- Joined
- Jan 17, 2004
- Messages
- 42,949
- Reaction score
- 127,174
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!
A friend that I have never discussed this case with posted this on my facebook page yesterday:
Gasp - sudden epiphany - you're ncsu95!!!
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?
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".
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.
A friend that I have never discussed this case with posted this on my facebook page yesterday:
Gasp - sudden epiphany - you're ncsu95!!!
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?
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.![]()
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?
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.
There is a Greenstone Ln in Cary, but there is no 178. The addresses go from 103 to 119.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.
What I'm alleging is that BC saw a purloined copy of a separation agreement, and the numbers rocked him.
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.
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.
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.