April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness

[calgary123]

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.

First because I know him and if he really intended to let the divorce proceed I think he would have retained counsel early. Second, he knows he's paying a lot of money regardless of any negotiations.

I'll freely admit I'm speculating on this point though.

 

[ncsu95]

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...

I don't think your scenario is possible. He didn't google search his address. He did a search of his zip code. And he zoomed all the way in on the site where the body was found. I can't see him accidentally doing this. If the search is valid (and obviously that is in doubt...at least as to when it was done), then he's guilty in my opinion.

 

[zenreaper]

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.

Honestly, the COMPLETE lack of physical evidence bothers me. The theory seems to be that he waited for her in the house the night before she was reported missing, came up behind her and strangled her.

But lets consider that (and it probably was already discussed, if so, I apologize). She walsk down the hall, he steps out behind her, and wraps an arm around her neck (the most efficient way, leaving one of his arms free). What now? He has, factually, a world class athlete in a choke hold. Now we have to believe that she never KICKED him from in front (no bruises on his legs) or swung her arms around (no scratches), or ANYTHING, but simply stood there and died. Sorry, but that is not PHYSICALLY possible. The human body, when deprived of oxygen, goes into thrashing around, kicking, swinging, etc, whatever it takes to get AIR. Close quaters (a narrow hallway) makes it MORE likely that there would be damage to the walls from the kicking or fighting, etc.

 

[RaleighNative]

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.

I disagree. I don't see BC as having been controlling. NC seemed to go and come as she pleased, and get whatever she wanted financially.

Until the separation agreement, when he finally realized the sorry state of their financial affairs.

But NC did not rely on BC to get an attorney...her family paid for it. And BC consulted with The Rosen Firm, a very good local divorce firm. BC knew the first draft agreement wouldn't stand, that the agreement regarded far more parental support than the law allowed, and at max he would have to pay alimony for 4 years in N. Carolina...if at all.

 

[otto]

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.

<respectfully snipped for space>...

Thanks for your thoughts. I laughed when I read that the person that files first wins ... so true. Even the language of plaintiff and respondent or defendant speaks volumes. Many people are still caught in the philosophy of the Tender Years Doctrine, which presumes that young children belong with their mother. That is not true, and not respectful of father's rights. With Nancy seeking sole custody, Brad had to then demonstrate why he should have equal rights as a parent. It would have been a very expensive, acrimonious divorce. They should have simply liquidated everything, given all their money to the lawyers, and asked the lawyers to write up the final compromise they knew they would have in the end ... get it over with quickly, as that's what would have happened. No one would have been happy, and both would have been broke.

Surely Brad realized that Nancy's wish list would not be the final decision. The first financial responsibility would have been the lawyers, then the debt.

 

[water_dancing]

There is absolutely no testimony by any witness that this is fact, Kurtz is the only one floating that or maybe its just some posters speculating that was possible..But AS sent this attachment to Nancy on her supposedly secure email address, and also Brad's lawyer..however Brad lawyer never got paid ( retainer check got bounced)..then of course the copied email was found in Brad's mailbox in forensic search....

I would greatly appreciate if you could link to something that this was true..that Nancy gave him a copy??..

it is always possible she thought his lawyer gave him a copy, not realizing there was no lawyer??..

It was during AS's testimony. She stated in an email to who she thought was BC's lawyer that it was her understanding that NC had shared a copy of the SA with BC. She also suggested in an email to NC that NC share the SA with BC.

Whether BC saw it before that has not been established either way through testimony.

 

[calgary123]

Honestly, the COMPLETE lack of physical evidence bothers me. The theory seems to be that he waited for her in the house the night before she was reported missing, came up behind her and strangled her.

But lets consider that (and it probably was already discussed, if so, I apologize). She walsk down the hall, he steps out behind her, and wraps an arm around her neck (the most efficient way, leaving one of his arms free). What now? He has, factually, a world class athlete in a choke hold. Now we have to believe that she never KICKED him from in front (no bruises on his legs) or swung her arms around (no scratches), or ANYTHING, but simply stood there and died. Sorry, but that is not PHYSICALLY possible. The human body, when deprived of oxygen, goes into thrashing around, kicking, swinging, etc, whatever it takes to get AIR. Close quaters (a narrow hallway) makes it MORE likely that there would be damage to the walls from the kicking or fighting, etc.

So in other words, your working theory is she was not strangled by anybody.

 

[otto]

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.

I had a child that would have a melt down if I moved the furniture. Some children do need everything to be very static. If dad was doing something new, it should have been presented as a positive. Going to the dentist the first time can be traumatic for a child, but the parent can find ways to make new things fun.

 

[zenreaper]

I don't think your scenario is possible. He didn't google search his address. He did a search of his zip code. And he zoomed all the way in on the site where the body was found. I can't see him accidentally doing this. If the search is valid (and obviously that is in doubt...at least as to when it was done), then he's guilty in my opinion.

Actually, using the zip code makes the theory MORE plausible. I used google maps as I was doing this, and perhaps it is because of the news coverage, but his ADDRESS goes right to the correct house. But a ZIP CODE would go to a general area. You then zoom in on the location you want enlarged. For example, I type in a zip code, and double click on the upper right hand corner of the photo, and it centers the spot where I double clicked and zooms in. So he is looking at an overview of his zip code area. Sees what he THINKS is a visual landmark near his home, double clicks on it, it zooms in, maybe once or twice to get closer. Then, realizing he is not at the right cul-de-sac, he backs out or closes the window.

Personally, it makes a heck a lot more sense than the theory that he was able to kill a person in a home occupied by two child, without making a sound or leaving any incriminating evidence on the body, manages to dump the body at a dirty muddy location without leaving any evidence there, or bringing any home, devises and executes his "alibi"...then forgets to erase the web search.

 

[zenreaper]

So in other words, your working theory is she was not strangled by anybody.

I did not say that, but when strangling an athlete, one would think she would be able to leave marks on him, if nothing less than a bruise on a shin, or something like that. He had no such bruises. I know someone strangled her, I just think whomever did it was never checked for bruises.

 

[otto]

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".

85% of mothers are permitted to take the children and move away from the father? That seems high for fathers that have been involved in the children's lives from the beginning. With the change in perspective from rights of the parents to rights of the child, wouldn't children more often be given the right to have access to a parent that wants the responsibilities of parenting?

 

[zenreaper]

85% of mothers are permitted to take the children and move away from the father? That seems high for fathers that have been involved in the children's lives from the beginning. With the change in perspective from rights of the parents to rights of the child, wouldn't children more often be given the right to have access to a parent that wants the responsibilities of parenting?

I think you are misunderstanding. 85% of custody cases are awarded to the mother. When motioning to relocate, more often then not, a custodial mother or father is permitted to move. Sorry if that was confusing.

 

[otto]

First because I know him and if he really intended to let the divorce proceed I think he would have retained counsel early. Second, he knows he's paying a lot of money regardless of any negotiations.

I'll freely admit I'm speculating on this point though.

Doesn't it mean he has a screw loose somewhere if he chose murder over divorce? Would he really take the risk of losing his freedom and everything he worked for to avoid the cost of divorce? Sure divorce is expensive, and child support can create resentment, but Brad had a good job and his income would have continued to increase. It would have been a couple of rough years paying for the mess, and then he would have been back on his feet.

 

[Shadow722]

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??..

LyndyLoo,

First, I believe BC is guilty. Second, I believe that NC did not deserve to be murdered. However, your statement above does pose some intriguing questions for me, in placing context on the situation in the Cooper household in the March to July timeframe, prior to NC's murder:

1) NC borrowed money from her family as a retainer for AS in the amount of $6 to $7K?
2) NC had to have spent time with AS in providing financial details that appears in the draft SA.
3) NC told everyone of her plans to: Move back to Canada.
4) Looked for homes/apts in Canada
5) Looked for schools for the kids in Canada.

Given the above, what actions (as opposed to plans) did NC actually do?

1) Got a draft agreement meant for BC eyes, that was not given to BC? Why not. If NC thought it was too harsh, she asks AS to draft a milder one. But she does not do nothing....
2) Without a separation agreement signed by both parties or forced by the courts, no going to Canada.
3) You do not pay $6 or $7K to a lawyer for just drafting a SA. Lawyers charge $500 to $1K to perform that task only, if that's all you need.
4) After paying AS, NC did nothing to facilitate moving forward toward divorce from BC, with AS as her advocate. Why?
5) BC does not need a lawyer to negotiate an SA. He merely red pens her draft and hands it back.
6) If BC does not want to sign or negotiate a SA with NC, AS can get the courts to issue one, under equitable distribution guidlines, or asks for an exception from ED.

What you don't do during a divorce is nothing. You don't not talk to your lawyer. If you no longer need your lawyer, to divorce you ask for a partial refund, especially if you need money, as NC did. But you don't do nothing. And nothing is what was going on. And that is puzzling.....

 

[otto]

I think you are misunderstanding. 85% of custody cases are awarded to the mother. When motioning to relocate, more often then not, a custodial mother or father is permitted to move. Sorry if that was confusing.

That's awfully high. Is that a NC statistic?

 

[otto]

So in other words, your working theory is she was not strangled by anybody.

I think the suggestion was that Brad should have had injuries.

 

[calgary123]

Doesn't it mean he has a screw loose somewhere if he chose murder over divorce? Would he really take the risk of losing his freedom and everything he worked for to avoid the cost of divorce? Sure divorce is expensive, and child support can create resentment, but Brad had a good job and his income would have continued to increase. It would have been a couple of rough years paying for the mess, and then he would have been back on his feet.

Certainly irrationality. Could be a loose screw, maybe intense selfishness combined with a feeling of invincibility (ability to commit the perfect crime), a brooding supressed but ultimately uncontrollable temper, or maybe he is just 'evil' (whatever that really means).

I really do believe he did it and that it is proven. I'm waiting for the defense to change my mind by shaking some of the prosecution's case.

 

[cityslick]

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.

I'm inclined to think the version that Daniels gives seems more plausible than this one. Basically he saw the seperation, figured it would leave him in the poor house, so tried to make things work. Unfortunately, his version of making things work wasn't the same as NC. He thought he was trying to do better and it wasn't getting acknowleged. He thought he had cleaned the house (whatever his version of cleaning was) and she lit into him when she got home. That probably put him on the path to figure out he was going to do something to her (thus the search on Friday). She embarrassed him in front of a ton of people that night and instead of yelling back, he bottled it up, went home and let the rage continue boiling until she came home. Then he decided to fast foward his plan to that night.

 

[zenreaper]

That's awfully high. Is that a NC statistic?

That is a country wide statistic, based on Census 2000. The exact figures for Census 2010 are not out yet, but I would imagine it to be SLIGHTLY lower (as the Father's Rights movement has had some effect, the fallacy of the Tender Years Doctrine is becoming less accepted, etc), but still in the same ball park.

 

[calgary123]

I think the suggestion was that Brad should have had injuries.

He's conveniently omitting any argument about how she could have been strangled on the open road. A 'world class athlete' (which she was most certainly not) would been hard to catch let alone kill without leaving any evidence of trauma on herself or her attacker.

The only rational argument is whoever killed her had the benefit of complete surprise. I don't think that is rationally possible on an open road.