April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness

[fran]

Good post! I just wanted to clarify one point - the TOD could have been as late as 11AM.

That time of 11 A.M. mentionted by the witness was June 11, 11 A.M. However since she was KNOWN and SEEN to be alive up until approximately 12 midnight 6/12, the time was between 1 A.M. and 6 A.M.(or was it 6:30?) June 12.

It was the def attorney who mentioned it near the end of his cross, he said 11 A.M., but he just forgot to mention that it was the PREVIOUS day. He did that to confuse the jury.

Hope the DA mentions that in his close.

JMHO
fran

 

[johnfear]

I agree, it looks like she was moving in ten directions at once, but not following through with any of them.

I had one of those divorces. I was finally like...hmmm, we have nothing left. I'll just waive equitable distribution and file myself and be on my way. (FYI, she still shows up every 12-18 months and says: You've changed. I've changed. Let's get some therapy. Let's __________. Nothing has really changed. I don't know what the motivation is. I decided that stepping back and letting the roller coaster go without me on it was the ONLY way to deal.)

 

[otto]

And when Nancy's father testifed, he stated that Nancy always carried her keys in her hands, and that he'd shown her how to hold her keys, making them sort of like a cross between brass knuckles and little daggers sticking through her fingers. Dad said that was how Nancy ran, with her keys sticking through her fingers, to use against any would be attacker. And they all said 'nancy never ran alone'.

There's a photo I've seen with Nancy running in someplace like Canmore. I don't know where I saw it, but I definitely don't remember seeing her keys in her hand.

 

[Albert]

That would be me. I believe he is innocent based on everything that's been presented. I'm honestly surprised so many people are so sure he did it with absolutely no proof.

I had gut feelings he was innocent early on and I explained that. One example was I thought it very unlikely a husband would leave their wife exposed like that. It makes me truly believe that someone else did this after she left the house that morning. (I can go into that further if you are interested, but I don't think anyone really wants to hear what I think may have happened to her) and it doesn't really matter because the state hasn't provided a shred of proof that he did it.

At one point, when the F-Drive data came out, I was in shock to be honest because I felt so sure they had the wrong guy. But I accepted that evidence and changed my mind. It was the smoking gun. Now that I see clear evidence the computer was tampered with, I'm back to - I don't think he did it and the tampering helps solidify my feelings.

Hi Sunshine. Imagine NC was killed while wearing the dress and the method of killing caused some type of fluid on her dress. Now, to support an alibi of jogging her clothes must be changed. Is it not possible that in an attempt to put her into jogging clothes BC found how difficult this was becoming, therefore stopped at the jogging bra to make it look like a sexual assault? I just think that if a husband killed his wife that he would care less how the wife was left exposed.

As far as evidence tampering... Don't you think that the defense would have questioned the FBI witness about this solid evidence of tampering? Wouldn't this have made more sense to have the FBI attempt to answer the allegation of tampering instead of JW simply testifying how simple this process could have been hacked.

So, now we have 2 possibilities, BC automated the 6:40am call or someone planted evidence. Both possibilities have been explained how easily each could be accomplished. I don't believe the evidence of tampering is any stronger than the evidence of automating a call. In fact, I think the evidence of tampering is less likely because it would have had to occur during a very narrow window of time and it would have had to occurred with someone's knowledge that BC was in the Cisco office at 1:15pm on 7/11.

 

[WolfpackWoman]

That time of 11 A.M. mentionted by the witness was June 11, 11 A.M. However since she was KNOWN and SEEN to be alive up until approximately 12 midnight 6/12, the time was between 1 A.M. and 6 A.M.(or was it 6:30?) June 12.

It was the def attorney who mentioned it near the end of his cross, he said 11 A.M., but he just forgot to mention that it was the PREVIOUS day. He did that to confuse the jury.

Hope the DA mentions that in his close.

JMHO
fran

This is just plain wrong. Entomology said his time of dropping the body was consistent with up to 11am on the 12th. He wasn't confused, the Defense wasn't confused. It's perfectly consistent with up to 11am. The entomologist under direct said it could be consistent with 1am to 5am IF flies laid eggs at night (which they don't), so he has NO SCIENTIFIC CONFIDENCE in the results prior to sunrise on that day. Medical Examiner said his findings are consistent with leaving to run at 7am and dying within a few hours of that time. If time of death was confirmed to be prior to 7am, do you really think you'd have the lead detective saying there's no physical evidence?

 

[gracielee]

Could the reason she called the realtor be because he told her NO< he would NOT agree to her going back to Canada with the kids? You say Nancy was working through her attorney, but the initial divorce filing had not even been done, and having been divorced twice, I know that is the FIRST thing that is done.

I suppose pigs could fly, but the bottom line is, Nancy had retained a lawyer. AS testifed that she thought Brad had an attorney too, per Nancy. But when she called the firm, she was told 'no, brad didn't hire them'. It was testified that 'nancy had asked brad if the elder child could finish out her school year, but brad said 'no, they had to leave by the end of april.' Then after DD bought a one way ticket from toronto to RDU, in preparation to accompany nancy and the girls in their car, so Nancy wouldn't have to drive alone with the kids. Only days before this was all set to go into motion, brad changed his mind and said 'no, no you can't take the girls to canada.' After he'd already bought Nancy's 'interview outfits' for her to find a job in Toronto.

 

[sunshine05]

But the Cisco co worker said they were friendly out side of work, dinners together etc. And it is a blanket statement to say he *never* said anything negative about her. It is impossible for us to even know that. So either way its a wash.

I will say IMHO, I do find it odd. I understand the state they were in because of the divorce. I went through a very nasty divorce, I understand where they 'possibly' stood in disliking each other. I still find it odd that it was almost like it wasn't happening at all for him according to those who testified. He didn't try to negotiate the separation agreement, the lived in the same home, he decided she was to go then she wasn't, from testimony they fought, sometimes in public. Even private people have their moments and say something untoward when going thru stressful situations. BC was human, not superhuman. I can not reconcile that there was not one moment he said something in either kindness or anger.

Kelly

It's fine. I really didn't mean to get into a huge disagreement with you over this. I'm sorry for that. I just think at this point in the case, and with everything we've heard now (including from the defense finally) that maybe this picture many have of him as a silent, controlling, anti-social person ready to lose it is less than accurate.

 

[momof7]

It's fine. I really didn't mean to get into a huge disagreement with you over this. I'm sorry for that. I just think at this point in the case, and with everything we've heard now (including from the defense finally) that maybe this picture many have of him as a silent, controlling, anti-social person ready to lose it is less than accurate.

Agreed...me either. I really not sure what to believe if the truth be known.

 

[metafizik]

Exactly, why is it so hard to believe a man who has a history of stalking, one who exacted excessive control over his wife, read her private mail, listened in on her phone calls so much so that nancy & her family knew he was recording them, why is it such a leap to murder?

I don't know that I have seen evidence that he stalked her and I most certainly haven't seen any evidence that he murdered her. I would never take such a leap based on a feeling like many here seem to be willing to do, especially when a man's life is at stake. He is innocent until proven guilty and thus far that hasn't happened, at least IMO.

 

[gracielee]

Well, you know I don't think he did it, but IF he did, there is a lesson in this. When you take away a person's very reason for living, you make that person a VERY VERY dangerous person. This divorce, if it went on her terms, would DESTROY him. He couldn't leave the area until the house was sold, plus the child support and alimony would be based on his current wages, so he would have to find a comparable job in Canada if he wanted to see his kids. So in a soft housing market, with high unemployment, he is trapped in the US. He would have TWO mortgage payments, all the credit cards, and all the bills to pay on top of the other stuff, which would leave him no money to pay for the kids to travel to him or vice versa.

So his options? Be financially ruined and lose his kids, or kill her and if he got away with it, great, if not, he gets three hots and cot.

NOT saying he did it, because I really don't think he did, but really, what did he have to lose?

Brad had already checked into transferring through Cisco to France. He was in contact with his french girlfriend. I doubt very much brad thought of his life as being 'over'. After all, he expressed an interest in learning to play the guitar and speak French. :waitasec:

 

[unc70]

As I understand the general narrative of things with B & N, after he finally admitted the affair, N had the upper hand and was using his guilt as leverage and was going for broke (literally). He started spending more time with his kids (easier after finishing MBA), did what engineers tried to do and fix things, and started to see how much the divorce would cost everyone and tried to reel in their spending.

I can only partially understand the changes in his behavior around the time the draft sep/divorce sent to NC and somehow to him, but there seems much less a reason to explain her actions beginning with the "Saddest Party".

What if BC had discovered that NC had also had an affair? Could he have discovered the STD test somehow (insurance benefits summary)? NC would then be looking at a weaker position regarding custody, no alimony, and equitable distribution of assets and debts. Oops. NC would not have been talking about this to her friends who are worked up about his having had an affair. BC did not talk about their private life to anyone.

This would not have mattered in the custody battle which was with her family. Making NC look bad after her death would have just made him look spiteful and more likely to have murdered her.

This is probably the most speculative thing I have proposed. It probably is contradicted by lots of things, but I have never seen any discussion of these areas.

 

[MoonFlwr]

She didn't have children at that time. Lots of free time. Not so much in the year before her murder with two children. LE couldn't get her messages, but they are able to get the numbers from her account. Wouldn't they have checked them out to see who they belonged too? The only hint of a possible affair would be with JP (I think those are his initials). It would seem that her friends would have known about someone since Nancy didn't seem to keep anything to herself. I realize that everyone thought it was Brad as soon as it occurred, but I don't see her friends hiding a relationship in order to pin it on Brad. They have children and know how devastating it would be for B & K to lose both parents.

What *I* remember of the friends, from early on in this story, was that they appeared totally biased against Brad and totally unobjective in their thinking and speaking.
They were emotional.....and they'd had NC say whatever it was she had...to get them so riled up at BC.
I don't think NC was all that truthful to anyone about how the situation was.

 

[gracielee]

Ah, he RECENTLY took ONE of the kids passports, and left her with one, assuring that neither of them could go with both the kids. As for the permission needed, you forget, they wouldn't BE "leaving the country", and they were here on a VISA, and were citizens of Canada, they would be going HOME.

The children were born here, they held dual citizenship. And numerous people have posted here that nancy would have needed brad's permission to cross the border with the children.

 

[otto]

I had one of those divorces. I was finally like...hmmm, we have nothing left. I'll just waive equitable distribution and file myself and be on my way. (FYI, she still shows up every 12-18 months and says: You've changed. I've changed. Let's get some therapy. Let's __________. Nothing has really changed. I don't know what the motivation is. I decided that stepping back and letting the roller coaster go without me on it was the ONLY way to deal.)

The best solution is always to realize there will be compromise, and to decide whether to make the decisions with or without a Judge/lawyers. In fact, I've even looked back and thought that if we'd taken the $100k that we gave to lawyers and instead had 5 or 10 good vacations, things may have ended differently.

 

[SleuthinNC]

It definitely did not seem as though NC was actively pursuing a divorce. Her last email to AS was in April, one phone call in May and then AS called NC in late June.

I think she was building her divorce team and keeping her options open to figure out how she was going to get everything that she wanted out of the divorce.

 

[gracielee]

She would have needed both the passports and a document, signed by Brad, outlining her plans. The children could have possibly been taken across a small border crossing without the letter of persmission, but not if there was a moving truck in the party.

Nancy needed one of these: http://www.voyage.gc.ca/preparation_information/documents/consent-letter_lettre-consentement-eng.pdf

The reason for this is explicitly to prevent parents from taking children out of the country without consent of both parents. Nancy was getting way ahead of herself telling people that she was moving to Toronto without first sorting out out the custody issues.

Nancy wasn't 'telling people she was moving', brad was. He told nancy he wanted them out by the end of april. Brad himself said he'd checked into the cost of hiring a UHaul vs. hiring movers to move nancy and the girls. Brad bought nancy 'interview clothes' for her to go on job interviews in Toronto. Brad also testifed in the depo that 'they'd checked into private school for the girls in the suburb of Toronto where Krista lived, because nancy and the girls were to live in Krista's basement until they could get settled and find an apartment after nancy found a job.

 

[johnfear]

Nancy wasn't 'telling people she was moving', brad was. He told nancy he wanted them out by the end of april. Brad himself said he'd checked into the cost of hiring a UHaul vs. hiring movers to move nancy and the girls. Brad bought nancy 'interview clothes' for her to go on job interviews in Toronto. Brad also testifed in the depo that 'they'd checked into private school for the girls in the suburb of Toronto where Krista lived, because nancy and the girls were to live in Krista's basement until they could get settled and find an apartment after nancy found a job.

The saddest party ever idea came from her telling them. There was also testimony from two folks that she called and that the party was changing (1 person was away and she told them they didn't have to come now). So, she was telling someone right?

 

[gracielee]

Now even the Canadian neighbors are in on the conspiracy! It is a far-reaching one indeed!

No kidding. You know what has struck me is why did Brad want them out by the end of april? I wonder if the french gf was possibly coming, and something fell through? The fact that Brad said 'nancy and the girls had to be out by April 29th was it? And IIRC, the french girl, CB, had checked into a job with Cisco. That 'have to be gone by date' always struck me as odd in and of itself. Why was there a date nancy and the girls had to be gone by, and then why did it all change so quickly?

 

[otto]

The children were born here, they held dual citizenship. And numerous people have posted here that nancy would have needed brad's permission to cross the border with the children.

Did they have Canadian passports? I only know of discussion of two passports and I assumed they were US passports. Were they Canadian passports? If that's the case, I doubt she would have had difficulties bringing the children to Canada through a smaller border crossing.

 

[otto]

It definitely did not seem as though NC was actively pursuing a divorce. Her last email to AS was in April, one phone call in May and then AS called NC in late June.

I think she was building her divorce team and keeping her options open to figure out how she was going to get everything that she wanted out of the divorce.

So the divorce lawyer is calling Nancy? That's a bit weird. If someone was trapped and desperate to change things, 3 months is a long time to delay.