WTH Are Brad's Lawyers Up To Now???? #2

[jumpstreet]

The ME/autopsy report (which is completely separate from any forensics testing done in the case) can take up to 90 days to complete. In some cases, it could potentially take longer, but that would be for a complicated case involving drugs/poisons, etc. Nancy's autopsy report may or may not be released to the public immediately upon its completion. If for some reason the report is 'sealed' by a judge and is not immediately released to the public then it will eventually be released when that seal is lifted (just like what happened with the SWs).

Thanks again SG. Sounds like, since the 90 day mark is just around the corner (week after next I think...), then it's reasonable to think the ME report in NC case might be either published... or released then sealed... in the very near term. Agree?

FWIW, my "guess" is that the ME report is in fact done, but the ME is sitting on it, perhaps at request of DA, for the time being, so the judge doesn't have to seal it, and then have to deal with those pesky lawyers from capital broadcasting. Sounds like the ME can sit on it for at least the "usual and customary" 90 days before folks may start asking questions regarding what's the hold-up.

Also my "guess" that the forensics are complete (realize they are unrelated to the ME report) is indeed just that, a "guess" too! (Hopefully I've always qualified it "mho" only when stating as much...)

 

[raisincharlie]

Thanks SG. Regarding the MY case... do you think the original collected forensics in the MY case have been completed yet... or is LE/DA still waiting on those initial results to come back also?

The DA has Michelle's case - as per usual doing due dilligence of the evidence. Once that is done the DA will either tell LE he wants more evidence or will proceed. No need for LE to turn over the case to the DA if all the forensic work is not complete.

 

[jumpstreet]

The DA has Michelle's case - as per usual doing due dilligence of the evidence. Once that is done the DA will either tell LE he wants more evidence or will proceed. No need for LE to turn over the case to the DA if all the forensic work is not complete.

Cool - thanks Raisin - good to know. So LE isn't actively working the MY case (at least they're not waiting on any initial forensic results), and this is based on knowing that the DA has the case. Is that right?

 

[raisincharlie]

Cool - thanks Raisin - good to know. So LE isn't actively working the MY case (at least they're not waiting on any initial forensic results), and this is based on knowing that the DA has the case. Is that right?

I seriously doubt that LE would submit, or the DA would accept, a case which did not include all data collected, analyzed, and completed. What would be the point ? There is no point. LE does not stop working a case because it has been submitted to the DA. The process continues for LE, they do not stop looking for more evidence. It will be two years on November 3, I have little doubt that all initial forensics are back. It has been 7 months since the last series of warrants were served, I have little doubt that anything that may have required testing collected under the February warrants has already been completed and submitted as well.

 

[jumpstreet]

I seriously doubt that LE would submit, or the DA would accept, a case which did not include all data collected, analyzed, and completed. What would be the point ? There is no point. LE does not stop working a case because it has been submitted to the DA. The process continues for LE, they do not stop looking for more evidence. It will be two years on November 3, I have little doubt that all initial forensics are back. It has been 7 months since the last series of warrants were served, I have little doubt that anything that may have required testing collected under the February warrants has already been completed and submitted as well.

Thanks RC... just learning here. Just wasn't sure what "the DA has the MY case" meant exactly (not following that case as closely). Is it an official "announced milestone" between DA and LE typically, with certain implications? Or, is is just your opinion that the ball is likely primarily in the DA's court in the MY case, based on the amount of time since the crime occurred, and the most recent SW's...

 

[fran]

I don't know how anyone can draw any conclusions without a cause and time of death. Wonder where that autopsy report is?

LE said it was a 'homicide.' I don't need a COD to come to MY conclusion and OPINION. This isn't rocket science.

IMHO, Brad killed Nancy. He either beat her to death or strangled her. The end is the same.

IMHO, ALL evidence that I know about, points to NO ONE else but Brad.



fran

 

[Topsail Girl]

Thanks RC... just learning here. Just wasn't sure what "the DA has the MY case" meant exactly (not following that case as closely). Is it an official "announced milestone" between DA and LE typically, with certain implications? Or, is is just your opinion that the ball is likely primarily in the DA's court in the MY case, based on the amount of time since the crime occurred, and the most recent SW's...

Jumpstreet I'm not RC but I can tell you from my personal conversation with Detective Spivey and Detective Blackwell, the DA does have Michelle's case. That being said though, does not in any way indicate that the detectives are done investigating. They still are whole heartedly investigating this case.

 

[raisincharlie]

Thanks RC... just learning here. Just wasn't sure what "the DA has the MY case" meant exactly (not following that case as closely). Is it an official "announced milestone" between DA and LE typically, with certain implications? Or, is is just your opinion that the ball is likely primarily in the DA's court in the MY case, based on the amount of time since the crime occurred, and the most recent SW's...

It is not an announced, as in a press release, milestone. I know in the MY case because I know.

 

[Shadow722]

LE said it was a 'homicide.' I don't need a COD to come to MY conclusion and OPINION. This isn't rocket science.

IMHO, Brad killed Nancy. He either beat her to death or strangled her. The end is the same.

IMHO, ALL evidence that I know about, points to NO ONE else but Brad.



fran

Fran,

If the COD is blunt force trauma or strangulation, then yes, all arrows point to Brad alone. But what if the COD is for example: Stuck by motor vehicle and body dumped; or she was shot; or she was stabbed; or well you get the point; yes, LE said it was homicide, but what kind is still to be released.

COD is important, and it will point to Brad or maybe not. Until the COD is released, painting Brad as the suspect is fun and speculative, nothing wrong with that. But speculation without a firm foundation (ie: COD) is just that, speculation not evidence. Nothing wrong with your conclusion or opinion, but without COD, it is a trifle premature, IMHO.

That said, all the available evidence released at this point does favor Brad as the perp, and I will not be surprised if he is arrested and if so found guilty. And if guilty he should burn.

Please note I am not challenging your conclusions or opinion, you may indeed be right, but until you know COD, you also may well be wrong.

Shadow

 

[jumpstreet]

It is not an announced, as in a press release, milestone. I know in the MY case because I know.

Sounds good - thanks RC and TG! It makes sense to me now, and given this, I agree it seems reasonable to think the (initial) forensics in that case are no doubt complete.

Side bar: If you happen to find out a similar milestone has occurred in the NC case, feel free to relay that too

Thanks again!

 

[SleuthyGal]

Thanks again SG. Sounds like, since the 90 day mark is just around the corner (week after next I think...), then it's reasonable to think the ME report in NC case might be either published... or released then sealed... in the very near term. Agree?

I have no idea. However, you can call the ME's office and request info and ask if this has been completed yet. And, you can even go to that office when the report is complete/released and request to look at the report, with an explanation and once their permission has been granted.

 

[Topsail Girl]

O/T - if anyone is following the missing woman Kelly Morris - some search warrants have been released and it looks as if hubby and daddy might be in cahoots somewhat. I posted a link in her thread.

 

[jumpstreet]

However, you can call the ME's office and request info and ask if this has been completed yet. And, you can even go to that office when the report is complete/released and request to look at the report, with an explanation and once their permission has been granted.

Looks like the autopsy in the Wynn case has been release now (posted on WRAL here).

Not that the turnaround time on the Wynn case means anything to the NC case necessarily (all autopsy and related paperwork aren't necessarily the "same"), but the Wynn crime occurred over 110 days ago, and about 5 weeks prior to NC.

[ So will wait at least another month or 2 before ringing the ME's phone on the NC results... ]

 

[raisincharlie]

Looks like the autopsy in the Wynn case has been release now (posted on WRAL here).

Not that the turnaround time on the Wynn case means anything to the NC case necessarily (all autopsy and related paperwork aren't necessarily the "same"), but the Wynn crime occurred over 110 days ago, and about 5 weeks prior to NC.

[ So will wait at least another month or 2 before ringing the ME's phone on the NC results... ]

June 8th - 3.5 months. Looks to me the ME's office has been extremely busy there in Chapel Hill. Seems to be quite a run on murder over the summer. Just about 7 weeks up since Nancy was murdered, may be a while before we hear anything. But as you can see from the link you posted, not much will be learned other than COD. Not sure that really means much actually, we already know she was murdered.

ETA - if I hear I will say.

 

[SleuthyGal]

I think some folks believe, even though the CPD said it wasn't 'random,' that she may have been hit by a car, or shot, or stabbed or something that would leave a lot of blood evidence or show something more random, despite what the authorities have said thus far. And there may be some who still believe it's a heart attack or stroke or something due to natural causes, again despite what was announced, and they will not believe anything they're told until they see the written autopsy report for themselves.

If we learn COD was strangulation or BFT (blunt force trauma) or some combo, as you said earlier, does that really assuage any doubts? BTW for those who don't know this, both BFT and strangulation can be 'bloodless' crimes. (cf. JonBenet Ramsey who had an 8.5" BFT/skull fracture in which the bleeding from the injury was internal and not apparent until autopsy, in addition to the visible strangulation/garrote.)

 

[jumpstreet]

I think some folks believe, even though the CPD said it wasn't 'random,' that she may have been hit by a car, or shot, or stabbed or something that would leave a lot of blood evidence or show something more random, despite what the authorities have said thus far

Are these COD's necessarily incompatible with the statement that it 'wasn't random'? [Ref Theory B]. If not, and the ME's report lists these as COD, then it's certainly 'of interest' information, and, while it wouldn't prove anything, might serve paint some doubts on the 'conventional theory' (BC did it in the house).

If we learn COD was strangulation or BFT (blunt force trauma) or some combo, as you said earlier, does that really assuage any doubts? BTW for those who don't know this, both BFT and strangulation can be 'bloodless'

It also wouldn't prove anything either way - you're right. Just curious though - is a bloodless BFT more common, or less common than a bloody one?

Regardless, it still seems to me that COD would be an 'of value' datapoint to have given the vast amount of things we don't know about the case. It could very well be significant... or insignificant... but until we find out what it is, we won't know.

Are you thinking that regardless of what COD is, there's zero chance it will change any of your current opinions of the case? [ Fair if so... just asking... ]

 

[raisincharlie]

I think some folks believe, even though the CPD said it wasn't 'random,' that she may have been hit by a car, or shot, or stabbed or something that would leave a lot of blood evidence or show something more random, despite what the authorities have said thus far. And there may be some who still believe it's a heart attack or stroke or something due to natural causes, again despite what was announced, and they will not believe anything they're told until they see the written autopsy report for themselves.

If we learn COD was strangulation or BFT (blunt force trauma) or some combo, as you said earlier, does that really assuage any doubts? BTW for those who don't know this, both BFT and strangulation can be 'bloodless' crimes. (cf. JonBenet Ramsey who had an 8.5" BFT/skull fracture in which the bleeding from the injury was internal and not apparent until autopsy, in addition to the visible strangulation/garrote.)

Brad boy sure did a lot of cleaning, enough to think this crime was either bloody or some bodily fluid was present upon completion of the murder. After all, he admits in his amended affidavit that he had cleaned the house the week before so Nancy wouldn't come home to a mess (right). The removal of the rug indicates to me there was some forensic reason to do so.

I don't see how COD will relieve any suspicion or create anymore. It might however generate a more emotional response. I don't see how COD has anything to do with random versus non-random unless we are talking serial killer, which in Nancy's case, we are not.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Jump, with your interest in and lots of questions about the medical examiner's office, how autopsies are done, how quickly they get done, how they determine COD/manner of death and why they show certain things but not other things, etc, etc, I encourage you to find your local coroner/medical examiner and have a discussion with him/her. We're all just armchair amateurs/observers here and can only make certain assumptions based on our (limited) knowledge.

You show a real passion/interest in the pathology stuff...I think you should definitely talk to a M.E. where you can ask all these questions and more and actually get answers rather than one of our opinions.

 

[jumpstreet]

I don't see how COD will relieve any suspicion or create anymore.

Hmmm...I guess for me, if COD ends up being strangulation (with likely little change of associated forensics), it certainly would not reduce my odds of Theory A. OTOH, if gunshot, or multiple gunshots, it probably would somewhat. [ Wouldn't eliminate it of course, but just based on what I know... it would reduce it's likelihood somewhat, in my view ]

So, you're saying, regardless of COD, you can't imagine a scenario, where it would change view at all of the likely root cause? [ Fine if so... just asking ]

 

[SleuthyGal]

Brad boy sure did a lot of cleaning, enough to think this crime was either bloody or some bodily fluid was present upon completion of the murder. After all, he admits in his amended affidavit that he had cleaned the house the week before so Nancy wouldn't come home to a mess (right). The removal of the rug indicates to me there was some forensic reason to do so.

Very true and good point! Of course there are others who don't find it odd at all that he spent 4+ hrs cleaning that morning and are unable (or unwilling) to correlate it with the possibility of a crime scene cleanup. I've always wondered why the house had to be scrubbed clean five days after Brad said he cleaned it and then Nancy came home to a 'mess' and cleaned it. Do your houses become pigstys in five days, necessitating scrubbing of floors, etc? Other than some dust, mine does not. Cluttered, sometimes yes. Dirty all over in 5 days? No.