Nancy Cooper, 34, of Cary, N.C. #7

[EnvoyDriver61]

Let's assume then that it is another person.

That person would have to either have kidnapped Nancy at home, or that person would have had to have snatched her while she ran sometime.

BC's original story was that he went to get milk and bread at 6 a.m. and that Nancy left the home to go jogging between 6 a.m. and 7 a.m. I'm sure he told LE the store he went to purchase this stuff at 6 a.m. and thus they are focused on a specific store. They can't find records of this purchase. So, did he tell them the wrong store? Surely he remembered what store it was since the story wasn't 12 hours old.

If he was at the store as he says, he couldn't see her leave at 6 a.m. The 6-7 is kind of vague. So, did he actually see her leave or not? It appears he did, so the kidnapped by another person at home doesn't seem to be supported.

Second, the routine Brad describes isn't the normal routine for Nancy, especially when she is running with someone else. Did she meet someone to run with or not? If so, it's an ethereal Carrie person that someone may know but someone may not. That's leaves a stalker person named Carrie whom not many knew who might have killed Nancy. What reason, motive, opportunity did they have?

Third, where she usually jogs was fairly busy that day. It's daylight, and there's activity on her normal route. Even on a Saturday, there are other walkers/joggers out at that time and traffic. Someone would have had to grab her from the streets with a car and a gun. That's difficult to do unless there are two people. An experienced runner like Nancy is as likely to try to make a run for it if a single person is stopped in a car, even with a gun on them telling them to get in the car. I'd suspect someone would have to drag her in the car and that would be difficult without a scene.

So, there's three scenarios for other people: a kidnapper at home, stalker Carrie, and kidnapper in route. All three of these scenarios have problems with them, either problems of time, motive, opportunity, etc.

Not that they couldn't happen, but that they seem less likely.

 

[Wudge]

Hurtful to whom? I am reasoning to a conclusion BASED on the FACTS as we know them to be at this point in time. I am not and will not be a juror in this case. Again, this is what we do here. Surely you know that by now!

It's hurtful to a defendant's right to a fair trial by an impartial jury, for a prejudiced jury pool prejudices a fair trial.

HTH

 

[panthera]

At first I thought he said she'd left at 7am, then I've heard other reports of between 6:30am - 7am. Either way, no one remembers seeing her that morning, and her change of routine plus not taking any ID or cell phone with her makes it suspicious that she even went out, imo. After hearing about the marriage problems though it is more understandable why he didn't report her missing.

 

[Lurker]

Why was it a friend instead of the husband who reported her missing?

 

[RKAB]

I find this extremely difficult. I feel so much grief for those two little girls whose world has been absolutely ripped apart. This is not something that will pass. This is something that will be with them their entire life. I feel for NC's family..what a horrible thing to have to endure. At the same time, I feel for BC's family. No one raises a child to become a murderer (if indeed he did this). BC's family has lost a daughter-in-law, are watching what's happening to their son and who knows how much access they are getting with their grandchildren. These people are grieving too. They are trying to hope beyond hope and believe in their son that he was not responsible for this. They, however, must realize that this does not look good for him.

I think the parents can not be blamed for his mental instability, I truly believe he has a chemical imbalance which in absolutely NO WAY does it excuse what's happened. I don't believe it to even be any sort of defense. There are tons of ways to work through chemical imbalances and personality issues. It is never a defense for murder, IMO.

Now before someone jumps on me for defending him or his family, I have a right to be so torn. I am one of those "ex's" from Canada. BC is from a good family. They gave him so many opportunities that others never had. The Calgary poster is right though. As a person, Brad can be materialistic, self-centered, narcisistic (sp?), moody, mean, emotionally controlling and the like. He can also be a good person, we all have good in us. Nancy must have seen more of his good side at the beginning to have wanted to have children with him and probably tried so hard (as all of his previous relationships did) to work through the bad.

I feel horrible for what NC had to endure and the outcome (at whoever's hands). This is such an awful situation. My head KNOWS how this is going to turn out, my heart wishes it would be different. I wish it was going to be a different outcome because I have shared part of my life, my family....with BC and can't believe that someone that I had put my trust in could ever be involved in such a horrible act. I don't feel sorry for BC because he put himself in this situation. I feel sorry for NC, those poor children and both families.

He is an intensely private person. He is also an extremely smart person which surprises me all the more that he would do something so stupid. I don't think that it was pre-meditated. I think there was an argument that got out of control, one thing led to another and she was gone and he panicked. Which is why everything is unravelling for him. If this was premeditated, he is smart...he would have covered everything to the last meticulous detail.

I think he's guilty. I'll say it clear. But I do feel for his family as well.

And Brad, if you're reading this, because lord knows if you're not in jail, you'll have that laptop all wired up, how could you?

 

[SuziQ]

Would you please list the sufficient, material, reliable and competent evidence for me?

Show us evidence that says Brad is innocent. I mean real and sensible evidence. Not some far out theory how it could have been a mistress, pissed of co-worker of Brads, or random lunatic roaming the streets.

We are allowed to discuss both Brad's guilt or possible innocence. Everyone deserves to have their opinion heard. But no one should be harrased into discussing what they don't believe is true.

 

[panthera]

Why was it a friend instead of the husband who reported her missing?

I don't know, and it seems LE doesn't either, but knowing they were having problems in the marriage, that he might have been having an affair with someone, it seems he just didn't care or thought she was out with her friends. Just my take on why he didn't call, if he didn't kill her.

 

[SuziQ]

...or, if you are out of detergent, you need to do laundry and your wife is going running, first thing in the morning.

The stores around here aren't 24hr, but I work from home and watch the kids. Numerous times, I've ran to the store as soon as they've opened (before my wife has left for the office), where I could get what I need without having to drag the kids.

The point is isn't what he bought or when he bought it. The point is that he lied about it.

 

[Pepper]

It's hurtful to a defendant's right to a fair trial by an impartial jury, for a prejudiced jury pool prejudices a fair trial.

HTH

Then I guess this board and all others like it - countless blogs should be shut down because any of them could taint the jury pool? How about TV news? Newspapers?

That wouldn't be in conflict with the 1st Amendment, would it????

 

[Pepper]

RKAB Thank you for your thoughtful and insightful post. You speak volumes about how this act affects so many people. Prayers to your side of the family as you all are victims of this senseless act.

ETA: I agree that it probably was not premeditated. Too bad he didn't call 911 right away instead of trying to cover it up.

 

[Wudge]

SNIP

There are tons of ways to work through chemical imbalances and personality issues. It is never a defense for murder, IMO.

SNIP

Andrea Yates drowned her children. Deanna Laney stoned her children to death.

You would have sentenced them to?

 

[panthera]

The point is isn't what he bought or when he bought it. The point is that he lied about it.

Exactly! And if caught in a lie about something that might be as innocent as a quick trip to the store, what else is a lie?

 

[SuziQ]

Andrea Yates drowned her children. Deanna Laney stoned her children to death.

You would have sentenced them to?

I would have.

 

[curiositycat]

God Bless you RKAB and welcome to WS's.

You are right it is so hard to believe that someone who was part of your friends or family could commit an act like that. It is painful because you have already seen the "good" things about the person. I am sure it is hard on his family. In some cases harder, they are experiencing a lot of loss also.

I have found that a lot of "head" smart people don't have as much "street-smarts" as other people.

Thanks for posting what I am sure may be the thoughts of a lot of folks who knew both Nancy and Brad.

 

[Wudge]

Then I guess this board and all others like it - countless blogs should be shut down because any of them could taint the jury pool? How about TV news? Newspapers?

That wouldn't be in conflict with the 1st Amendment, would it????

The right to a fair trial conflicts with the freedom of the press. If it were up to me, I would not permit the media to discuss cases before a trial concluded.

 

[RKAB]

Andrea Yates drowned her children. Deanna Laney stoned her children to death.

You would have sentenced them to?

Yes, I would have. It was murder. However, there are different degrees of murder as well as the sentencing implications which could get them the help that they need. I am more than sympathetic to women with post-partum psychosis as one of my best friend's suffered through it (and thankfully came through to a positive end).

I will also say that at least in the USA, you guys have true justice. In Canada, a "life" sentence is 25 years unless you are declared a dangerous offender. You are eligible for parole before completing that, you get double-credit for time served in remand before sentencing and then ta-da...you're out. In the US, a life sentence means a life sentence.

 

[Wudge]

I would have.

Do the mentally ill belong in prison or on death row?

 

[Pepper]

Andrea Yates drowned her children. Deanna Laney stoned her children to death.

You would have sentenced them to?

Be nice Wudge, she is a family member.

Re Andrea Yates and Deanna Laney and anyone who commits such a vile act, especially against defenseless CHILDREN deserves LWOP. No exceptions, no excuses.

 

[curiositycat]

It's hurtful to a defendant's right to a fair trial by an impartial jury, for a prejudiced jury pool prejudices a fair trial.

HTH

You know what Wudge, IMHO, that is what's wrong with the country these days. We are so concerned about "getting it right, worrying about the defendants rights"
I believe that contributes to a lot of these murdered women cases. I am thinking of four possibly five in the past year or so where NO one has been arrested because of the rights of "criminals"

What about the rights of the women? What about the rights of the children? I am going to make a "shocking" statement. I don't give a clam about the rights of these aholes. I would love to go back to the days of the old west when they would get a rope and hang them. I bet you we would have a whole lot less murder of women if we did that.

 

[Wudge]

Yes, I would have. It was murder. However, there are different degrees of murder as well as the sentencing implications which could get them the help that they need. I am more than sympathetic to women with post-partum psychosis as one of my best friend's suffered through it (and thankfully came through to a positive end).

I will also say that at least in the USA, you guys have true justice. In Canada, a "life" sentence is 25 years unless you are declared a dangerous offender. You are eligible for parole before completing that, you get double-credit for time served in remand before sentencing and then ta-da...you're out. In the US, a life sentence means a life sentence.

Is insanity a proper defense?