What is considered CONTROLLING?

[EnvoyDriver61]

By my understanding of controlling, NC acted in that manner toward BC because she knew that spending was a means to really upset him.

Was she a controlling individual? No, I'd say not in the general sense of the term. As for BC, I don't know whether he would be considered controlling in the general sense of the term or if his high sense of self-worth and superiority to others made him just assume that whatever plan of action he deemed for a situation was just "better" than the average person.

Yes, we'd call that controlling; but, in his mind, no one measured up to him in any shape or form, so his decisions and actions on just about ANY matter, no matter whom it involved, was just superior be the mere fact HE thought of it.

 

[jmflu]

I don't think Nancy made herself susceptible to this treatment by overspending. This comes too close to blaming the victim IMO. No matter what she was like, HE did not have to be a controlling individual. One can be in control of the finances without coming across the way Brad did.

Also, whatever Nancy spent, she wasn't working, so even if she didn't spend a lot, she didn't have any money to save up. Keep in mind that Brad was very much into keeping up with the Jones, too.

 

[piedmont]

I don't think Nancy made herself susceptible to this treatment by overspending. This comes too close to blaming the victim IMO. No matter what she was like, HE did not have to be a controlling individual. One can be in control of the finances without coming across the way Brad did.

Also, whatever Nancy spent, she wasn't working, so even if she didn't spend a lot, she didn't have any money to save up. Keep in mind that Brad was very much into keeping up with the Jones, too.

I agree. I think BC was busy being BC and NC was busy being NC. They each have to take responsiblity for who they are.

I obviously enjoy analysing the psychological aspects of relationships, but it's possible none of this led to murder. I guess the big question is: is BC capable of turning violent? I think maybe he's not the violent type and his personality works to make him look guilty whether he is or not.

 

[EnvoyDriver61]

I think if BC did murder NC, it's got to be an enigma to him.

He would convince himself that someone made him snap and do something he hadn't done before: physically force someone to his will whereas he could always manipulate that person before.

Admitting that he "snapped" would be abhorant to him because it forces him to admit he lost control in a world he thought he controlled and on a person he thought he controlled.

 

[piedmont]

I think if BC did murder NC, it's got to be an enigma to him.

He would convince himself that someone made him snap and do something he hadn't done before: physically force someone to his will whereas he could always manipulate that person before.

Admitting that he "snapped" would be abhorant to him because it forces him to admit he lost control in a world he thought he controlled and on a person he thought he controlled.

I agree. It would be admitting she got the best of him. She "made" him lose control.

 

[jmflu]

I agree. It would be admitting she got the best of him. She "made" him lose control.

But would he say that? Would a controller say anyone could "make" him do anything?

 

[piedmont]

And actually that's his whole thing, right? Having alot of anger but keeping it controlled? Everybody seems to agree on that aspect of his personality.

 

[piedmont]

But would he say that? Would a controller say anyone could "make" him do anything?

In my experience, this personality type always blames the other person. Things are rarely their own doing. And they truly do think they're smarter and are oblivious to their obvious weaknesses.

 

[SleuthyGal]

I think most people are capable of killing someone if the incentive is big enough. Be that to save the life of a loved one or oneself, possibly even if angry enough. No, not everyone, but it's deep down in our DNA somewhere. The question is, did something incentivize Brad enough that he (was able to) cross that line? Be it rage or something he saw as a threat...did something push him over that edge? It sure happened (to someone) on the morning of 7/12.

 

[MCDRAW]

You can say a person is a controlling person whether they are successful at it or not!

For instance, say my spouse says he forbids me to go out tonight.

He hides the keys to the car from me.

Now, whether or not I find the keys and go anyway, or whether or not I am meeting another man or merely a friend for a cup of coffee... has not my spouse demonstrated that he can be controlling?

Yes, but if you go out anyway, Are you controlled?

 

[ncsu95]

If I am being totally honest - I think that the loss of control is what pissed bad off and eventually led to him killing her. I think he knew that eventually he'd be paying alimony and child support and that she'd probably end up back in Canada, possibly reigniting an old flame (while he's paying the bills) and having to scale WAY back on his lifestyle.
..

I want to say that this is actually a reasonable thought as to what happened. I have never said that Brad Cooper is innocent, although he may be. I have said that I haven't seen evidence of him killing her. Although, if he did, I would agree that this thought process is what led him to do it.

 

[ncsu95]

Pathological controlling would be the above-treating someone as less than what they are: another adult with a right to be shown respect as an adult who can make their own choices in life.

BC forcing NC to do her life very differently than she wanted would have felt awfully controlling to her. But she made herself susceptible to this treatment by overspending, agreeing to go to a different country where she couldn't legally work. She was her own worst enemy (as we all can be.)

I agree.

 

[ncsu95]

By my understanding of controlling, NC acted in that manner toward BC because she knew that spending was a means to really upset him.

Was she a controlling individual? No, I'd say not in the general sense of the term. As for BC, I don't know whether he would be considered controlling in the general sense of the term or if his high sense of self-worth and superiority to others made him just assume that whatever plan of action he deemed for a situation was just "better" than the average person.

Yes, we'd call that controlling; but, in his mind, no one measured up to him in any shape or form, so his decisions and actions on just about ANY matter, no matter whom it involved, was just superior be the mere fact HE thought of it.

That's probably pretty accurate.

 

[ncsu95]

I don't think Nancy made herself susceptible to this treatment by overspending. This comes too close to blaming the victim IMO. No matter what she was like, HE did not have to be a controlling individual. One can be in control of the finances without coming across the way Brad did.

Also, whatever Nancy spent, she wasn't working, so even if she didn't spend a lot, she didn't have any money to save up. Keep in mind that Brad was very much into keeping up with the Jones, too.

My wife is a stay at home mom, and she has just as much money as I do...because the money I have is hers as well. We follow the Dave Ramsey principles with regards to money and jointly determine how we are going to spend each and every dollar. Consequently, we haven't had a fight about money in nearly 3 years.

 

[piedmont]

I think most people are capable of killing someone if the incentive is big enough. Be that to save the life of a loved one or oneself, possibly even if angry enough. No, not everyone, but it's deep down in our DNA somewhere. The question is, did something incentivize Brad enough that he (was able to) cross that line? Be it rage or something he saw as a threat...did something push him over that edge? It sure happened (to someone) on the morning of 7/12.

Yes, and he may very well be guilty. I was just struck by someone who posted awhile back that , bad as things were, they were chugging along. WHAT changed things? WHAT would make this person go over the edge? Or another possibility is premeditated-but then again, would he have the persona
lity for premeditated murder? I'm thinking "no" to both, but I could be wrong.

If there was some other factor in her personal life-surely that would have come out by now-or maybe not?? It's tortuous not knowing who did this murder!

 

[RaleighNC]

My wife is a stay at home mom, and she has just as much money as I do...because the money I have is hers as well. We follow the Dave Ramsey principles with regards to money and jointly determine how we are going to spend each and every dollar. Consequently, we haven't had a fight about money in nearly 3 years.

GOOD FOR YOU!

Hubby and I don't fight about money (don't really fight period, but that's beside the point), but watching and reading those affi's and the video deposition - I am blown away about what these folks were doing to each other and to their futures all in the name of what appears to be keeping up appearances.

I cannot imagine the tension in that home - fights over money are THE WORST and then fester and they grow and it appears with the Coopers - it just got worse and worse and worse.

It was enough to make me almost physically ill.

They were BOTH mortgaging their futures, spending money they clearly didn't have, making poor financial decisions, all of this negatively impacting themselves AND THE CHILDREN.

Both the girls have college funds - with a couple hundred dollars in them. Brad was saving at a rate of about 4% a year for his 401K. He's not 20 - that rate needed to be more if that was supposed to support he and a wife in retirement.

Honestly - they were both grossly irresponsible. I might go so far as to say selfish.

I just can't imagine the ongoing and increasing tension in that house. I won't call Brad's "allowance" system controlling. SOMEONE had to set limits, and the allowance was more than reasonable. WITHHOLDING it, was a controlling behavior, but having a system to try to get themselves back on track was just trying to be an adult.

Again - this is all what made me say how sad this all is. and it all appears to be about money.

 

[hroark2112]

Just as a preface to my comments...I am NOT blaming the victim here.

BC's controlling behaviors are well documented here in this & other threads...I don't think the obvious bears repeating.

NC exhibited many behaviors that could be construed as controlling, or at the very least as "intentionally irritating" actions. The obvious one is one that most men will consider controlling, and that is withholding sex. That's a given, and it sounded like she was proud of that fact. Some of the others are not so obvious, but I'm inclined to think they were intentional.

Telling your family only the worst things your soon-to-be ex does is one such behavior. You're turning them against your ex intentionally...and getting "allies" on your side for the future fight. Exaggerating your stories to your friends to get them on your side falls into the same arena.

Constantly spending more than the budget allows is another. For whatever reason, she needed/wanted more money at times. He said no, or he gave her only the bare minimum.

Intentionally doing things that you know will annoy/irritate/anger your spouse. Again, I'm not blaming her for getting murdered. I do blame her for doing some of the things she did that she knew would bother him, like the high dollar paint to prepare the house for selling. She knew he'd be pissed off, and he was...but she did it anyway.

Constantly harping at your soon-to-be ex's faults. OK, BC is a slob. Lots of men are. I know I'm not the neatest guy around, anyone who walked in to my place knows a single guy lives here. It's not dirty, it's just cluttered. I'm fine with it. From what we know, she harped on him about things like that...to the point where it was bearing on his mind after her murder.

That's just a few of the things I see. You may disagree, but I think they both exhibited many signs of controlling behavior, and they both bore some culpability for the atmosphere in their home at the end of their relationship.

I could be wrong...I'm just a dumb single guy

 

[cygnusx1]

I think we are all getting to much into the semantics about control. I think they were both attempting to control each other. The question is more about abuse. Was BC abusive to NC or the kids? From what I've seen/heard. No.

Do we know at what point she was put on the allowance? I don't remember reading that anywhere. Also, it seems her father was complicit in the allowance as BC mentioned in his affidavit CC'ing GR by email whenever he gave NC her allowance.

 

[jmflu]

Yes, but if you go out anyway, Are you controlled?

As I've said, I don't think that is the point. One doesn't need to look at the victim of a controller to pinpoint that the controller is indeed the controller.

And anyway, this is one single item in a whole list of items and it would be tough to characterize an entire relationship based on one example. Just as it's tough to say if BC could have murdered NC based on on example without looking at the whole.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Yes, and he may very well be guilty. I was just struck by someone who posted awhile back that , bad as things were, they were chugging along. WHAT changed things? WHAT would make this person go over the edge? Or another possibility is premeditated-but then again, would he have the persona
lity for premeditated murder? I'm thinking "no" to both, but I could be wrong.

If there was some other factor in her personal life-surely that would have come out by now-or maybe not?? It's tortuous not knowing who did this murder!

Here's the thing: we'll never know exactly WHY. We could write page after page after page of possible theories as to why Brad did the deed (assuming he did it)... oh wait....that's already happened! :wink: :waitasec:

The point is, we'll never know. He's not going to tell us. I think the 'who' done it is likely to be known. One may never believe Brad did it (some people can't believe anything unless they see it with their own 2 eyes and have a videotape backup as well), but statistically-speaking, he is the likely perp, and that's not even considering the facts that are emerging and will continue to likely emerge as time goes on. He is not cleared and will probably not be cleared. But the 'why' will never be known unless the killer tells you why and he ain't talking.