State v Bradley Cooper 3.14 .2011 - 3.?.??

[Cheyenne130]

Because unless they were involved in the murder, there is no way for them to have the cold hard facts.

As I stated, I worked with one of the individuals involved in this scenario and I saw the tears flow when DD sent out that loyalty email. It was a mess.

DD and her husband omitted pertinent information during the police interviews and as far as I am concerned those are lies of omission.

I don't know if BC did it. I will not determine that until I have heard all of the evidence. I too have read every document that has been released to the public and well as watched every video made available. I also have the benefit of knowing the culture of that group. But, even with all of that, I don't know that he did it anymore than I know that he did not. I can't imagine how you might already know that he did or feel that your espousing his guilt without hearing all of the evidence makes you more objective a commenter than myself.

I believe they are telling the truth as they heard it from NC and each other, but NC has already proven that she was not above telling a fib or being dishonest either. Do you think Mr. Duncan was telling the truth when he said that he never hit on NC or do you think NC lied when she said that he did? One of them lied...which one?

I don't think it matters who lies. The problem that I'm seeing is that Nancy is being put on trial right along with Brad. We know she didn't kill herself. The marriage was dysfunctional. She was murdered on the Saturday after the BBQ on the 11th. Either Brad did it or someone else did it. All this gossip aside, were any of her running shoes missing? Was her necklace found in his desk drawer? The running shoes being the bigger of these two issues. I have others but I'll put them on the back burner for now.

 

[rwesafe]

To add to this...

Nancy told Ms. Lopez that she babysat for HM...Nancy found out later that while she was babysitting for HM, HM was out with Brad. Nice.

Yeah, that is sucky...but conversly, finding out that the paternity of your child is in question because she was born 8 mos and 24 days after your wife had sex with another man is not all that nice either, ya know?

What a mess. :sick:

 

[rwesafe]

I don't think it matters who lies. The problem that I'm seeing is that Nancy is being put on trial right along with Brad. We know she didn't kill herself. The marriage was dysfunctional. She was murdered on the Saturday after the BBQ on the 11th. Either Brad did it or someone else did it. All this gossip aside, were any of her running shoes missing? Was her necklace found in his desk drawer? The running shoes being the bigger of these two issues. I have others but I'll put them on the back burner for now.

I think it does matter who lies. The more these people lie, the bigger chance that if BC did not do it, they just let a killer get away with murder by not allowing proper investigation to take place.

Yeah, I want to hear the hard evidence too. I will be glad when the "state of mind" testimony is over.

 

[SleuthyGal]

DD and her husband omitted pertinent information during the police interviews and as far as I am concerned those are lies of omission.

What pertinent information was omitted? Do you think this is info that would affect the murder case?

I can't imagine how you might already know that he did or feel that your espousing his guilt without hearing all of the evidence makes you more objective a commenter than myself.

Because I didn't know either of the Coopers and had no preconceived ideas about them or their lives, that leaves me to only look at the facts presented over the course of the last couple of years. Plus, we have over 7 hrs of deposition from Brad and testimony from the custody hearing, lots of affidavits and motions and statements. We have several points in which Brad says one thing and a witness (and I'm not talking about NC's friends) say something completely different.

Based on what I've learned, I suspect his guilt, I don't know for a fact he's guilty.

As for the C.D./N.C. thing: I have no idea who 'picked up' who, or tried, or was sober or not, but that doesn't appear to have any bearing on the murder (unless you are insinuating that C.D. is the murderer?) It's easy to get lost in the chum being thrown into the water, but how does it specifically relate to the crime? The witnesses testifying are providing state of mind context of the victim, per the judge.

Each witness has verified the following: Nancy wasn't happy. Brad wasn't happy. They were headed for divorce. Nancy was trying to move back to Canada and those plans got canceled. There was control of the money and Nancy was upset about it. We can guess that they both hated each other by the night of 7/11/08.

And we know something else (or should): you don't get arrested based on people's gossip and backstabbing and an email cutting someone out of a social circle. There's got to be something that links you to the crime in order for you to be indicted -- something that is at least enough for the DA to believe a case can be presented to a jury of 12 and that jury can be convinced.

We don't yet know what all they have to provide these links. We have a few clues, but not the whole picture yet.

 

[raisincharlie]

I think it does matter who lies. The more these people lie, the bigger chance that if BC did not do it, they just let a killer get away with murder by not allowing proper investigation to take place.

Yeah, I want to hear the hard evidence too. I will be glad when the "state of mind" testimony is over.

"The more these people lie" - how do you know they are lying about what Nancy supposedly told them ? I don't see how one determining they are all lying is even remotely possible. I will be glad when the state of mind stuff is over as well, but will say - Nancy's mind was pretty well set in one direction and pretty darn consistent about it. It is highly likely her state of mind had everything to do with the fact she died on 12 July 2008. I can understand the reason for knowing that.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I think it does matter who lies. The more these people lie, the bigger chance that if BC did not do it, they just let a killer get away with murder by not allowing proper investigation to take place.

Yeah, I want to hear the hard evidence too. I will be glad when the "state of mind" testimony is over.

I guess I should have been more clear. I do believe that Craig probably hit on Nancy in one of his drunken stupors. I don't think it's relevant to the crime whether he did or didn't. I believe that he's probably telling the truth that Mike M. said what he said to his wife about wanting to "get with" (my PG phrase) Nancy. I also believe him when he said that Mike M. said this to score some stupid point with his wife during an argument. Also not relevant to the crime. I believe that Nancy said terrible things about Brad and her friends "hated" him for it. I'm not saying that everything she said about Brad is true but I do believe that she said them.

I have a lot more questions about things that Brad said. In addition to the actual evidence, I will await the inconsistencies in what he said compared to what he said at another time compared to what the evidence shows. For instance, in all of my married years I can think of no time when my husband had to go to the store twice on a Saturday morning before 7 a.m. to pick up necessities. I'm interested so far but waiting for more.

 

[otto]

I think it does matter who lies. The more these people lie, the bigger chance that if BC did not do it, they just let a killer get away with murder by not allowing proper investigation to take place.

Yeah, I want to hear the hard evidence too. I will be glad when the "state of mind" testimony is over.

Absolutely. Witnesses that have their minds made up prior to an investigation, and who provide witness testimony with that preconceived notion impairing their information, are not helpful to the investigation.

 

[SleuthyGal]

I think it does matter who lies. The more these people lie, the bigger chance that if BC did not do it, they just let a killer get away with murder by not allowing proper investigation to take place.

What lies are being told on the witness stand?

I worked with one of the individuals involved in this scenario and I saw the tears flow when DD sent out that loyalty email. It was a mess.

I can imagine it would be a very difficult thing. Social structures are fluid and this murder changed things up in a big way, obviously. However, this is about the social scene, after the fact, and isn't related to the murder itself. I'm trying to keep things separate because unless something relates to the murder, it doesn't matter in the end (as far as the criminal case is concerned). If someone has information about the murder or has evidence that relates to the murder then I hope they have provided this information. If anyone wrote an affidavit, I hope they did so with complete honesty and integrity. If anyone felt coerced, then I think that's on them. Each person ultimately has to decide what's the right thing to do and the right way to proceed when they are part of a community. If I personally felt strongly about someone's innocence (as an example), I wouldn't give a damn who got their knickers in a bunch. I stand up for what I believe and let the chips fall where they may and if someone doesn't like me because of it... oh wellllll.

 

[rwesafe]

What pertinent information was omitted? Do you think this is info that would affect the murder case?



Because I didn't know either of the Coopers and had no preconceived ideas about them or their lives, that leaves me to only look at the facts presented over the course of the last couple of years. Plus, we have over 7 hrs of deposition from Brad and testimony from the custody hearing, lots of affidavits and motions and statements. We have several points in which Brad says one thing and a witness (and I'm not talking about NC's friends) say something completely different.

Based on what I've learned, I suspect his guilt, I don't know for a fact he's guilty.

As for the C.D./N.C. thing: I have no idea who 'picked up' who, or tried, or was sober or not, but that doesn't appear to have any bearing on the murder (unless you are insinuating that C.D. is the murderer?) It's easy to get lost in the chum being thrown into the water, but how does it specifically relate to the crime? The witnesses testifying are providing state of mind context of the victim, per the judge.

Each witness has verified the following: Nancy wasn't happy. Brad wasn't happy. They were headed for divorce. Nancy was trying to move back to Canada and those plans got canceled. There was control of the money and Nancy was upset about it. We can guess that they both hated each other by the night of 7/11/08.

And we know something else (or should): you don't get arrested based on people's gossip and backstabbing and an email cutting someone out of a social circle. There's got to be something that links you to the crime in order for you to be indicted -- something that is at least enough for the DA to believe a case can be presented to a jury of 12 and that jury can be convinced.

We don't yet know what all they have to provide these links. We have a few clues, but not the whole picture yet.

And we also have testimony that NC said that things were good and bad after the cancellation of the Canada move. After that, they had discussed buying land, buying a townhome...as if they were trying to work it out. When people are hurt and angry they say a lot of hurtful stuff to each other. Why is there some expectation that these two in this tumultous relationship that included busy body neighbors should be so significantly different than 90% of all other couples who are struggling with infedelity and financial issues?

Of course it is pertinent to the case if others lie. I don't know who did it. I don't know that Mr. Duncan didn't do it. I know that he was intimately familiar with her habits, that he was very close to her and that she had told several of her friends that he had cornered her and expressed his desire to be with her in romantic way and that she told people she was repulsed at the thought. It is not completely inconceivable that it got back to him and his ego could not handle it. That is kind of my point though...there were other people that were very close to NC and some even found her inappropriate...hugging and hanging on their husbands...and that was no secret around here, but odd how none of that was conveyed during the interviews. Is it pertinent to the murder trial, I don't know. How do you know that it is not? Not unheard of that a dissed male blew his top and killed the object of his affection. So yeah, I think it was important and even curious that those instances were purposely not reported to CPD. Proves nothing. But does point to additional possibilities and motives.

Ha! You must not live around here. You could probably get arrested in Cary for farting in public. We have had long drawn out lawsuits because because someone opted for a red tin roof or had the audacity to display the American flag on July 4th in a neighborhood across the street from Lochmere that did not allow flags of any type at any time. Cary is not typical in any way and thing that would not be considered kosher anywhere else in the US seem to slide off Cary like it was coated in tefelon.

They were headed for bankruptcy...is that more favorable than giving her 300 a week for groceries. She was very much a keep up with the Jones' type. At what he was giving her, she still made above what this country considers poverty level. You heard testimony from DD herself that NC was upset that week because he did not give her the allowance and she had wanted to get mani/pedi's for her and her little girls and now she couldn't...wow...the horror.

Again, will be glad to get to the actual presentation of evidence.

 

[Cheyenne130]

<snipped>

They were headed for bankruptcy...is that more favorable than giving her 300 a week for groceries. She was very much a keep up with the Jones' type. At what he was giving her, she still made above what this country considers poverty level. You heard testimony from DD herself that NC was upset that week because he did not give her the allowance and she had wanted to get mani/pedi's for her and her little girls and now she couldn't...wow...the horror.

Again, will be glad to get to the actual presentation of evidence.

It may have been her spending habits that had them headed to bankruptcy but he wasn't any better. When he took her off the accounts and took over bill paying himself, he couldn't pay the bills on time. Maybe that's different in Cary as well but where I live, you pay additional fees if you are late. You pay additional fees if your service is turned off and has to be turned on again. That's just not fiscal responsibility.

All I'm seeing from the defense so far in the trashing of Nancy is more motive for murder by her husband.

 

[Just the Fax]

So, who is it? Could be a van of Hispanics....no wait, Craig Duncan....no wait, John Pearson. How about the lady that claimed to see her jogging?
Anyone but the only person that had a solid motive, Brad Cooper.

 

[Just the Fax]

OT....for those that followed the 2nd degree murder trial of Dr Raymond Cook. He was just assigned to a minimum security prison in Raeford NC

http://www.doc.state.nc.us/dop/prisons/hoke.htm

http://webapps6.doc.state.nc.us/opi...turl=pagelistoffendersearchresults&listpage=1

 

[SleuthyGal]

Actually I do live in Cary, but not in that neighborhood nor right near it.

Witness testimony described Nancy saying her rel'p with Brad was like a pendulum...sometimes living with him was tolerable and other times...not so much.

Multiple witnesses confirm that as of the evening of 7/11/08 Nancy 'was back in hate mode' in terms of Brad, that they were fighting, and things were tense between the two. This does not appear to be a lie. Do you think it is?

Are the neighbors busybodies or was Nancy just very open about her issues? People only know what you tell them. If you keep your business private then they don't know. Testimony indicates that Nancy was open about what was going on in her life, including her marriage. That doesn't make the neighbor a busybody, it makes them the person she is telling this stuff to!

The police did their investigation and gathered evidence. They arrested the person they think they can prove did the crime. It doesn't matter if a thousand people think he did it in the 'hood, it doesn't matter if Nancy flirted with every last man in the town...the police have to have evidence to get the DA to take the case and take it to trial. The DA took the case. They have something that they believe links exactly one person to Nancy's murder.

And we also have testimony that NC said that things were good and bad after the cancellation of the Canada move. After that, they had discussed buying land, buying a townhome...as if they were trying to work it out. When people are hurt and angry they say a lot of hurtful stuff to each other. Why is there some expectation that these two in this tumultous relationship that included busy body neighbors should be so significantly different than 90% of all other couples who are struggling with infedelity and financial issues?

Of course it is pertinent to the case if others lie. I don't know who did it. I don't know that Mr. Duncan didn't do it. I know that he was intimately familiar with her habits, that he was very close to her and that she had told several of her friends that he had cornered her and expressed his desire to be with her in romantic way and that she told people she was repulsed at the thought. It is not completely inconceivable that it got back to him and his ego could not handle it. That is kind of my point though...there were other people that were very close to NC and some even found her inappropriate...hugging and hanging on their husbands...and that was no secret around here, but odd how none of that was conveyed during the interviews. Is it pertinent to the murder trial, I don't know. How do you know that it is not? Not unheard of that a dissed male blew his top and killed the object of his affection. So yeah, I think it was important and even curious that those instances were purposely not reported to CPD. Proves nothing. But does point to additional possibilities and motives.

Ha! You must not live around here. You could probably get arrested in Cary for farting in public. We have had long drawn out lawsuits because because someone opted for a red tin roof or had the audacity to display the American flag on July 4th in a neighborhood across the street from Lochmere that did not allow flags of any type at any time. Cary is not typical in any way and thing that would not be considered kosher anywhere else in the US seem to slide off Cary like it was coated in tefelon.

They were headed for bankruptcy...is that more favorable than giving her 300 a week for groceries. She was very much a keep up with the Jones' type. At what he was giving her, she still made above what this country considers poverty level. You heard testimony from DD herself that NC was upset that week because he did not give her the allowance and she had wanted to get mani/pedi's for her and her little girls and now she couldn't...wow...the horror.

Again, will be glad to get to the actual presentation of evidence.

 

[rwesafe]

"The more these people lie" - how do you know they are lying about what Nancy supposedly told them ? I don't see how one determining they are all lying is even remotely possible. I will be glad when the state of mind stuff is over as well, but will say - Nancy's mind was pretty well set in one direction and pretty darn consistent about it. It is highly likely her state of mind had everything to do with the fact she died on 12 July 2008. I can understand the reason for knowing that.

I don't know who is lying...but if NC said that CD hit on her and he is swearing that did not happen...someone has/had a problem with exaggeration or flat out lying.

But specifically, I was answering a poster who said it does not matter who is lying...I say it does matter. You can't investigate a crime if the people in the know are not completely forthcoming.

 

[cygnusx1]

So, who is it? Could be a van of Hispanics....no wait, Craig Duncan....no wait, John Pearson. How about the lady that claimed to see her jogging?
Anyone but the only person that had a solid motive, Brad Cooper.

Could be (probably is) him, too. But have the other possible suspects been vetted, or did they blindly pursue the "the husband did it" theory?

That is the the question.

A white van sitting with the headlights off the night before she disappeared in the same undeveloped cul-de-sac in which her body was found? Somebody saying they saw a white van following her on the day of her disappearance? Tire tracks by the dump site that don't match the suspect's vehicles with a cigarette butt next to them? Has this avenue been pursued? I guess we'll see.

 

[SleuthyGal]

but if NC said that CD hit on her and he is swearing that did not happen...someone has/had a problem with exaggeration or flat out lying.

Or that person was intoxicated and is not aware of what he said or how it was interpreted. Or he did say it and doesn't remember saying it. Really, where can anyone *go* with this? Is there EVIDENCE linking him to the murder?

You can't investigate a crime if the people in the know are not completely forthcoming.

What makes you think people were not forthcoming? What didn't they tell that they should have? How does it relate to the crime committed?

 

[Just the Fax]

It is laughable to think Colin Willoughby would have authorized an indictment (especially so soon) if the case was based on anything close to what we have heard so far. The state is simply setting the stage to show possible motive....the perfect storm, if you will.

I feel sure we will hear the hard, compelling evidence from the medical examiner, telecommunications experts and possibly forensic experts . Personally, I am looking forward to hearing what the undercover FBI agents bring to the case.

 

[DogWood]

Yeah, that is sucky...but conversly, finding out that the paternity of your child is in question because she was born 8 mos and 24 days after your wife had sex with another man is not all that nice either, ya know?

What a mess. :sick:

If true, you're right. I was just commenting on the testimony given.

You seem to have some knowledge of "Lochmere". Sorry, I haven't read all of your posts as of yet.

Just out of curiosity, and nothing more...when DD got through testifying she went and sat down on a bench in the courtroom. She sat down by a man that had her arm around her. Do you know who that was?

 

[Just the Fax]

Could be (probably is) him, too. But have the other possible suspects been vetted, or did they blindly pursue the "the husband did it" theory?

That is the the question.

A white van sitting with the headlights off the night before she disappeared in the same undeveloped cul-de-sac in which her body was found? Somebody saying they saw a white van following her on the day of her disappearance? Tire tracks by the dump site that don't match the suspect's vehicles with a cigarette butt next to them? Has this avenue been pursued? I guess we'll see.

I was being facetious. Kurtz splattered any possible scenario on the wall in hopes the jury might latch on to one of them. Random hispanics vs a consensual sexual partner shows the defense has no credible theory, just the standard list we have seen before in these cases.

 

[DogWood]

It is laughable to think Colin Willoughby would have authorized an indictment (especially so soon) if the case was based on anything close to what we have heard so far. The state is simply setting the stage to show possible motive....the perfect storm, if you will.

I feel sure we will hear the hard, compelling evidence from the medical examiner, telecommunications experts and possibly forensic experts . Personally, I am looking forward to hearing what the undercover FBI agents bring to the case.

Gotta agree with you on CW.

I'm looking forward to the undercover FBI agents as well.