State witnesses’ false testimony and its impact on the Brad Cooper case

images-65One of the biggest contributing factors in wrongful convictions is police tunnel vision.  This occurs when police narrow in on a suspect from the very beginning and then fail to consider other possibilities, suspects or scenarios.  They ignore evidence that points away from their suspect and they aim to shape or even manufacture evidence that supports their theory.  There is no doubt in my mind that this happened in this case and one person – Jessica Adam shaped the investigation from the very beginning. Police never considered that what she was telling them may not be truthful, but we learned throughout the trial that she was untruthful about all of the state’s key evidence.

Even knowing that everything was based on lies, the State still began their opening arguments with Jessica’s story, her story about Nancy’s plans to paint her house that day.  We would learn throughout the trial from several witnesses that the story wasn’t supported by anyone and it didn’t make sense.  The reason this is significant is because Jessica made the initial call to police to tell them that Nancy was missing.  It appears that she made up a story that Nancy was expected at her house that morning to help her paint.  However, the plans conflicted with Brad’s plans to play tennis with a friend that morning.  This was supported by a witness, Mike Hiller who made the plans with Brad the night before.  He actually borrowed Nancy’s cell phone (Nancy dialed) at the party to call Brad and make the plans, after asking Nancy if it was okay with her that they play tennis the next day.

I’m sure that as time went on in the investigation, police began to notice that Jessica’s information wasn’t accurate, but they never stopped and considered that maybe they had it wrong.  Maybe they felt that they were in too deep by then.  Maybe they had even gone so far as to manipulate the computer evidence, thus framing Brad for the murder.  If that were true, it would be too late to backtrack and consider other suspects or follow new leads. So they forged ahead.  But those of us who watched the trial saw how piece by piece Jessica’s story and all of her helpful “assistance” and all of her tips completely fell apart. Police let a lying witness guide the entire investigation from the beginning and prosecutors attempted to present these lies to the jury.  I saw right through it and many others did too.  Here’s a summary of the allegations that didn’t hold up at trial.

Jessica Adam:

JAJessica Adam placed the call to police to report Nancy missing.   After that she raced to the Cooper home and stood outside yelling to all the neighbors that Brad must have done something.  The day Nancy disappeared and over the course of the next several days, she told police several things that later turned out to be false.  It’s important to mention her impact on this case because much of what she told them was likely used by police to get an indictment since they were classified as “inconsistencies”.  The following is a list of items she provided to the police that later turned out to be false.  The police never doubted any of her claims.

1) All DetergentFalse

0007261345054_500X500The Harris Teeter videos and receipts were obtained by police on July 12th and they showed that earlier that morning, Brad had purchased Tide laundry detergent, green juice and milk.  When asked about the brand of detergent used, Jessica told police that the Coopers used All detergent. She also testified to that.  During her testimony, the defense attorney asked her to review the BJ’s store records for detergent purchases and they showed that the Coopers had purchased 30 bottles of Tide, only one bottle of All.  The All vs Tide was an inconsistency noted by Detective Daniels, the lead detective in this case.

paint22) Jessica made painting plans with Nancy on Friday 7/11/08likely False

When Jessica reported Nancy missing, she told police that Nancy was expected at her house by 9AM to paint.  Jessica later told police that the painting plans were arranged by phone on Friday, 7/11. When police obtained her phone records, no record of that call existed.  She then changed her story.  This time she said that she was at the Cooper’s home on Friday when the plans were made.  It is my opinion, based on the following and including the changed statement about how and when the plans were made, that it’s unlikely there ever were painting plans scheduled for that morning.

  1. Nancy didn’t tell anyone at the party on Friday that she had plans to paint the following morning.
  2. Nancy told 3 people at the party she planned to jog the following morning.
  3. Nancy had recently told several friends and her sister that she was tired of painting.
  4. According to Jessica, the painting was to be a swap  – Jessica would help Nancy organize the house and in return Nancy would help paint her dining room. Nancy wasn’t even going to profit from this work.
  5. No additional paint was purchased for the dining room.
  6. Nancy was aware that Brad had tennis plans with a friend that morning at 9:30 and she would have to watch the kids.
  7. Jessica didn’t have it written on her calendar, but she did have activities planned with her kids late that morning.

If there were no painting plans scheduled for Saturday, it’s a bit puzzling why Jessica was so hysterical on Saturday morning and pointing the finger at Brad while Nancy was still missing.  The police really needed to investigate this, but they were too busy buying into everything she fed them.  With three people testifying that Nancy had plans to jog the next morning, and then 16 people contacting them to report that they believed they saw Nancy jogging that morning, why were they so quick to dismiss that Brad said she went jogging that morning and instead chose to believe the “painting plan” story, even though there were a lot of holes in it?  That is exactly what they did though.

ducks3) Ducks and sticksFalse    

The police took photos of the Cooper home on Saturday, July 12th and later showed them to Jessica since she was “there on Friday” to see if she noticed anything different.  She said there were decorative ducks and sticks missing from the foyer area.  The Cary police ran with this and even testified that this was “evidence of a struggle”.  During the trial, it was revealed that the ducks were in a box in the Cooper’s living room all along.  The police never bothered to even search for the ducks and sticks.  They just took Jessica’s word for it and made it part of their “evidence”.

Nancy - no necklace4) Nancy never removed her diamond pendant necklace.False

Jessica signed a sworn statement that Nancy never removed her necklace.  She even included information that she saw Nancy before the party and that she was wearing the necklace, yet she couldn’t remember what she was wearing. The significance of the necklace is that Nancy wasn’t wearing it when she was found but all of the “friends” stated that she never took it off so this implied that the killer must have removed it.  The necklace was found by police in a jewelry box in the Cooper home shortly after Brad was arrested.  During the trial the investigator working for the Defense testified about a video that showed Nancy the day before she disappeared and she was not wearing the necklace.  Clearly it was a myth of the trial that she “never took it off”.

5) Nancy wouldn’t schedule a run without telling her.  – False

Jessica wrote in her affidavit that Nancy wouldn’t have scheduled a run with Carey Clark without including her. For starters, Jessica had never even met Carey at that point.  She stated in her affidavit, “we discussed any/all runs we did or intended to make.”  During the trial witnesses testified that Nancy ran alone and also ran with other people that Jessica was unaware of.

6) Bella didn’t drink Green juiceFalse

7) Nancy always ran with her keys and cell phone – False

8) Jessica coordinated and met with others about the affidavits to make sure that everyone had their stories straight.   If you read the affidavits, they all tell the same story and much of it was refuted in Brad’s rebuttal affidavits.

Hannah Prichard:

1) Necklace – Hannah sent an email to Jennifer Fetteroff requesting photos of Nancy between October ’07 and July ’08 and specifically requested only photos of Nancy wearing the necklace. Detective Dismukes was copied on the email so obviously the Cary police were aware of this.

We know that a video was found of Nancy NOT wearing the necklace the Friday afternoon before she disappeared.  Hannah testified that Nancy was wearing the necklace at the pool that morning, clearly she was not since the video shows Nancy at the store shortly after leaving the pool.

“Nancy never removed the necklace” – False

2) Screw-back earringsFalse

Hannah made it a point to update her affidavit because she needed to include the fact that Nancy’s diamond earrings were screw-back.  To her, this would explain why Nancy was found wearing the diamond earrings but not the necklace.  I think Hannah theorized that it would have been too time consuming for the killer to remove the earrings, while the necklace would be easy to remove.  The problem is, the earrings were not screw back.

3) Hannah called the Cooper home on Saturday morning wanting to speak to Nancy.  Hannah told police that she was aware of Nancy’s painting plans with Jessica that morning.  If this is true, why did she call the house?  Why didn’t she try to reach Nancy on her cell phone?

Ricardo Lopez

Mr. Lopez told police in a recorded interview that while at the Duncan’s party on Friday, Nancy told him that she had plans to jog the following morning.  He described vivid details of the conversation he had with her.  Detective Dismukes kept asking him if he was certain and he responded “yes”.  At the end of the interview, the detective told Mr. Lopez that he would need to speak with Donna (Lopez’s wife) to make sure they had all the fact straight.  The next morning Mr. Lopez called the police and asked if he could come in and change his story for the record.  In a second recorded interview he stated that he wasn’t actually sure that Nancy told him she had planned to jog in the morning.  He also stated that he didn’t want to jeopardize the investigation. Both recorded interviews can be found here.

These lies were likely presented to the grand jury and used to indict Brad Cooper.  If Cary police detectives were competent, they would have realized that all of it was lies and they would have put effort into finding out what really happened to Nancy Cooper instead of buying into the “Brad did it” lies.

Attached is the video of Ricardo Lopez’s testimony that includes both police recorded interviews.

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “State witnesses’ false testimony and its impact on the Brad Cooper case

  1. Just wanted to say thanks for all the work you’ve put in to writing this blog. I hope that it will be a help towards true justice for Brad.

    Like

    • Thank you for your comment. I hope it will help in some way too. I know it helps me to write about it. I really want people to know what happened in this investigation and trial.

      Like

  2. Lynne, also to note, Jessica Adam was not included in the Nancy and Carey Clark runs because she was not able to run at their pace. Carey and Nancy were training to run the Rock N Roll Marathon in Virginia Beach end of Aug 08. Doesn’t sound like she was moving to Canada if she was training to run in this marathon.

    Like

    • Thanks. That’s a good point. It’s interesting that she wasn’t on Dateline last night since she had such an impact on this case.

      And isn’t it interesting that none of the jurors were interviewed?

      Like

  3. There is a real “odor” about Jessica Adam and everything she did in this investigation and subsequent prosecution of Brad Cooper. Basically, I am certain that most objective observers of the events of this case will regard Ms. Adam as the “neighbour from hell”. It is extremely interesting to me that an ordinary housewife could find herself in the middle of a marriage and in the middle of a murder investigation. To most, I think anyone on the periphery of the Cooper household would be pretty cautious about their actions in recruiting support for “theories” about what happened to Nancy in the early hours of her fateful disappearance. It is plainly obvious that Ms. Adam spoke very convincingly to anyone who would listen about Brad and his murderous ways, yet in every instance she had zero basis to be so outspoken AND so confident in what she said. Turned out to be nearly 100 per cent contrived. She is a very dangerous person. I hope the remainin g neighbours realize it.

    Like

    • I know. Everything about her actions is so suspicious. WHY didn’t police start to rethink things after learning that everything she said was not holding weight. Although they didn’t learn about the ducks that were never missing or the necklace that wasn’t worn until the trial.

      But she drove the investigation if you think about it. If not for her comments to police when she reported Nancy missing, Bazemore would have never made those statements “this was not a random act”. They believed Jessica 100%. They now know they were wrong to do that. That she is a liar but they still pursued the prosecution with nothing. Then I suppose they realized they needed more evidence so they put the Google search on the computer to frame Brad. I don’t know how these people sleep at night. Pure evil.

      Like

      • I’ve read through a great deal of the information you’ve analysed, yesterday and today and am sorry I didn’t find your blog much sooner. I’ve gone from no opinion to the terrifying conclusion that he couldn’t have done it.

        Some observations based on this information:

        Nancy comes across as self-indulgent, impressionable, probably not the smartest woman you could hope to meet. Too inconsequetial to be the object of a grand, coordinated conspiracy. But the fact that a conspiracy existed is obvious. Is it possible that Nancy’s murder was just the tool used to bring about Brad’s destruction?

        Jessica appears to have been laying the foundation for Brad’s destruction weeks before the murder. As I understand from your narration, Nancy and Brad were not getting along but she had no fears for her safety – from him or anyone else. However, Jessica DID fear that Brad would harm Nancy and reported it. She was the first person to fear Nancy would come to a violent end and the first to realize Nancy was missing and that foul play was likely. How could she possibly know these things when Nancy did not? Is it possible that Brad has run afoul of Jessica before the murder? Might he know the reason she would commit an act of revenge?

        The house painting project was to continue but no paint was provided. Strange circumstance. A sceptic might be led to think the painting project was a clever ruse to account for Jessica’s unwarranted “concern” on the morning of the crime.

        In pictures, Brad looks like a reasonably strong man. But not strong enough to strangle his physically fit wife without getting seriously injured, himself. I have not read of any injuries. Were there any? I read with interest that the missing ducks were conjectured to be a sign of the altercation in the foyer. Naturally, there would have been some of his blood in the foyer too. I have not read that any blood was expected or looked for. If it was ever there, traces of it are still there. I suppose they didn’t find giraffes either…

        We’re told that on the day of the murder, Brad was a diabolical genius who spoofed a phone call from his wife, then covered it up successfully. On the day prior, he was a diabolical imbecile, spending a good forty seconds to find a suitable dumping ground on google maps. Which is it? Evil genius or evil numbskull? It can’t be both. Cops have been examining hard drives for greater than 20 years and Brad would know such evidence would be found. Had I been on the jury, I would’ve voted for acquittal on this basis alone.

        The missing clothes: Isn’t it reasonable that who ever strangled Nancy DID get hurt in the process. That the clothes presumably had blood, hair and skin on them that could be used to identify the attacker? It’s not hard to imagine why the clothes were taken. Back to Brad: did he have any injuries?

        As an aside: it appears Brad loves his little girls very much. But we’re made to understand that after he murdered their mother, he left them sleeping alone in the house while he left to dump the body. Not what a loving father would do…

        Hay on the floor? You’ve got to be kidding! Hay but not mud? Really? Shoes worn to Harris Teeter? Seriously, whoever did the crime would’ve removed every article of cloth and leather that had a trace of the scene, bagged it and dropped it off at a distant dumpster. The killer DID take Nancy’s clothes, apparently to cover up his involvement. He would’ve done the same with his own clothes.

        These observations seem to me to be the heart of the case. Besides the misleading “evidence” there seems to be a great deal that’s entirely meaningless. Being one of the “friends” must be a living hell as there appears to be one friend to control them all.

        I hope the petition for a new trial is successful.I cannot imagine that another judge would permit such nonsense to be given as evidence. Jessica deserves some very serious attention.

        Like

        • Hi John. Thank you for taking the time to look at this case. Your comments about Jessica are interesting. I do believe there’s more to this and I’ve spent a great deal of time wondering about her possible involvement in this.

          To answer your question, no blood was found in the foyer or on Brad. Cary police claimed that there were “scratches” or “rub marks” on the back of his neck but it was never documented with photographs. It was nothing more than the word of the two detectives. There are even photos of Brad sitting outside the day Nancy went missing, wearing a short sleeve shirt. His neck completely exposed. No one noticed any scratches. He is also seen at press conferences, not doing anything to try to hide his alleged scratches. I believe they made it up.

          Nancy had blood under her fingernails but SBI testified that it was too decomposed to obtain any DNA from it so there is no remaining physical evidence available that could clear Brad.

          I am very hopeful that he will be granted a new trial and that the evidence of computer tampering will finally be heard.

          It’s a very sad situation and it’s horrible to think about all that Brad and his family have endured. I really hope that the courts will do the right thing because it’s very disturbing and unsettling (to say the least) that this could happen to an innocent man. This case has left a permanent impression on me.

          Like

          • Lynne
            I’m not terribly surprised such things can happen to an innocent person. It seems to be a fact of the human condition. Thus the Count of Monte Cristo tale is possible in every country in every age.

            I heard of this case back when because my boss lives in Cary & it was relevant to him & his wife. I have no TV & did not follow local news. Hence could not have understood anything about the case had not a colleague of mine directed me to your blog last night.

            Your analysis would convince any reasonable person that Brad did NOT do it. But there seems a great unexplored region concerning who DID cause it to happen & why. I only wish to point out what deserves to be explored.

            Probably the case has made a permanent impression on me as well. I’ve had my share of injustice too but nothing to compare to Brad’s. I will do whatever I can to help. You have my email so remind me to act. Please.

            My occupation is to investigate. Not criminals but principals are the same. It happens sometimes that I cannot discern truth on my own but can at least suggest what questions ought to be answered. Perhaps suggest one or two points a defence lawyer ought to bring up.

            FYI: Perhaps our “friend” Jessica would be the grandest fool of the 21st century if she were not YOUR most avid follower. We will assume she is no fool & really does read every word here. Tell me if I can be of any use.

            Like

  4. I followed the trial, and among everything that has been mentioned, that Detective Daniels was a piece of work. The way he looked at the camera as if it was irritating him; that’s not my main complaint about him though. The fact that almost every question he was asked he had no answer except to say, ” I don’t know, so and so was handling that”. Well for you to have been the lead detective, can you tell me something you actually knew other than the fact “I didn’t do this and I didn’t look into that because as far as I am concerned “Mr. Cooper” was guilty. Let’s not forget that really smart judge, Cary police chief, and the detective that accidently “fried” the SIMS card, “Yea, right”. The most important testimony in this case the jury was not allowed to hear and to me that was the nail that sealed Brad’s coffin. The other important thing to me is how the jury can send a note to the judge and say something like, we are ready to get this over, so we can go home. I understand this was a long trial but…………………….. come on now we are talking about a man’s life here right now. If there was anyone on that jury that had the least amount of doubt,hearing the complaints about jurors ready to go home, changed their minds quickly, they don’t want to be singled out like that so they go along with the majority. I am so hoping this man will eventually get the justice he deserves.

    Like

  5. I wish to draw attention to the number of times “state” witnesses were wrong, changed their story or more properly arranged their story to fit the prosecution’s theory. Mr. Lopez is a clear example where he was influenced by the clique of friends. He met with Dismukes (supposedly requesting on his own) to make his story fit with what the others were saying. He also says that no one caused him to come back to the police to “update” his story. Any reasonable, non-involved participant such as Lopez would really have no reason or idea to make them aware that he was mistaken about the jogging. A normal person, I think would simply find it unnecessary to change such an seeming non-consequential detail. I note that he stated he works with Dianna Duncan, and that these two interviews took place on August 20 then August 22, a Wednesday and a Friday respectively. You cannot possibly convince me that the two, Lopez and Duncan did not discuss the murder on the Thursday between.. Everyone was talking about it. Clearly Lopez lies when he states at the end of the second interview “I haven’t talked to anyone”. There is much to be said about the clear manipulation of facts by the prosecution. What is clear is that the evidence that the state had was from a bunch of liars, Jessica Adam, the Duncans, Lopez, Hannah Pritchard, Detectives Daniels and Young all of whom are simply not to be believed. Funny that a jury would not question the credibility of all of them.

    Like

    • Yes. They sure went to great lengths to build the case against Brad. The problem is, people like us saw right through it. They had nothing and no amount of witnesses discussing affairs and financial issues, spots on dresses and 10 way to spoof a call could have ever convinced me to vote guilty. Something happened with that jury.

      Like

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s