State v Bradley Cooper 04/01/11

[BrownRice]

What blows my mind is a year earlier (2007) they (she?) was looking into houses starting at 500K and under. That's an insane amount of money for a house that they didn't seem to have the means for.

Blows my mind too. They're in a sexless, unhappy marriage and wanting to upgrade homes. But I know couples EXACTLY like this. Keep thinking another kid, car, bigger home will solve it. It never does and just ends up burying both of them when they eventually divorce, as they all do.

 

[cityslick]

Well, what in the heck was she supposed to do? Be homeless? THERE WAS NO ALTERNATIVE for her.

And apparently she did sacrifice a lot. Her life.

Compromise. Come to some sort of way to work out without leaving him in the poor house. This happens every day in this country without someone getting murdered.

I've not heard whether any of this tried to happen once he didn't agree to the seperation. Was she dead set on her terms?

 

[ncsu95]

False.

It's in Kurtz' March motion, which is not a sworn statement, nor is it testimony, nor is it evidence. It is RUMOR that the defense threw out to mislead. The defense, btw, is thrilled to have fooled people into believing everything they wrote in that motion. They are counting on people being either too dumb or too naive to understand that motions are not evidence and have no evidentiary value. They can literally ask for anything in a motion and by virtue of the fact that a motion is filed with the court and enters the public domain as a result, they get their story out there, even if none of it is true. AND, they don't have to ever back up anything or ever refer to the motion again.

They could write in a motion: "we want all records, interviews and documents pertaining to the alien abduction that took place on July 12th in which Nancy Cooper went missing" and they could file that motion. And yes, some people would be dumb enough to say, "oooohhhh lookie here Marge...there was an ALIEN ABDUCTION. I knew it!"

Why would the defense care what we think? We're not the jury. I doubt anyone on the jury read those.

 

[borndem]

And she won't have caused Bradley to have to pay alimony, child support, or separate living arrangements. And while she was at it, she was about to help out with the debt by providing a handy little $75,000 in life insurance.

OUCH!!! You go, Less0305! :clap:

 

[Ovechkin]

I have a difficult time believing there has ever been too much traffic on Lochmere Dr at 6:30 AM on a saturday morning to make a left turn. JMO

Then you clearly dont live in the area.

 

[borndem]

Finally. Will we have evidence? Woo hoo maybe.

Well, I think we can feel fairly confident that BC had not planted any grass in their yard.....

 

[ncsu95]

The DEFENSE brought them in as part of their cross-exam of certain witnesses. They are evidence.

What I mean is that very little of it was presented. I'm just talking about what has been discussed during testimony of this trial.

 

[gritguy]

I have a difficult time believing there has ever been too much traffic on Lochmere Dr at 6:30 AM on a saturday morning to make a left turn. JMO

I don't buy that either. After watching the video depo of BC discussing that trip, I think he was lying. He appeared to have very sharp recollection of his first trip to HT and other details of the morning but as to the second said he may have gone another way and really couldn't remember b/c he went there so much.

IMO, he didn't know if for some reason someone saw him head out that way and had to acknowledge that direction of travel which I agree does not seem to be the way to go. He makes 2 trips within short order but goes two different ways, and recalls one clearly but not the other?

I also found his recounting of the morning from 4:30 to 6:30 to be generally suspect, IMO.

Watching that video reinforced to me why I thought he did it in the first place.

Nevertheless, the call from the house has to be dealt with and highly likely at least one witness who claims to have seen Nancy out that morning.

Also, for what it is worth, depositions, affidavits and the like are testimony but not evidence in the trial unless and to the extent allowed by the judge. Deposition questions carry on with no one to rule on objections unless and until the deposition is sought to be introduced at trial (they serve as discovery devices as well as testimony). Generally, an objection can be brought up at that point if the question was flawed. Often, depositions are used for impeachment or the threat of that, to keep a witness consistent with prior testimony.

The opening statement is a forecast of evidence, but the attorney need not bring evidence of each statement made and of course can bring in more than what was mentioned. It should go according to the old 3 step method of communication:

1. tell 'em what you're going to tell 'em (opening statement)
2. tell 'em (case)
3. tell 'em what you told them (closing argument).

 

[obsessive]

Then you clearly dont live in the area.

Yes, I live in the area, and IN THAT SUBDIVISION!! I definitely know the area and drive the roads. You seem to have an issue with most anything anyone says, so I'm not even sure I should bother responding...probably won't again. Pretty silly exchange IMO. But one last thing...135k is hardly a 'ton' of money!!

 

[Ovechkin]

6:15am to 6:45am on a Sat morning would not be a heavy traffic kind of time that one would have to be aware of to alter their route. Not for THAT reason. 5pm on a Friday? yeah, maybe.

Sorry but you are obviously not from around here... there is only 1 "major" road that funnels through there... It’s a two lane road (one in each direction) with many lights. The two different ways he is referring two are different side streets around a particular set of lights... You don’t have to believe me I don’t care but I am from the area and I know exactly what he is talking about. Doesn't mean he did or didn’t do it... Just don’t get caught in tunnel vision before we even hear real evidence... I want to hear actual evidence before I find someone guilty. So far we have not heard any hard evidence... just hearsay... you have to stay objective.

 

[Ovechkin]

I don't buy that either. After watching the video depo of BC discussing that trip, I think he was lying. He appeared to have very sharp recollection of his first trip to HT and other details of the morning but as to the second said he may have gone another way and really couldn't remember b/c he went there so much.

IMO, he didn't know if for some reason someone saw him head out that way and had to acknowledge that direction of travel which I agree does not seem to be the way to go. He makes 2 trips within short order but goes two different ways, and recalls one clearly but not the other?

I also found his recounting of the morning from 4:30 to 6:30 to be generally suspect, IMO.

Watching that video reinforced to me why I thought he did it in the first place.

Nevertheless, the call from the house has to be dealt with and highly likely at least one witness who claims to have seen Nancy out that morning.

Also, for what it is worth, depositions, affidavits and the like are testimony but not evidence in the trial unless and to the extent allowed by the judge. Deposition questions carry on with no one to rule on objections unless and until the deposition is sought to be introduced at trial (they serve as discovery devices as well as testimony). Generally, an objection can be brought up at that point if the question was flawed. Often, depositions are used for impeachment or the threat of that, to keep a witness consistent with prior testimony.

The opening statement is a forecast of evidence, but the attorney need not bring evidence of each statement made and of course can bring in more than what was mentioned. It should go according to the old 3 step method of communication:

1. tell 'em what you're going to tell 'em (opening statement)
2. tell 'em (case)
3. tell 'em what you told them (closing argument).

Just saying... if its that CUT and DRY why isnt the prosecution saying anything about it?

 

[SleuthyGal]

Sorry but you are obviously not from around here

wrong again. I live in Cary. I often go to Crescent Commons.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Why would the defense care what we think? We're not the jury. I doubt anyone on the jury read those.

That motion was published on WRAL well before the start of the trial. EXACTLY how Kurtz et. al. planned. The defense can't put out PR statements saying these things that are false, so they use motions to ask for the information pertaining to..... Getting motions out to the public is very much the point of this strategy.

 

[RaleighNative]

Well, it's all relative I guess. His annual compensation was $135k, correct? But that included bonuses (how much?). Bonuses are taxed at a much higher rate - like 40-42% I think. I think his salary was around $110? Sure, still a decent wage. Would take home be around $7? , BUT they lived in a $300 (at least) with at least 1 second mortgage, 2 BMWS (both pre-owned I think, but still $), and a pretty outgoing lifestyle. I can see where they blew through the money pretty quickly. It wouldn't be that difficult (if they were carefree).

Excellent point, and you are correct in that his base would be around $110K based on what we have heard so far.

I've said this before. In this location, and in this demographic, $135K isn't going to impress anyone.

There are always climbers, and I found many more "climbers" when I did live in Lochmere than in Raleigh or Wake Forest. Based on the evidence thus far, I'd say Nancy was certainly a climber and living well above their means. But living above your means is common in that circle.

Living on $300/week? Okay, I admit it. I spend more than that. And I would be ticked if I was suddenly given $300 cash to live on a week, and no access to my bank. However I work, we have no debt and we've continually invested for retirement and never dipped into our retirement. And we worked hard and went without to get to that place.

But my point is $135K may sound impressive to many people, but it's actually not considered a large amount of money in this demographic.

 

[gritguy]

Just saying... if its that CUT and DRY why isnt the prosecution saying anything about it?

A very good question. I don't think it is cut and dry. It's just my opinion from watching the depo. The prosecution has more to come and the defense has cards to play too. As I say most particularly to me the call from home and the eyewitness.

I'm far from having a firm grasp of the facts in this case. The straw testimony today was the first I've heard of that, and it remains to be explored more I suppose.

There is good reason to think the prosecution has something coming on the computer angle, and of course good reason to think the defense will introduce evidence to support the idea NC was alive after the DA claims she was killed.

 

[Ovechkin]

Yes, I live in the area, and IN THAT SUBDIVISION!! I definitely know the area and drive the roads. You seem to have an issue with most anything anyone says, so I'm not even sure I should bother responding...probably won't again. Pretty silly exchange IMO. But one last thing...135k is hardly a 'ton' of money!!

With the cost of living around here... that is easy life... at least I make a nice easy life with it. I moved here from Virginia in 2005 where you can’t buy a town house for less than 900k... ugh... fine hang him. Why can’t anyone on here say anything that is NOT pro HANG HIM NOW? I am no saying he is innocent... but last I checked it was Innocent until proven guilty... Someone tell me one piece of hard evidence that the prosecution has presented... Please help me believe already so I can join the hang him now before we ever hear the defense evidence or witnesses.

 

[Ovechkin]

A very good question. I don't think it is cut and dry. It's just my opinion from watching the depo. The prosecution has more to come and the defense has cards to play too. As I say most particularly to me the call from home and the eyewitness.

I'm far from having a firm grasp of the facts in this case. The straw testimony today was the first I've heard of that, and it remains to be explored more I suppose.

There is good reason to think the prosecution has something coming on the computer angle, and of course good reason to think the defense will introduce evidence to support the idea NC was alive after the DA claims she was killed.

They have a sworn witness who says she say and spoke with NC while jogging at 7:10 am that morning... I posted lnk and everyone just glosses past it. That alone should at least keep people objective.

 

[RaleighNative]

With the cost of living around here... that is easy life... at least I make a nice easy life with it. I moved here from Virginia in 2005 where you can’t buy a town house for less than 900k... ugh... fine hang him. Why can’t anyone on here say anything that is NOT pro HANG HIM NOW? I am no saying he is innocent... but last I checked it was Innocent until proven guilty... Someone tell me one piece of hard evidence that the prosecution has presented... Please help me believe already so I can join the hang him now before we ever hear the defense evidence or witnesses.

Okay, I just posted something about this. I would not consider $135K around here hardship by any means, but it certainly is NOT "easy life" in that location, that demographic, and amongst that circle.

 

[Ovechkin]

I didn't! Thanks for posting it. And do you have a link for the other affy for the post regarding the STD? Thanks.

Um... I left work for the weekend so I have it saved on my pc there ... if you search WRAL affidavits they are all there... if you cant find it PM me and i'll get it to you on Monday.

 

[Ovechkin]

False.

It's in Kurtz' March motion, which is not a sworn statement, nor is it testimony, nor is it evidence. It is RUMOR that the defense threw out to mislead. The defense, btw, is thrilled to have fooled people into believing everything they wrote in that motion. They are counting on people being either too dumb or too naive to understand that motions are not evidence and have no evidentiary value. They can literally ask for anything in a motion and by virtue of the fact that a motion is filed with the court and enters the public domain as a result, they get their story out there, even if none of it is true. AND, they don't have to ever back up anything or ever refer to the motion again.

They could write in a motion: "we want all records, interviews and documents pertaining to the alien abduction that took place on July 12th in which Nancy Cooper went missing" and they could file that motion. And yes, some people would be dumb enough to say, "oooohhhh lookie here Marge...there was an ALIEN ABDUCTION. I knew it!"

No there is a sworn affidavit... Ill get it to you monday.