Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #19

[Roy23]

See the thing is, many people are assuming that Brad is telling the TRUTH, that their precarious financial condition was all because of Nancy. Nancy was the spender. Nancy was the 'embellisher,' which by the way is another word for liar. Nancy wanted to break up their home. Brad gave Nancy plenty of money for food and what not, she just didn't know how to manage HIS money. Nancy continued running in preparation for a marathon or whatever, but yet he, Brad had decided to curtail his practice or whatever, to work on the family.:boohoo:

I dunno, I guess I just don't understand how a woman could have Mr. Perfect who even earned a fantastic living, and by all of Brad's accounts he never did anything except to work day and night to support his family and save his marriage. Yet, Nancy still wanted to leave him?

Course, I guess it COULD be that Brad is the :liar: and behind closed doors he could be a monster!

We can't ask Nancy because she's dead. So I guess we'll just have to go by Brad's word for it. NOT!!!!!!

JMHO
fran

PS......ah yes, I seem to remember affidavits by Nancy's friends that Brad held the purse strings and controlled the money. Looking from the outside in, looks like Nancy was right! Course, I can't discuss it with her because she's dead........

Fran,

I don't think this is the case at all. You should try to use phrases such as:

I think
In my opinion

I think that a lot of statements contradict Nancy as a helpless person that is totally controlled by Brad. That does not mean I believe Brad is innocent or not a liar. He is a cheater at minimum. I am quite certain if you polled everybody and the choices are were Brad innocent or guilty that almost all will say guilty.

Every piece of hearsay out there, you speak them as facts. And for now we don't know a COD, a time, where she was killed or anything.

 

[Star12]

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67337&page=8

here's the first link to the detergent story.

 

[ncsu95]

Very good points momto3

Where is his grieving?

From what I can see, he's ONLY concerned with APPEARING or PROVING he's innocencent.:waitasec:

IF he's really innocent, there SHOULD be NOTHING to prove.

He ACTS like a guilty man.:behindbar

JMHO
fran

Huh? What on earth has BC done to give any appearances of anything? He participated in 1 press conference and has made no public statements outside of that. He submitted affidavits for the custody hearing. Do you think his lawyers might have had something to do with that? He chose not to participate in any of the public events, and I don't blame him for that. According to law enforcement, he has fully cooperated with the investigation. So outside the statistical probability that he is the killer (since most husbands are in this situation), what on earth has he done to act guilty? Jason Young acted guilty. BC has not acted guilty. He very well might be guilty....but there has been no evidence disclosed yet that proves he is guilty of anything.

 

[fran]

RC,

I think the point is that most of us are using phrases that express an opinion. Fran's are very far from that.

This is an OPINION board. That's what I'm doing, giving my OPINION.

I think Brad killed his wife. I've given REASONS that go towards the reason of reached that OPINION.

JMHO = Just My Humble Opinion.

Simple as that.

JMHO
fran

PS....Like I said, I don't have a link to the 'detergent' purchase at 4:20. IF you don't want to consider it don't.....simple....fran

 

[ncsu95]

Yeah, and Brad cut off Nancy's credit so she couldn't do her side business.

Of course now to hear the grieving husband, it was to curtail Nancy's wild spending.

I believe IF there is a court case, Nancy's attempt to earn a living and Brad cutting off her credit cards and Nancy filing for legal separation are all going to be totally entiwined together.

JMHO
fran

And how exactly do you know this? They took out a home equity loan to "pay off" 85k in credit card debt and racked up another 45k after that. Seems like a good reason to get rid of credit cards if you ask me. My wife doesn't have a credit card (and neither do I). She makes do on less than $300/week (in cash) for our day to day needs, and is a stay at home mom. Of course, we follow Dave Ramsey's plan and agree to this together.

 

[MoonFlwr]

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67337&page=8

here's the first link to the detergent story.

Yes, a link to a poster's information about the detergent.

 

[FullDisclosure]

Yes, a link to a poster's information about the detergent.

It MUST be true! I read it on WEBSLEUTHS!! :bang:

 

[raisincharlie]

RC,

I think the point is that most of us are using phrases that express an opinion. Fran's are very far from that.

So attack the post, not the poster.

Lets talk about that 4 am store run.

The possible 4 am run to the store has been around since almost the beginning - no one has proved it right or wrong. The press has raised the issue - LE has refused to confirm it or deny it - so there is the bottom line - it could be either way. What would it hurt for LE to say it didn't happen, if it didn't happen ? Sure bet Brad would have appreciated them saying it did not happen, if it didn't happen. The way I see it - there is a 50 - 50 chance either way. Form your own conclusion or opinion if you will.

 

[MoonFlwr]

So attack the post, not the poster.

Lets talk about that 4 am store run.

The possible 4 am run to the store has been around since almost the beginning - no one has proved it right or wrong. The press has raised the issue - LE has refused to confirm it or deny it - so there is the bottom line - it could be either way. What would it hurt for LE to say it didn't happen, if it didn't happen ? Sure bet Brad would have appreciated them saying it did not happen, if it didn't happen. The way I see it - there is a 50 - 50 chance either way. Form your own conclusion or opinion if you will.

Yup, am doing that, thanks.

 

[Roy23]

So attack the post, not the poster.

Lets talk about that 4 am store run.

The possible 4 am run to the store has been around since almost the beginning - no one has proved it right or wrong. The press has raised the issue - LE has refused to confirm it or deny it - so there is the bottom line - it could be either way. What would it hurt for LE to say it didn't happen, if it didn't happen ? Sure bet Brad would have appreciated them saying it did not happen, if it didn't happen. The way I see it - there is a 50 - 50 chance either way. Form your own conclusion or opinion if you will.

You call that an attack.

What about the 4 am run to the store? LE hasn't confirmed ANYTHING. So why would they start there. The only conclusion I can form is that if Brad was at HT a 4:00 am, then he almost assuredly has knowlege of his wife's death.

Opinions are great. Is it too much to ask to at least clarify you have an opinion instead of state it as fact. For a second I thought that the HT (4:20 am) was actually a proven fact.

 

[fran]

So attack the post, not the poster.

Lets talk about that 4 am store run.

The possible 4 am run to the store has been around since almost the beginning - no one has proved it right or wrong. The press has raised the issue - LE has refused to confirm it or deny it - so there is the bottom line - it could be either way. What would it hurt for LE to say it didn't happen, if it didn't happen ? Sure bet Brad would have appreciated them saying it did not happen, if it didn't happen. The way I see it - there is a 50 - 50 chance either way. Form your own conclusion or opinion if you will.

IF it was NOT true, and the only visits to the store were at the times specified in Brad's affidavit, then why is he trying to get copies of stuff from the store?

He couldn't possibly have something to hide?

JMHO
fran

 

[MoonFlwr]

You call that an attack.

What about the 4 am run to the store? LE hasn't confirmed ANYTHING. So why would they start there. The only conclusion I can form is that if Brad was at HT a 4:00 am, then he almost assuredly has knowlege of his wife's death.

Opinions are great. Is it too much to ask to at least clarify you have an opinion instead of state it as fact. For a second I thought that the HT (4:20 am) was actually a proven fact.

Not at all and that's why (with all due respect to the original poster) the original post was questioned and, all along the way, some people have just tried to remind others where this opinion originated, JUST to remind people that that's what it is/was.

No disrespect to anyone intended! Just trying to keep proven facts apart from other things.

 

[Roy23]

IF it was NOT true, and the only visits to the store were at the times specified in Brad's affidavit, then why is he trying to get copies of stuff from the store?

He couldn't possibly have something to hide?

JMHO
fran

Could be numerous reasons Fran. Could be getting receipts that confirm his timeframe in the affidavit. Heck Fran, it could be anything. Could be either way.

 

[MoonFlwr]

IF it was NOT true, and the only visits to the store were at the times specified in Brad's affidavit, then why is he trying to get copies of stuff from the store?

He couldn't possibly have something to hide?

JMHO
fran

I see no problem with gathering proof to back up your claims (imo).

 

[MoonFlwr]

Could be numerous reasons Fran. Could be getting receipts that confirm his timeframe in the affidavit. Heck Fran, it could be anything. Could be either way.

Zackly!

 

[carolinalady]

IF it was NOT true, and the only visits to the store were at the times specified in Brad's affidavit, then why is he trying to get copies of stuff from the store?

He couldn't possibly have something to hide?

JMHO
fran

And as I have said before, someone else can easily use another's VIC, you only have to know their phone number. That's why I said video would be important if there's a purchase on the records that he doesn't admit to.

 

[FullDisclosure]

Could be numerous reasons Fran. Could be getting receipts that confirm his timeframe in the affidavit. Heck Fran, it could be anything. Could be either way.

I see no problem with gathering proof to back up your claims (imo).

I was going to respond, but I'll just say that I agree with Roy and MoonFlwr.

 

[raisincharlie]

You call that an attack.

What about the 4 am run to the store? LE hasn't confirmed ANYTHING. So why would they start there. The only conclusion I can form is that if Brad was at HT a 4:00 am, then he almost assuredly has knowlege of his wife's death.

Opinions are great. Is it too much to ask to at least clarify you have an opinion instead of state it as fact. For a second I thought that the HT (4:20 am) was actually a proven fact.

I don't seem to be seeing where a JMHO hasn't been added to the post.

 

[RaleighNC]

I do think that the fact that LE has had warrants for their home and cars, as well as BRAD's place of employment and computers paints a picture. Knowing that LE cannot get a warrant without a reason that states why they expect to find what they are looking for.... it says that they know a heck of a lot more than we do, and it's pointing to Brad.

The fact he's on administrative leave and Cisco made that public says they are potentially safeguarding themselves and their OTHER employees.

If this was a spouse dying from a random act from a stranger - they'd just have his manager tell him to take the time he needed and potentially come back to work when he could, etc. I believe that they are paying him to stay away. remember, their attorneys have seen the warrant.

 

[carolinalady]

See the thing is, many people are assuming that Brad is telling the TRUTH, that their precarious financial condition was all because of Nancy. Nancy was the spender. Nancy was the 'embellisher,' which by the way is another word for liar. Nancy wanted to break up their home. Brad gave Nancy plenty of money for food and what not, she just didn't know how to manage HIS money. Nancy continued running in preparation for a marathon or whatever, but yet he, Brad had decided to curtail his practice or whatever, to work on the family.:boohoo:

I dunno, I guess I just don't understand how a woman could have Mr. Perfect who even earned a fantastic living, and by all of Brad's accounts he never did anything except to work day and night to support his family and save his marriage. Yet, Nancy still wanted to leave him?

Course, I guess it COULD be that Brad is the :liar: and behind closed doors he could be a monster!

We can't ask Nancy because she's dead. So I guess we'll just have to go by Brad's word for it. NOT!!!!!!

JMHO
fran

PS......ah yes, I seem to remember affidavits by Nancy's friends that Brad held the purse strings and controlled the money. Looking from the outside in, looks like Nancy was right! Course, I can't discuss it with her because she's dead........

The people I know that operate on a cash budget do it to control the spending, not each other. They have accounts in 1 name and pay as much towards those items as possible to pay the debt down. Then, they operate on a cash budget for the remaining expenses.