Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #26

[gritguy]

Was there more than one 26 second clip? If so, the rest has been removed from WRAL.

the link i watched (from here) was almost 2 minutes and it said there were two other videos.

 

[SleuthyGal]

You know SG - that affidavit, Shirley Hull, makes me plumb mad. Look at what he did in public to Nancy and those little girls - just imagine what it was like behind closed doors.

I don't have to imagine it. I read the autopsy report. :furious:

 

[ncnative]

RKAB: do you know anything about the car accident that Brad had in 1999, or whenever Jill Dean's affidavit said he did? If so, can you tell us about it?

I wonder if maybe someone was killed due to that accident, which could have led to his depressive/suicidal issues. OR, maybe he had a head injury which can really alter your senses for a while. I wonder if you could fill us in, or maybe you have "people" who can let you know. It's always nice to have "people".

TIA

 

[SleuthyGal]

how you could not see for yourself where your wife's body was found is completely beyond me. Even if you DIDN'T do it, and you HATED the other person - you'd go. It would be part of closure, or understanding, or something. But to say he has no interest in going.....

This one I'm not going to judge him on (well maybe just a little), but seriously, in my family I am probably the only one who would go to a site of a murdered one. I'm not kidding. My parents and uncle would NEVER be able to handle it emotionally. So knowing that some people can't do it, I'll give him a pass on that, but only barely.

The thing is, I think he DID come to hate Nancy...I think he felt she was draining him financially, emotionally, in every way, and when it was hitting him on all levels, he was 'done.'

 

[mahmoo]

Was there more than one 26 second clip? If so, the rest has been removed from WRAL.

Go here Star http://www.newsobserver.com/2864/story/1248805.html

There are three clips listed under Related Content

• See Brad Cooper talk about the location where wife Nancy's body was found.
• See Cooper describe arguing with his wife a day before she disappeared
• See Cooper talk about phone calls regarding his wife's disappearance

 

[SleuthyGal]

Brad looks both arrogant and nervous in these videos. He's also looking down or away as he's answering questions and only makes eye contact at the end of his answer. I think this shows dishonesty in his answers. His lawyers should have coached him a lot better than this.

And, really, you can't remember if your wife told you that she hated you that day? Seems kind of like it should be a yes or no answer. You don't remember if she's ever used those words with you? Really? I find that hard to believe. We remember hurtful and angry words a lot longer than we remember kind ones.

Happy birthday Coops! I hope it's your last one on the outside. :behindbar

The thing that struck me most about him on these videos, as well as the first one at the press conference, is the nervous twisting of his hands. It jumped out at me when I saw the first presser. The camera zooms in on his hands and he is wringing them over and over and staring into oblivion and it just hit me in a visceral way. And again on these depo videos he can't keep his hands still...playing with the pen. Nervousness for sure but the body always shows deception in some way...it is literally impossible to lie and not have that energy come out somewhere on the body. Studies have been done about this. Sometimes it's imperceptible and sometimes a lot more obvious.

 

[gritguy]

whopper alert!

this short clip shows him saying that his two priorities are getting his kids back and "helping" the investigation about nancy. his second highest priority in life is helping the investigation but yet later he proclaims himself minimally aware of core facts of the case.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/3708389/

 

[reddress58]

whopper alert!

this short clip shows him saying that his two priorities are getting his kids back and "helping" the investigation about nancy. his second highest priority in life is helping the investigation but yet later he proclaims himself minimally aware of core facts of the case.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/3708389/

"whopper alert" I love it!:floorlaugh:

 

[mahmoo]

Sleuthy, I agree with your post about him fidgeting with the pen. I can understand that he likely was nervous but, it just appeared excessive to me. As a matter of fact, I had to watch the video clips a few times because I was so distracted watching him fumble with the pen that I wasn't listening to what was being said.

 

[jmflu]

It's just me personally but even if my ex-husband, and believe me - there's no love lost there, died tomorrow in some tragic way, I would probably still visit the site to pay my respects. If I couldn't visit the site, I would definately want to have learned enough to be able to identify the area on a map.

Brad looks both arrogant and nervous in these videos. He's also looking down or away as he's answering questions and only makes eye contact at the end of his answer. I think this shows dishonesty in his answers. His lawyers should have coached him a lot better than this.

And, really, you can't remember if your wife told you that she hated you that day? Seems kind of like it should be a yes or no answer. You don't remember if she's ever used those words with you? Really? I find that hard to believe. We remember hurtful and angry words a lot longer than we remember kind ones.

Happy birthday Coops! I hope it's your last one on the outside. :behindbar

Very poignant RKAB... very poignant.

 

[jmflu]

Well really he's been there once already.

I've deposed a lot of people. One theme that occurs frequently is that when the witness wants to create the perception that he had nothing to do with a particular action, he will feign more ignorance of the event than is reasonable.

Cooper did that here. He acted like he had only minimal knowledge of where his wife's body was found, and said things like "the report" said as if there were any reason to question it.

Yet if he had not committed the murder, his interest in the location of the body would have been intense for at least two reasons (discounting that he might actually have cared about Nancy and therefore have an interest in what happened to her which would have been the best reason): 1) the desire, like many people, to know who did this - in this case to his children's mother and his wife (wedding band on people yet he has no interest in the murder!) and the manner and location of the body disposal is relevant to that, and 2) if he felt like the finger were being pointed at him unfairly, the desire to know the basic facts of the case as close as possible to right the injustice and defend himself.

The feigned ignorance is superficial. It says, "I know nothing of the murder so I cannot give you any details about it which should tell you I had nothing to do with it." The deeper strategy would have been to show interest in the case, but that does have the risk of the attorney getting you to say something that maybe was not revealed in the press.

Anyway, I haven't watched the other videos, but this one follows a path taken many times before.

I recognize all the facts are not on the table yet, but that clip did him no good in my book.

Exactly... That's what I picked up... too much feigning of innocence about such an intense event... no WAY if he had nothing to do with it he would be that ignorant...

 

[jmflu]

whopper alert!

this short clip shows him saying that his two priorities are getting his kids back and "helping" the investigation about nancy. his second highest priority in life is helping the investigation but yet later he proclaims himself minimally aware of core facts of the case.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/3708389/

Nothing's playing on this video. Anyone else have the same problem?

I'm glad I got to see the other three.

Just a strange fact I found out last night from my BF... K&B represented him several years ago in his divorce!!!!!

 

[ncnative]

In the video (deposition), notice how Brad is asked about the calls on the morning Nancy was missing. The woman asked Brad about the calls, and Brad refers to Jessica and Hannah as "THOSE two" in a derogatory tone, in my opinion. As in how a teacher would refer to their two most troublesome students, or how someone would refer to a duo of pesky troublemakers. Not reading into it, I did notice it.

For the first time I have looked at the depo videos. Yes, he does strike me as arrogant toward the woman who is questioning him. Would he be so arrogant if a man were questioning him? I don't know.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Why were Brad and Nancy fighting about painting if Brad had no idea Nancy was planning to paint at JA's house that Sat morning?

Did he know? Did he not know? And if he didn't know then why did he 'forget' to give her the $300 that Friday?

Conflicting stories all around.

The lawyer's (Alice Stubbs?) tone is sooo even and calm and smooth. She was giving him lots of rope and letting him construct his own noose. I'm used to hearing lawyers sound condescending and sarcastic and on the attack, when I've watched/heard other cases.

 

[jumpstreet]

I think a change of venue is a given if Brad is arrested for Nancy's murder and I do think it was a part of K & B's strategy from the beginning has to "help" this along. No doubt in my mind about a change of venue.

Hi RC... I recalled we kicked around the 'change-of-venue' possibility some time ago, and I thought at the time, that you were on the page that voir dire alone should take care of getting an objective jury in place, and (at the time) you didn't see anything compelling thus far to base a change of venue on. [ This was probably just after the initial wave of custody affidavits prior to the first custody (non)-hearing ].

With all the custody stuff that's been posted since then (agree, it continues to surprise) are you thinking now that even a voire dire won't suffice in any (hypothetical) criminal case? [ I would agree, BTW, and actually was thinking even originally that voir likely wouldn't be sufficient in Wake County, given the high publicity of the case ]

I was joking last week when I posted about making the video of the deposition public... only to see it so just a few days subsequent. The custody element (at least) indeed seems to make this one unique case!

 

[reddress58]

Why were Brad and Nancy fighting about painting if Brad had no idea Nancy was planning to paint at JA's house that Sat morning?

Did he know? Did he not know? And if he didn't know then why did he 'forget' to give her the $300 that Friday?

Conflicting stories all around.

The lawyer's (Alice Stubbs?) tone is sooo even and calm and smooth. She was giving him lots of rope and letting him construct his own noose. I'm used to hearing lawyers sound condescending and sarcastic and on the attack, when I've watched/heard other cases.

I know we don't have the whole 7-8 hrs. of deposition tape and we weren't present at the first three days of interviews after NC's death; but from what you can hear and what we've seen from the search warrants, can anyone take a stab at what "inconsistencies" Det. Daniels may be refering to? I have no speaker sound, so I have to sit this one out. SG, your post highlights one.

 

[jumpstreet]

Why were Brad and Nancy fighting about painting if Brad had no idea Nancy was planning to paint at JA's house that Sat morning?

Did he know? Did he not know? And if he didn't know then why did he 'forget' to give her the $300 that Friday?

Perhaps it was over the $300 (and not the painting)... who knows though.

 

[reddress58]

Perhaps it was over the $300 (and not the painting)... who knows though.

I think his statement regarding him not knowing about the painting was "planted" by his legal team. Their stategy as we have seen so far is to point fingers at JA. This is just another example of it.

 

[SleuthyGal]

I know we don't have the whole 7-8 hrs. of deposition tape and we weren't present at the first three days of interviews after NC's death; but from what you can hear and what we've seen from the search warrants, can anyone take a stab at what "inconsistencies" Det. Daniels may be refering to? I have no speaker sound, so I have to sit this one out. SG, your post highlights one.

Maybe another one is his level of cooperation in helping the CPD. Maybe he told them during the 3 days they talked to him that he'd do anything to help and once he got lawyered up he stopped cooperating. That is not unusual though, once lawyers get involved.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Perhaps it was over the $300 (and not the painting)... who knows though.

In the police affidavit for probable cause they state that they learned that Brad and Nancy were fighting over Nancy painting for money as well as the state of the house/cleanliness when Nancy got back. Nothing was said about Brad forgetting to give Nancy her weekly $300 allowance.