he wasn't the greatest housekeeper. Again, means NOTHING.
12, 13 and 14, personal opinion, based SOLELY on the words of NC.
Now, I HOPE I do not get banned for the above. I am NOT bashing NC, she did what MOST couples do in a pending divorce situation, she started to draw in a circle of friends. Nothing wrong with that, but NOTHING listed above indicates ANYTHING out of the ordinary.