April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness

[otto]

A friend that I have never discussed this case with posted this on my facebook page yesterday:

Gasp - sudden epiphany - you're ncsu95!!!

Must have been the interview!

 

[GhostCrab]

My understanding is that it was a draft of an agreement for Nancy's eyes. Had she signed anything to be presented to him? She would have the ability, with AS as her attorney, to veto items in the draft or add to it. Had she had a chance to do that before her husband saw it?

I don't have a cite to who gave B the SA when but if you go back to AS's testimony she tries to play down that this was even an aggressive first offering. Based purely on my recollection it seems that during her testimony that everyone was going with the supposition that he had legitimately received it in April from AS and that was when so much changed, N's plans to leave, etc.

 

[RaleighNative]

What was the child upset about? Isn't it true that young children decide that when a parent is on the phone, it's a good time to demand attention? I can't recall a phone call with a mother of young children that did not have an awful lot of noise and activity in the background - everything from laughing to crying, minor incidents of injury that were extremely important, spats between siblings and so on. In fact, I've spoken to moms of young children and asked why it is so quiet, and the answer is usually "I'm hiding in the bathroom".

KL testified that she spoke with NC and the child every morning on their way to preschool. She testified NC was upset and the child was crying over BC following her to preschool and upsetting Mommy.

KL testified she spoke directly to both NC and the child during the time, which is why I found her refreshing after so many witnesses for the pros testifying to what I consider gossip.

As the parent of young children, I'd give her testimony credence given KL was well aware of the rountine and the state of NC and the child during daily calls.

Do I think that means BC is guilty? Absolutely not.

 

[Bottle Cap]

There is just way too much speculation in this. You are making assumption after assumption. And for me it comes down to what do I need in terms of evidence to send this man to prison for the rest of his life and speculation such as this doesn't do it for me.

Yeah, it's an assumption. Based on his previous willingness to let Nancy and the girls leave, and then changing his mind. Right around the time he saw the separation agreement IIRC. Am I off on my timeline?

 

[GhostCrab]

A friend that I have never discussed this case with posted this on my facebook page yesterday:

Gasp - sudden epiphany - you're ncsu95!!!

ack!!!

 

[LyndyLoo]

My understanding is that it was a draft of an agreement for Nancy's eyes. Had she signed anything to be presented to him? She would have the ability, with AS as her attorney, to veto items in the draft or add to it. Had she had a chance to do that before her husband saw it?

Of course not Bottle Cap...She had little or no communications with AS after that point....as there was no further negotiations as Brad had no lawyer and never did get one that I know of...Nancy had to have been given that lawyer/firms name by Brad..otherwise how would AS even know to send them a copy..She testified she would never sent Brad a copy of the initial draft and it was for nancy's eyes only.

I felt so bad for AS..I do think she feels very guilty for her advice to stay in that house??..

 

[otto]

KL testified that she spoke with NC and the child every morning on their way to preschool. She testified NC was upset and the child was crying over BC following her to preschool and upsetting Mommy.

KL testified she spoke directly to both NC and the child during the time, which is why I found her refreshing after so many witnesses for the pros testifying to what I consider gossip.

As the parent of young children, I'd give her testimony credence given KL was well aware of the rountine and the state of NC and the child during daily calls.

Do I think that means BC is guilty? Absolutely not.

If the child had been told "isn't this exciting, dad wants to learn more about your school", the child would not have been upset. Seems to me that the parents said something that upset the child, something that should not have been said. That drama was then shared with anyone that would listen.

 

[Bottle Cap]

That always happens in divorce, but negotiations transform that "wish list" into reality.

Right, and there were not any negotiations because Brad decided that they were going to work on their marriage. Motivation for working on marriage: love or money?

 

[GhostCrab]

Someone tell me what IIRC means.

 

[Bottle Cap]

if I recall correctly

 

[Bottle Cap]

Right, and there were not any negotiations because Brad decided that they were going to work on their marriage. Motivation for working on marriage: love or money?

Quoting my own self again, sorry. Should have said, Brad decided unilaterally that they were gonna work on their marriage. Motivation = the numbers in the sep agreement that he never should have seen anyhow. Cyber-stalking her was how he was keeping a step ahead of her. Haven't seen any evidence that NC was monitoring his communications to obtain divorce ammo.

 

[otto]

Right, and there were not any negotiations because Brad decided that they were going to work on their marriage. Motivation for working on marriage: love or money?

They were both unfaithful in the marriage, with Nancy making the first mistake. An affair was not a reason for divorce since that was common in their marriage. I don't know what they were planning in the marriage, but it's not unusual for there to be a lot of back and forth while the plans are sorted out - that much is obvious since divorce with children and property normally takes 2-2.5 years.

The marriage seems to have been a love/hate relationship. There was no intimacy for 2 years, so they were living like roommates with children. Throughout that 2 year period, Nancy had no limitations put on her spending or lifestyle. Was Nancy in the marriage for love or money, and after leaving the country, what did she still want? What did Brad want? Who knows.

 

[otto]

Quoting my own self again, sorry. Should have said, Brad decided unilaterally that they were gonna work on their marriage. Motivation = the numbers in the sep agreement that he never should have seen anyhow. Cyber-stalking her was how he was keeping a step ahead of her. Haven't seen any evidence that NC was monitoring his communications to obtain divorce ammo.

Nancy had the entire neighborhood gang as her ammo.

 

[SleuthSayer]

It doesn't show up on wakegov.com, but it does show up in a google map search as being in Cary. I'm confused.

There is a Greenstone Ln in Cary, but there is no 178. The addresses go from 103 to 119.

 

[calgary123]

What I'm alleging is that BC saw a purloined copy of a separation agreement, and the numbers rocked him.

This is my theory too. Also note that though he saw it he did not go hire an attorney to negotiate for him. Instead he hatched and executed a plan to settle out of court.

 

[zenreaper]

New to the site, and I do have to say, as compared to other sites I frequent, this one does seem to remain fairly balanced and calm (although I am sure that is not always the case, LOL). I have read the rules, and will try to post in that manner, I “pre apologize” for any mistakes.

I was first directed to this case in 2008, surprisingly, not from the news accounts, but from the custody battle. I will say upfront, that I am a father’s rights activist and frequent many boards that deal with that topic. This case, at least the custody portion of it, was a father’s nightmare, and that is what led me to research it further. To have your children removed, in the manner that they were removed (Ex Parte motion, fooled into bringing them to a location, etc) is horrific. I felt for Mr. Cooper at that time. The complete and utter lack of physical evidence in the case led me to feel so much pity for Mr. Cooper, I wrote a letter to him, and sent it to the law office, offering my support, especially in the overwhelming barrage of “We know he did it!” stories that were coming in through the media.

Having said that, I that, I think there are a few questions on here that can be answered when you look at them from a FAMILY COURT perspective, as opposed to a CRIMINAL COURT perspective. On a side note, I CAPITALIZE some things for emphasis, not YELLING. It’s the way I type, I apologize in advance.

There is a saying in family court that marriage is about love and commitment, but divorce is ALL BUSINESS. Using that POV, here are some reasons why certain things happened the way they did, IMO:

1. Why did NC seem to be in a “rush” to contact the realtor and get back to Canada after the separation agreement was refused?

In divorce proceedings, in is common knowledge that who files first does best. Had BC filed for divorce, the FIRST thing his lawyer would have filed was a RO or “restraining order” mandating that NO funds be used for other than normal expenses, and that the parties to the divorce and custody trial be barred from leaving the state. In other words, if he filed, she is stuck in the states for the remainder of the divorce. If she can get her and the kids back to Canada, she can make a case for filing there.

2. If NC was having an affair, why didn’t she tell her friends, with whom she shared all of her OTHER family secrets?

Well, she had consulted an attorney. She wasn’t stupid. She was going for sole custody and alimony. Now Family Court has rules of evidence that are not nearly as high as criminal court. What “details” DID she tell her friends? Did she mention that they took out a second mortgage to pay for her spending habits? Did she tell them she had spent them almost into bankruptcy? Nope, she told those things that made BC look bad. Now, it would be hard for her to complain to her friends about BC’s affair, and in the same breath, say SHE had an affair, or was having an affair, right?

One other issue, which seems to be the nail in the coffin to some, is the Google search of the body dump site. I was questioning that as well. I REALLY could not figure it out. I don’t think anyone planted anything on his computer, as if you WERE going to plant something, it would be FAR more incriminating. It was only in doing a Google map search of my own home that I realized it could have been something as simple as a mistake. Let me explain.

How many here have looked at the satellite photos of their home on Google? I have. How do you do it? Well, you go to Google maps, type in your address, and it goes there. Well, it ALMOST goes there. Because all municipalities and areas use different numbering systems, let be honest, anyone who has done this, it gets you CLOSE to your house, and you use visual landmarks to find it exactly.
So, picture this scenario, and tell me if it sounds plausible.

NC gives him the separation agreement or he reads it in her intercepted Emails (not as nefarious as it sounds, divorce is war; you take your “intelligence” where you can get it. Not “right”, but still). She is planning on taking the kids to Canada. He will get hit with a child support and alimony payment based on his current salary, which he cannot make in Canada, so he is stuck either living in a box in Canada, or not seeing his kids. So he talks to guys at work, ones who have been through divorce and they tell him he needs to make a case for keeping the kids here, so he looks to bring up a satellite view of his home, with the surrounding schools, parks, playgrounds, etc etc. But Google takes him to the wrong address. He zooms in, realizes he is NOT at his house, and stops the search. Now was it a coincidence that he ended up at the place where his wife ended up being dumped? Yes. All of those developments look the same from the GROUND; imagine how they look from space? Did it happen that way? Not sure, but it is AT LEAST a plausible explanation.

Of course, that does not explain the issue with the time stamps on the internet cache...

 

[otto]

Thisnis my theory too. Also note that though he saw it he did not go hire an attorney to negotiate for him. Instead he hatched and executed a plan to settle out of court.

Why do you think he wouldn't have viewed it as the first stage in the divorce negotiation? Surely he would have met people that were divorced, and had some understanding of the long, drawn out process of compromise that every divorced person has settled for. Divorce is about compromise where no one gets what they want.

 

[zenreaper]

Why do you think he wouldn't have viewed it as the first stage in the divorce negotiation? Surely he would have met people that were divorced, and had some understanding of the long, drawn out process of compromise that every divorced person has settled for. Divorce is about compromise where no one gets what they want.

If he met those people, he would also be told that women win custody battles 85% of the time, especially if they are stay at home parents. They are also usually granted "move aways".

 

[sunshine05]

If the child had been told "isn't this exciting, dad wants to learn more about your school", the child would not have been upset. Seems to me that the parents said something that upset the child, something that should not have been said. That drama was then shared with anyone that would listen.

Plus, one of my kids has always been pretty clingy with me. Even now at age 6, he prefers for me to drive him to school and when he was younger, maybe he would have even cried/fussed about it. Some kids really like routines so I don't think it's a huge deal that she was crying over who would take her to school. It doesn't mean she was afraid of her dad or anything like that.

 

[less0305]

Thisnis my theory too. Also note that though he saw it he did not go hire an attorney to negotiate for him. Instead he hatched and executed a plan to settle out of court.

Exactly! He wasn't about to give up control of his wallet and plans to the State of N.C. He wanted all the control and when he found out Nancy had enough of a backbone and brain to contact an attorney - a good one at that - he took matters into his own hands. Remember, he had taken away all avenues for her to seek legal advice - or so he thought. Mom and Dad came through one more time and I think he realized he wasn't going to be fighting just Nancy in court - nope, he was going to be fighting Nancy, Mom, Dad, Sis, friends, an attorney, and the State. I think he saw the scales tipped a little too far to one side and came up with a brand new plan - a permanent trip for Nancy.