April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness

[jmflu]

The defense sent out something like 240 subpoenas. Seriously, is there anyone who didn't get one? I think people's cousins, pets, and inlaws got them too.

And ain't it interesting that we know some of the posters who have been adamantly pro-BC do have that bias we have been wondering about all along!

 

[GhostCrab]

And ain't it interesting that we know some of the posters who have been adamantly pro-BC do have that bias we have been wondering about all along!

I for one am not pro BC. I am interested in the legitimacy of the justice system, but I am definitely not interested in some sort of modern day witch hunt.

 

[LyndyLoo]

I have been reviewing posts here and testimony from that past few weeks..I have too many questions but the highlights for me cover a rather large time=span and events... Please indulge me..TYIA

1) I cannot figure out just what Brad did for almost two hours after he bought that "Drop Shet" July 11th, 2008 and didnt arrive to work until almost 1130AM..What the heck was he doing..???
2) Connecting possibility of planted Google Map search on Cisco laptop for 115PM...It seems to me this would have to have been done in a very narrow timeframe..Before power down on July 16th...So it had to have been someone who knew where she found, and plant this specific search on the computer after the fact, and before July 16th??..
3) IF Nancy had indeed had an ongoing Relationship..All phone logs have been obtained from providers..so maybe not texts but all ###'s right?. I am sure all those people connected with those ### were contacted and either had alibi's or were no where near the scene
4)Brad unwillingness to call police when Nancy's friend called him to report she didnt turn up to her place as expected at 8AM?? He told that person she went jogging at 7AM with possibly CC.. IF he intended to go to his tennis planned outing..why would he not be wondering too??
5)Brad calls JA back at 1PM July 12th to ask IF she had heard from Nancy?...That in of itself sounds wonky..then when he gets call from Police..he doesnt return their call..and I am sure they left a message?/
6) What the heck did he feel was more important to do from 9AM that morning until 1PM that day?
7) Why would Brad be in possession of Nancy's Cell, Computer and Car keys when Nancy had spent months trying to protect her "Stuff" from his snooping?
8)Nancy wasnt even identified until July 15th, House was secure evening of same date..so unless the real killer had background snooping abilities on Brad's computer, and was able to plant that Google map..why wouldnt he or she have planted a whole host of other incriminating items??
9) Last but not least, why would Nancy's friends, or boyfriend for that matter want to kill Nancy and leave Brad with the kids?..Who really benefits? Certainly NOT a boyfriend, certainly NOT her friends, certainly NOT Nancy?


Of course some wish to opine that some Hispanic aliens had the expertise to do this..BUT the "Elephant in the Courtroom" is that Brad had the knowledge, expertise, equipment availability to do just what I believe he did!!:twocents:

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

You keep repeating this, but again, how do you know they didn't consider a possibility that someone other than BC may have killed NC? Is it because they didn't tell you?

What this says is that people need the perception of the cops looking at several other people, even if no evidence exists to lead them in that direction. This is about feelings of depth and breadth of investigation, but not about the reality of what information CPD was working with.

Unless you were part of the investigation, I don't think you can say who all the CPD looked at or not.

I keep repeating this because after 2 days of finding the body a press conference was held stating the this was not a random act of violence. During those 2 days the CDP didn't even follow up with the eyewitnesses that claimed to have seen NC running.
But - if you know that the CPD did follow up on other leads, would you please mind sharing with me who they were? They did not give me the honor of including me in their half-* investigation.
How could they so quickly say that this was not a random violent act when they obviously had no concrete evidence at that point (nor now) that BC strangled NC to death.
Cops need not look at several people, but do owe the public the decency of conducting a thorough investigation before announcing that all residents in this area are safe,( because they had already pinpointed the crime on BC.). In speaking for myself, I was began running with my dog immediately after NC went missing, because I was not (and am still not) convinced that this could not have been a random act of violence

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

If they shared the defense list with you....do you want to tell us anything else they have shared?

I never said they shared the defense list. However I do know of 2 people that had previously testified that have been subpeoned by the defense. That is all. No more. And I know one of these people personally (our kids have played together). I am not going to miss that day on the live feed

 

[ncsu95]

Originally Posted by Wyn
Didn't he tell her he had looked at possible job openings in France? She was looking at job openings here? I think the jury may feel it makes a difference.




You know, this reminds me of years ago, the Laci Peterson case. I was posting on a different crime group then. And early on, I posted that I thought we'd come to find out scott peterson was a *player*. this was well before amber came to light. RStJ, another prolific poster there, disagreed vehemently with my opinion. we went back and forth, and then amber showed, and the girlfriend scott had the first year of his marriage, and a number of other women in various cities he visited on his trav eling salesman job. I think Brad was a player too. Yeah, I think Nancy probably did have a couple emotional affairs, but for nancy, I think she was looking for something she wasn't getting at home. Not sex as much as a connection, an emotional connection to meet her emotional needs. Deep down inside she was v ery lonely in her marriage. MO

Scott was in an active affair with Amber. NC and BC were in the process of divorcing. It's not the same situation.

 

[jmflu]

I for one am not pro BC. I am interested in the legitimacy of the justice system, but I am definitely not interested in some sort of modern day witch hunt.

Good to know! But I do not count you in the "adamantly pro-BC list." That is a very short list and IMO might even be several posters equalling one person. Take a look around and see which people are not even able to CONSIDER Brad Cooper having murdered his wife. See which ones have taken a hack at every innocent person along the way. Those of us who are certain in Brad's guilt got here because of a lot of circumstancial evidence that these people do not even acknowledge EXIST. They point out lies in every scenario but have not said one word about Brad's lies. They go around and around in circles trying to convince us, almost desperately, that Brad is innocent. Now who might those people actually be?

 

[Lori59]

I never said they shared the defense list. However I do know of 2 people that had previously testified that have been subpeoned by the defense. That is all. No more. And I know one of these people personally (our kids have played together). I am not going to miss that day on the live feed

Ah, I see. Well, I sure would hate to be a witness or know a witness in this trial. Looks like a tough thing to go through.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

And ain't it interesting that we know some of the posters who have been adamantly pro-BC do have that bias we have been wondering about all along!

I never said I was Pro -Brad. I am simply for finding the complete truth. I am not truly convinced either way. I just think everyone deserves a fair trial with evidence to convict rather than making a possible big mistake because we are convicting on simply the fact that a husband and wife did not get along

 

[gracielee]

I think the issue isn't so much that they only focused on BC, it's that in the early days of the investigation, the only evidence they had was hearsay from neighbors/friends. It would be troubling to me if they only focused on him based on that and only that. We even caught a hint that CPD didn't buy his story from the very beginning because Greer testified that they told the ME that last time seen was shortly after midnight, not 7am. (this was on the 15th when the body was found)

This is why CPD hasn't came out in this trial and said they focused on him (and only him) from the very beginning.

That isn't the *only* evidence they had. Teddy Bear is a detective, he observed Brad's lies, 'we are working on our marriage', 'I cleaned the house all day today, to make Nancy happy'. As Teddy said 'if this is what a house looks like *clean*, lord save us.' Well, he didn't exactly say those words, but you know that's what he meant. He had a guy who wouldn't come down to the station to give a statement, who never inquired as to what they were doing to find his wife. Now I don't know how many of the ABB'ers are 'regular' crime buffs and how many are just here for this case, but those of us who have been reading crime for decades, have 'hinky meters', much like the Detective. This isn't his first case, his first suspect. Just like for most of us, this isn't our first 'dead wife' case. Hinky meters go off, things set them off. Brad set's off hinky meters, LOUDLY. MOO

Wanted to add, much like Ann Miller Konce set off my hinky meter.

 

[dramamama]

:aktion:

Good to know! But I do not count you in the "adamantly pro-BC list." That is a very short list and IMO might even be several posters equalling one person. Take a look around and see which people are not even able to CONSIDER Brad Cooper having murdered his wife. See which ones have taken a hack at every innocent person along the way. Those of us who are certain in Brad's guilt got here because of a lot of circumstancial evidence that these people do not even acknowledge EXIST. They point out lies in every scenario but have not said one word about Brad's lies. They go around and around in circles trying to convince us, almost desperately, that Brad is innocent. Now who might those people actually be?

:aktion:

 

[gracielee]

Sorry, but it is in the rules of professional conduct. It applies to every attorney in every proceeding to ensure the very thing that you seem to accuse Kurtz of doing does not happen. Sorry, I know that doesn't bolster your suggestion that the defense is weak.

uh huh. Fish much?

 

[gracielee]

Sorry, but it is in the rules of professional conduct. It applies to every attorney in every proceeding to ensure the very thing that you seem to accuse Kurtz of doing does not happen. Sorry, I know that doesn't bolster your suggestion that the defense is weak.

So tell me exactly how these rules applied to the attorney representing David Westerfield, when he argued that the parents of Danielle VanDam were responsible for her death out one side of his mouth, while trying to broker a deal to give up the location of her body out the other? Pray tell?

 

[Lori59]

With JW, I thought it was a dirty move, but it did succeed in placing doubt on his credibility. What happened with the friend that is a child psychologist was also a dirty move. When the prosecution resorts to dirty moves, I'm inclined to think that's all they have in terms of discrediting good testimony.

I'm sorry but dirty moves??? :waitasec: The prosecution can not discredit "good" testimony. If it was good, it would stand up to cross examination.

 

[Madeleine74]

I keep repeating this because after 2 days of finding the body a press conference was held stating the this was not a random act of violence.

That says they believed early on that Nancy knew her killer or at least her killer knew her. Random implies victim and killer never met or encountered each other before the crime happened.

Think maybe the police noticed the (not)missing diamond earrings in NC's ears and wondered about why a random killer wouldn't take something that looks valuable?

Think maybe after 3 days of searching all over the area and then finding Nancy wearing nothing but the one item of clothing her husband said the day before she was identified that she was wearing, but not finding anything else, when dear hubby didn't see her leave for her 'run' had them thinking 'Hmroo? Concidence?'

Think maybe upon learning from the M.E. that he did not see any indication of sexual assault and the death was from asphyxiation/strangulation they might have reason to believe this type of death might be from someone who knew her?

Think maybe the police wondered why the hubby was in HT twice that early morning of 7/12 within 19 min, wearing 2 different sets of shoes and a zipped up pullover?

They knew all of that by the time Nancy's body was identified. They didn't believe it was random because the information they had gathered by that time, along with the condition of Nancy's body, led them to rule out 'random' attacker.

 

[gracielee]

Scott was in an active affair with Amber. NC and BC were in the process of divorcing. It's not the same situation.

What has that got to do with being a player? He was in an active affair with Amber for less than a month. Scott met amber the middle to end of november. he bought a boat on Dec. 9th was it? The boat to dump Laci's body. Amber had nothing to do with the death of Laci. Scott did NOT want to have to pay for a baby. That's why he had to get rid of Laci before the baby was born. If Laci had never gotten pregnant, or as scott said 'he was hoping for infertility', she'd probably still be alive today. MOO

 

[LyndyLoo]

So tell me exactly how these rules applied to the attorney representing David Westerfield, when he argued that the parents of Danielle VanDam were responsible for her death out one side of his mouth, while trying to broker a deal to give up the location of her body out the other? Pray tell?

IIRC...Its my understanding that defense attny or Pros. for that matter..can NOT Subborn perjury..in other words since their words is NOT testimony they can say whatever they want..speculate, suggest etc..SO as I have witnessed many many trials suggesting all sorts of things ( Take Cayley Case as an example)..HOWEVER, they can cannot put someone on the stand to state something they KNOW is false or a LIE..AND if proven as such..either one of the lawyers can be lose their license and be in BIG Do DO..

Its also IIRC that is precisely why Def. Attny do not want to know if their client is guilty or not..No confessions so to speak..as it really curtails their defense..They can suggest all they wish, and attempt to discredit Pros. witnesses ( which is mostly their focus in trials) as IF they indeed have solid proof then it would never come to trial in the first place......

JMOO on that point you are making :seeya:

 

[Bottle Cap]

Good to know! But I do not count you in the "adamantly pro-BC list." That is a very short list and IMO might even be several posters equalling one person. Take a look around and see which people are not even able to CONSIDER Brad Cooper having murdered his wife. See which ones have taken a hack at every innocent person along the way. Those of us who are certain in Brad's guilt got here because of a lot of circumstancial evidence that these people do not even acknowledge EXIST. They point out lies in every scenario but have not said one word about Brad's lies. They go around and around in circles trying to convince us, almost desperately, that Brad is innocent. Now who might those people actually be?

A real big, real bright lightbulb just went off over my head.

 

[Wyn]

And ain't it interesting that we know some of the posters who have been adamantly pro-BC do have that bias we have been wondering about all along!

NO! Say it ain't so. :floorlaugh: A lot of fence sitters can't see the forest for the fence slats.

 

[Wyn]

I have been reviewing posts here and testimony from that past few weeks..I have too many questions but the highlights for me cover a rather large time=span and events... Please indulge me..TYIA

1) I cannot figure out just what Brad did for almost two hours after he bought that "Drop Shet" July 11th, 2008 and didnt arrive to work until almost 1130AM..What the heck was he doing..???
2) Connecting possibility of planted Google Map search on Cisco laptop for 115PM...It seems to me this would have to have been done in a very narrow timeframe..Before power down on July 16th...So it had to have been someone who knew where she found, and plant this specific search on the computer after the fact, and before July 16th??..
3) IF Nancy had indeed had an ongoing Relationship..All phone logs have been obtained from providers..so maybe not texts but all ###'s right?. I am sure all those people connected with those ### were contacted and either had alibi's or were no where near the scene
4)Brad unwillingness to call police when Nancy's friend called him to report she didnt turn up to her place as expected at 8AM?? He told that person she went jogging at 7AM with possibly CC.. IF he intended to go to his tennis planned outing..why would he not be wondering too??
5)Brad calls JA back at 1PM July 12th to ask IF she had heard from Nancy?...That in of itself sounds wonky..then when he gets call from Police..he doesnt return their call..and I am sure they left a message?/
6) What the heck did he feel was more important to do from 9AM that morning until 1PM that day?
7) Why would Brad be in possession of Nancy's Cell, Computer and Car keys when Nancy had spent months trying to protect her "Stuff" from his snooping?
8)Nancy wasnt even identified until July 15th, House was secure evening of same date..so unless the real killer had background snooping abilities on Brad's computer, and was able to plant that Google map..why wouldnt he or she have planted a whole host of other incriminating items??
9) Last but not least, why would Nancy's friends, or boyfriend for that matter want to kill Nancy and leave Brad with the kids?..Who really benefits? Certainly NOT a boyfriend, certainly NOT her friends, certainly NOT Nancy?


Of course some wish to opine that some Hispanic aliens had the expertise to do this..BUT the "Elephant in the Courtroom" is that Brad had the knowledge, expertise, equipment availability to do just what I believe he did!!:twocents:

:waitasec: I'm sorry. Your post contains too much common sense for it to be considered.