Brad Cooper April 1st Weekend

[BrownRice]

No, I don't. I'm just saying that I won't be surprised if the contents are boring, thus not supplying a motive.

Yes, so far all of the anticipation of the exciting aha evidence has not appeared. Testimony BC forwarded home phone to cell phone/No evidence yet; Testimony BC googled a dump site for NC's body/No evidence yet. So I'm not getting too excited about anything right now.

 

[borndem]

I went back and began reading the posts on this forum that began in July, 08 at the time Nancy went missing. I haven't finished all of them yet but there are several from people who knew him from Canada (including one or two who have posted recently) and many opinions from others about how this will all turn out. Very interesting as a lot of what was being said back then is being played out at this time in the trial two years later.
For anyone who is interested, just go to the bottom of this page and start with "Seriously Searching". It's time consuming but I have enjoyed reading those very earliest posts.

You're right -- I did the same yesterday and last night (yawn, yawn) -- We were pretty perceptive, I think, and most of us have kept our original impressions these years later. And there are some interesting tidbits along the way, eh?

 

[LyndyLoo]

I am pretty certain he couldn't get into the text messages on her phone. She had it locked. The emails he could see. And yes, he could have been tipped over the edge that night.

May be so..but for me (maybe I am giving him too much credit)..IF he could access her personal email account and copy and be able to see them..then I have to believe he was quite capable to hack her BB Pearl too and get any and all voice mail and texts too....

Nancy's behavior by going to friends and speaking frankly (maybe more venting ) to her friends/neighbours/exterminators..was her only outlet to let people know something that Brad DID NOT HAVE ACCESS to...I think we will see just how invasive Brad was into Nancy's personal stuff..when the Puter expert testifies..I for one cant wait for that one :rocker:

 

[SleuthSayer]

I guess I should have said "hardly any doubt"
The state has not proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt....yet.

I think that if you believe that this is the criteria by which this case will be decided, you are kidding yourself. It's nice to say the "innocent until proven guilty" stuff because it's the right thing to say and it's interesting to discuss theoretically whether the case has been proven. But after the first few days of the trial this turned in to a case of Brad having to prove that he didn't do it.

As many here have said, it's always the husband in cases like this. The jury knows that too. So, that's the baseline assumption. Then as soon as they heard that there were marriage problems (motive) and that Brad had no solid alibi (opportunity), it became the defense's challenge to prove that he's innocent.

After hearing from Nancy's mother's emotional testimony and seeing photos of Nancy and the kids, the jury is going to want to see someone punished for her murder. As long as it seems likely that Brad did it, they are not going to let him walk just because the DA's failed to prove it. They know that it's not like if they find him not guilty the Cary police are going to say "ok, I guess he didn't do it" and go out looking for someone else. So, if they don't find Brad guilty, Nancy's murder will go unpunished. They are human, they won't let that happen.

It's just like 90% of the people here. Even without a "smoking gun", the only thing that would make them believe that Brad didn't do it is if somehow the defense proved that he couldn't have done it. The onus has been on the defense from the beginning.

As I said, I think that he probably did it and that's going to be close enough in this case.

 

[less0305]

May be so..but for me (maybe I am giving him too much credit)..IF he could access her personal email account and copy and be able to see them..then I have to believe he was quite capable to hack her BB Pearl too and get any and all voice mail and texts too....

Nancy's behavior by going to friends and speaking frankly (maybe more venting ) to her friends/neighbours/exterminators..was her only outlet to let people know something that Brad DID NOT HAVE ACCESS to...I think we will see just how invasive Brad was into Nancy's personal stuff..when the Puter expert testifies..I for one cant wait for that one :rocker:

Is it possible as the account holder and the person responsible for the bill to obtain this information? At one time we had a problem employee who was using his work issued phone for some pretty illicit activities. As the account holder we were able to receive copies of the texts related to that phone. I can't remember that we could have gotten voice mails, but I know we got text messages printed out and sent to us. It was maybe in 2007 or 2008. It was with Sprint at the time.

 

[NCEast]

You're right -- I did the same yesterday and last night (yawn, yawn) -- We were pretty perceptive, I think, and most of us have kept our original impressions these years later. And there are some interesting tidbits along the way, eh?

It was reassuring to see some of those very early posters are still very active, and you are right, most opinions haven't changed. I was very involved with taking care of my younger brother during the time Nancy went missing and the subsequent months after her body was found and Brad's arrest. I didn't have the time to spend interacting, such as on this forum, but I kept up with the case through the tv coverage and print media. I was anxious for the trial to start and I'm so happy I found you guys.
And I am totally in agreement with the rest of you who think those final emails may be the bomb that set him off that night.

 

[BrownRice]

Is it possible as the account holder and the person responsible for the bill to obtain this information? At one time we had a problem employee who was using his work issued phone for some pretty illicit activities. As the account holder we were able to receive copies of the texts related to that phone. I can't remember that we could have gotten voice mails, but I know we got text messages printed out and sent to us. It was maybe in 2007 or 2008. It was with Sprint at the time.

yeah, I was wondering about that as well. Or, if not BC, I wonder if the police were able to obtain her texts (even though the phone was physically disabled, there were no copies on a server somewhere?

 

[sunshine05]

My only problem for Brad being in the know as to just who or when she could have been meeting to jog..or to paint for that matter..I truly do NOT believe Nancy gave any details to BRAD at all...since like for a very long time...I get the impression she only shared what she had to with him...

Having said that...I do think that Brad knew precisely what Nancy had plans for and with whom..when where and why ( BUT not from Nancy directly)..BY reading her emails or checking her text messages..He truly seemed to be watching, checking, listening, reading everything she did, for a very long time..like back when he brought all the computer stuff into the home that Nancy demanded to be removed...

Just my impression...He knew precisely what she did, said and planned..and just couldnt stand it..together with her confrontation.. Brad may well have been tipped over the edge that night.. I do think that urgent request to move her and the kids OUT may have it!!JMO

It seems like an awful lot of speculation. NC called BC several times on the 11th and they also spoke every single day when she was away on her trip with her parents.

He also purchased the paint for her to do her painting at JA's so they couldn't have been on that bad of terms or he would have said "forget it".

If it's like BC described, which was a vague answer when JA called "she went running....not sure who with....possibly CC" then even called JA a bit later to find CC's number....it could have happened that way and no lie occurred.

I'm not sure what to make of the apartments/contact with the real estate guy....unless? Maybe that was what the lawyer's email was about. Maybe it would stipulate that BC must provide immediately for her to have her own place. The timing makes it possible.

 

[cityslick]

I think that if you believe that this is the criteria by which this case will be decided, you are kidding yourself. It's nice to say the "innocent until proven guilty" stuff because it's the right thing to say and it's interesting to discuss theoretically whether the case has been proven. But after the first few days of the trial this turned in to a case of Brad having to prove that he didn't do it.

As many here have said, it's always the husband in cases like this. The jury knows that too. So, that's the baseline assumption. Then as soon as they heard that there were marriage problems (motive) and that Brad had no solid alibi (opportunity), it became the defense's challenge to prove that he's innocent.

After hearing from Nancy's mother's emotional testimony and seeing photos of Nancy and the kids, the jury is going to want to see someone punished for her murder. As long as it seems likely that Brad did it, they are not going to let him walk just because the DA's failed to prove it. They know that it's not like if they find him not guilty the Cary police are going to say "ok, I guess he didn't do it" and go out looking for someone else. So, if they don't find Brad guilty, Nancy's murder will go unpunished. They are human, they won't let that happen.

It's just like 90% of the people here. Even without a "smoking gun", the only thing that would make them believe that Brad didn't do it is if somehow the defense proved that he couldn't have done it. The onus has been on the defense from the beginning.

As I said, I think that he probably did it and that's going to be close enough in this case.

I disagree. I think the burden is with the state and as of today you can't send someone to jail for life with what you got. At this point you have no evidence she died in that house, no evidence he was at the dump scene, no evidence he had a body in his car and no evidence she was not alive as late as 6am.

 

[less0305]

I need clarification on something. I'm just not remembering... how do we know that brad bought any paint for nancy's extra painting job - not the painting that went on in the cooper home, but for the extra job?

 

[sunshine05]

I think that if you believe that this is the criteria by which this case will be decided, you are kidding yourself. It's nice to say the "innocent until proven guilty" stuff because it's the right thing to say and it's interesting to discuss theoretically whether the case has been proven. But after the first few days of the trial this turned in to a case of Brad having to prove that he didn't do it.

As many here have said, it's always the husband in cases like this. The jury knows that too. So, that's the baseline assumption. Then as soon as they heard that there were marriage problems (motive) and that Brad had no solid alibi (opportunity), it became the defense's challenge to prove that he's innocent.

After hearing from Nancy's mother's emotional testimony and seeing photos of Nancy and the kids, the jury is going to want to see someone punished for her murder. As long as it seems likely that Brad did it, they are not going to let him walk just because the DA's failed to prove it. They know that it's not like if they find him not guilty the Cary police are going to say "ok, I guess he didn't do it" and go out looking for someone else. So, if they don't find Brad guilty, Nancy's murder will go unpunished. They are human, they won't let that happen.

It's just like 90% of the people here. Even without a "smoking gun", the only thing that would make them believe that Brad didn't do it is if somehow the defense proved that he couldn't have done it. The onus has been on the defense from the beginning.

As I said, I think that he probably did it and that's going to be close enough in this case.

I think you should give the jury more credit that they will only say guilty if it's been proven. To suggest that a jury will convict based on emotions is weak. I don't believe it and it's scary to think that our justice system could be based on gut feelings versus proof. So much of the testimony has been about "Brad didn't make eye contact, he walked wrong, he drank a beer, etc. " Please tell me a jury will not convict someone on that.

 

[sunshine05]

I need clarification on something. I'm just not remembering... how do we know that brad bought any paint for nancy's extra painting job - not the painting that went on in the cooper home, but for the extra job?

The receipt is in evidence. He showed it to JA when she was on the stand and she confirmed it.

 

[SleuthSayer]

I disagree. I think the burden is with the state and as of today you can't send someone to jail for life with what you got. At this point you have no evidence she died in that house, no evidence he was at the dump scene, no evidence he had a body in his car and no evidence she was not alive as late as 6am.

I would agree with you if this were a death penalty case -- and that is probably why they didn't pursue it as a DP case. That decision is a lot more difficult to make.

 

[SleuthSayer]

I think you should give the jury more credit that they will only say guilty if it's been proven. To suggest that a jury will convict based on emotions is weak. I don't believe it and it's scary to think that our justice system could be based on gut feelings versus proof. So much of the testimony has been about "Brad didn't make eye contact, he walked wrong, he drank a beer, etc. " Please tell me a jury will not convict someone on that.

Sit back and watch.

 

[less0305]

The receipt is in evidence. He showed it to JA when she was on the stand and she confirmed it.

When I buy paint or other hardware supplies on my husband's account, it has his name on the receipt and he's nowhere near the store. I knew about the receipts, just wondered if there was any other proof that Brad was the one that actually bought any paint for the extra painting jobs.

 

[SleuthinNC]

When I buy paint or other hardware supplies on my husband's account, it has his name on the receipt and he's nowhere near the store. I knew about the receipts, just wondered if there was any other proof that Brad was the one that actually bought any paint for the extra painting jobs.

Hard to tell. There was a receipt that sad Brad Cooper, one that said Nancy Cooper, and one that said Cooper. There hasn't been any store clerk testimony or video or anything. I guess maybe the paint color might be the tip off?

 

[sunshine05]

Hard to tell. There was a receipt that sad Brad Cooper, one that said Nancy Cooper, and one that said Cooper. There hasn't been any store clerk testimony or video or anything. I guess maybe the paint color might be the tip off?

Where did you get the info about the receipts? I thought he took her credit cards away so how could there be a NC receipt? The only one that I'm aware of that's been mentioned in court was the BC one that was shown when he was questioning JA.

 

[cody100]

I think that if you believe that this is the criteria by which this case will be decided, you are kidding yourself. It's nice to say the "innocent until proven guilty" stuff because it's the right thing to say and it's interesting to discuss theoretically whether the case has been proven. But after the first few days of the trial this turned in to a case of Brad having to prove that he didn't do it.

As many here have said, it's always the husband in cases like this. The jury knows that too. So, that's the baseline assumption. Then as soon as they heard that there were marriage problems (motive) and that Brad had no solid alibi (opportunity), it became the defense's challenge to prove that he's innocent.

After hearing from Nancy's mother's emotional testimony and seeing photos of Nancy and the kids, the jury is going to want to see someone punished for her murder. As long as it seems likely that Brad did it, they are not going to let him walk just because the DA's failed to prove it. They know that it's not like if they find him not guilty the Cary police are going to say "ok, I guess he didn't do it" and go out looking for someone else. So, if they don't find Brad guilty, Nancy's murder will go unpunished. They are human, they won't let that happen.

It's just like 90% of the people here. Even without a "smoking gun", the only thing that would make them believe that Brad didn't do it is if somehow the defense proved that he couldn't have done it. The onus has been on the defense from the beginning.

As I said, I think that he probably did it and that's going to be close enough in this case.

Well, you are certainly entitled to your opiion on how this will be decided. I don't think anyone can predict how the jury will vote on any case. There may actually be objective scientific individuals on the jury who will look for proof and not inuendo, gossip, and hearsay which has been uttered over and over on the witness stand, laced by a number of errors by law enforcement. I realize that many of the people here have convicted him and probably feel as you do. Again that is your choice. I am just glad that you are not on the jury. And if you thik close enough in this case is justice, you are kidding yourself.

I for one am waiting to see the remainder of the evidence and the defense presentation. Then I will be happy to form a decision, not before.

 

[sunshine05]

When I buy paint or other hardware supplies on my husband's account, it has his name on the receipt and he's nowhere near the store. I knew about the receipts, just wondered if there was any other proof that Brad was the one that actually bought any paint for the extra painting jobs.

Are you talking about a Home Depot account or??

 

[sunshine05]

Sit back and watch.

Well, it's obvious we are only completely different sides of this thing! We shall see.