Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #20

[raisincharlie]

Please don't take this wrong - I love reading your posts and you have so many great thoughts, but at this point I tend to think BC's eye condition is the least of his problems. I mean his receding hairline is just so much more obvious than his eye

Hope y'all have a great day!!

-- interesting on the warrants, RC. Not surprised and would guess they'll stay sealed past Monday???

All Willoughby has to say is that the release of the warrants would hinder the investigation or harm a defendents right to a fair trial and Judge Stephens will extend the seal IMO. However, the opposing lawyers may have a point or two on the warrants for the house and cars, depending of course on what LE found/retreived from the house.

The other two - I do not believe they will be unsealed at all.

If Willoughby says it will prejudice a defendents right to a fair trial - he might as well name a POI since Brad Cooper owned the home and cars - something to watch for.

 

[raisincharlie]

Always good to review different outlets:

http://www.newsobserver.com/front/story/1179143.html


The News & Observer has asked Stephens to release the documents. But District Attorney Colon Willoughby has indicated that he may ask that some portion of the documents remain sealed.

 

[raisincharlie]

Topsail - I thought you would catch that :::shrug::: :crazy:

 

[maconrich]

All Willoughby has to say is that the release of the warrants would hinder the investigation or harm a defendents right to a fair trial and Judge Stephens will extend the seal IMO. However, the opposing lawyers may have a point or two on the warrants for the house and cars, depending of course on what LE found/retreived from the house.

The other two - I do not believe they will be unsealed at all.

If Willoughby says it will prejudice a defendents right to a fair trial - he might as well name a POI since Brad Cooper owned the home and cars - something to watch for.

Gotcha, TY!! They'd be interesting to see but I sure wouldn't want anything to mess up the investigation! I'm not sure that seeing a list of things taken would be overly detrimental, but I guess that would depend on what they took. OTOH if they're really not looking at BC, I could see them releasing at least parts like you mention from the other article.

Star - I too would back outta a room!!

 

[raisincharlie]

Gotcha, TY!! They'd be interesting to see but I sure wouldn't want anything to mess up the investigation! I'm not sure that seeing a list of things taken would be overly detrimental, but I guess that would depend on what they took. OTOH if they're really not looking at BC, I could see them releasing at least parts like you mention from the other article.

Star - I too would back outta a room!!

This is kind of a funny issue I think. Searching the house should be a normal and expected activity since Nancy did reside there. From that perspective sealing the warrants seems rather absurd on face value. However, the probable cause affidavits , not sure how the release could hinder the investigation but can surely understand the prejudicial potential. The same with the inventory of items siezed - not sure how that would hinder an investigation but again the prejudicial value may be more extreme.

We shall see but my quess is the affidavits for probable cause at least will remain sealed. The inventory 50 - 50. In the end all I see being unsealed is the warrant form itself, if anything is unsealed.

JMO

 

[momto3kids]

All Willoughby has to say is that the release of the warrants would hinder the investigation or harm a defendents right to a fair trial and Judge Stephens will extend the seal IMO. However, the opposing lawyers may have a point or two on the warrants for the house and cars, depending of course on what LE found/retreived from the house.

The other two - I do not believe they will be unsealed at all.

If Willoughby says it will prejudice a defendents right to a fair trial - he might as well name a POI since Brad Cooper owned the home and cars - something to watch for.

Less than 2 weeks ago Judge Stephens wouldn't open them, IMO not now either. Willoughby is going to make sure of that. Stephens is the one who sat at his kitchen table signing for the SW, not to share :coffeeup:at 2am. These men are too intelligent to let this case slip thru their hands. BC knows what was taken from his house or at least should.

K&B are probably lining up what subpoena's they want to do next. They're getting so impatient they'll try for the DNA before its ready. With them nothing would surprise me.

 

[raisincharlie]

I see WRAL has updated in the last few minutes with the following

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3385292/

Willoughby has asked that no part of the warrants be released, saying that keeping the information private now is crucial to the investigation.

 

[KTaylorsc]

Hi all! I see nothing new happening.

 

[raisincharlie]

Less than 2 weeks ago Judge Stephens wouldn't open them, IMO not now either. Willoughby is going to make sure of that. Stephens is the one who sat at his kitchen table signing for the SW, not to share :coffeeup:at 2am. These men are too intelligent to let this case slip thru their hands. BC knows what was taken from his house or at least should.

K&B are probably lining up what subpoena's they want to do next. They're getting so impatient they'll try for the DNA before its ready. With them nothing would surprise me.

I don't disagree but for the sake of looking PC - the Judge might release the warrant form - not much of anything can be gleaned from the form.

Either way - no matter what excuse Willoughby uses, and I agree he will get his way, he is providing information. Crucial to the investigation - how can it be crucial - only if something was found to indicate a crime occurred in the house or is related to the cars. Prejudicial - only one person it can prejudice if you think about it.

Then there is that pesky part about DNA -

 

[Star12]

I see WRAL has updated in the last few minutes with the following

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3385292/

Willoughby has asked that no part of the warrants be released, saying that keeping the information private now is crucial to the investigation.

I think that is sloppy wral writing. I think that is a rehash of last month's hearing, and that Willoughby has yet to make his request (file) known.

Pretty sure we won't know anything about the documents on Monday, though.

But, question. If releasing the documents would be prejudicial, how is not releasing them not prejudicial? My mind tells me there is something there...:waitasec:

 

[raisincharlie]

I think that is sloppy wral writing. I think that is a rehash of last month's hearing, and that Willoughby has yet to make his request (file) known.

Pretty sure we won't know anything about the documents on Monday, though.

But, question. If releasing the documents would be prejudicial, how is not releasing them not prejudicial? My mind tells me there is something there...:waitasec:

uh huh - bingo

I suppose one could argue the "crucial" by saying nothing was found but seems to me - all those pictures of LE carrying stuff out of the house does not quite support that arguement. Lot of stuff hauled in.

 

[momto3kids]

Wow - tough crowd. Gotta have defense lawyers to make the justice system work folks. It simply has to work or we are all in trouble. Part of the court room drama, beyond the case, is the lawyers and how well they act out their parts. Have to act like they are right no matter what. Its called bluff, smoke and mirrors, and some red herrings thrown in. I have to say I find them interesting, but I keep that store of nerf bricks within close reach so as not to do permanent damage to tv's, monitors, walls, and floors:crazy:

:Jumpie: doing this act will bring distraction, but he has to do something to be seen. Maybe they will bring a ladder so Blum can be raised to a height that Judge Stephens can see them without having to lean forward the entire case.:crazy:

I can see it now Judge Stephens keeps telling Blum to stand and he keeps telling him, I am Judge!

 

[citygirl]

Topsail - I thought you would catch that :::shrug::: :crazy:

I caught it. It gave me the "stupid" chills.:crazy:

 

[MoonFlwr]

No wait. He won't. The daughters are carrying a trait of Brad's. This will appeal to his narcissistic mentality. He will want the girls to be branded for life with HIS Daddy Eye. :eye:

man ...that's filling in a lot of gaps with assumption!

 

[raisincharlie]

I caught it. It gave me the "stupid" chills.:crazy:

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

The devil made me do it...:slap: (me this side)

 

[ncnative]

No, Moonflower, the girls did get Brad's "eye" ailment. I didn't assume that.

Trivia alert! I went by Brad Cooper's on my way to and from my physical therapy appt. today. His car is in a different place than a few days ago. Now it's up closer to the garage door. Either someone (he, or who?) is living there, or someone is playing musical cars to keep us entertained on WS. :beamup:

 

[MoonFlwr]

No, Moonflower, the girls did get Brad's "eye" ailment. I didn't assume that.

Wasn't that part I was talking about.

 

[FullDisclosure]

Wasn't that part I was talking about.

Seriously....Sheesh. I totally agree, MoonFlwr.

 

[carolinalady]

No, Moonflower, the girls did get Brad's "eye" ailment. I didn't assume that.

Trivia alert! I went by Brad Cooper's on my way to and from my physical therapy appt. today. His car is in a different place than a few days ago. Now it's up closer to the garage door. Either someone (he, or who?) is living there, or someone is playing musical cars to keep us entertained on WS. :beamup:

I'm sorry, but have we seen some medical documentation or is this going on some photographs of the girls? I am asking this b/c even if it looks like they have it in a picture doesn't mean they do. I'm sure a pediatrician would have noted it and referred them to a specialist.

 

[Topsail Girl]

Topsail - I thought you would catch that :::shrug::: :crazy:

I caught it :crazy: I just love my cat, don't you?