State vs Bradley Cooper 4-21-11

[SleuthinNC]

Ok in regard to cell phone towers. There is a tower directly north of the site as well as one south of the site. Both phones used towers clustered in the general vicinity of the lochmere neighborhood with the exception of the calls from NC cell phone which used the towers in Apex. There is a good picture of this clustering on Day 12, Pt. 2 11:41.

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9332474/#/vid9332474

 

[CrimeAddict]

Should we make an easter weekend thread?

 

[jrb0124]

In spite of all the "forensic" BS, JW presented just enough evidence to show not just that tampering was possible, but that it almost certainly had happened.

Here's my analogy,

JW: so you would definitely see a bowl with 4 different fruits in it.
(on the screen for the jury to see is a bowl with 4 apples)

 

[jrb0124]

I believe the state will have a rebuttal witness that will disprove what JW tried to portray regarding the computer. MOO

Possible, but I doubt it. I think the state wants to stay as far away as possible from any more testimony that could drift to (or dance around just close enough to) computer forensics on cross given Kurtz's demonstrated ability to do just that.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Possible, but I doubt it. I think the state wants to stay as far away as possible from any more testimony that could drift to (or dance around just close enough to) computer forensics on cross given Kurtz's demonstrated ability to do just that.

I have no idea what Kurtz's ability is in crossing the computer experts because I didn't get to see any of it. I know that the agent remained in the courtroom throughout JW's testimony. I believe there had to be a reason for that. MOO

 

[Wyn]

The Google Maps search always seemed a little too convenient for me. "He did WHAT? You got to be kidding!" My first thought was to ask if it might have been a weather site using G M, or some such. Then the zooming.

Had pretty much dismissed the tampering arguments, not so much because it would be difficult or that far-fetched, but because it would require a higher standard of proof. You better be right if you claim evidence tampering.

As a geek who is also involved with the societal implications of technology, I see this as an important case. In spite of all the "forensic" BS, JW presented just enough evidence to show not just that tampering was possible, but that it almost certainly had happened. A Google expert to tie it all together will finish off completely the last thread of the presecution's case. And the reputation of the CPD and FBI.

I'll try to refrain from saying "I told you so" when the jury decides that not only did the defense not prove that tampering occurred, that the most logical explanation for those phone calls was Brad did it. Had the means, had the motive. I guess a lot of geeks are going to be disappointed because they don't "get" the emotional elements of this case. The jury is stacked with women who failed to see the charming Brad being dad at the pool. But they'll relate to NC's plight.

Just wish someone would ask Brad what he did with the ducks that day? Dropped them in a dumpster with those mis-matched shoes? Just another one of those oddities that makes you go hmm. You know it's the little things that add up.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Ok in regard to cell phone towers. There is a tower directly north of the site as well as one south of the site. Both phones used towers clustered in the general vicinity of the lochmere neighborhood with the exception of the calls from NC cell phone which used the towers in Apex. There is a good picture of this clustering on Day 12, Pt. 2 11:41.

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9332474/#/vid9332474

Wow! I missed it before that she called his cell at 2:32 and 2:35 on that Friday. Did he hang up on her?

 

[CrimeAddict]

New thread has been made for wknd discussions. FYI take a break and spend time with your families this weekend :woohoo:

 

[ncsu95]

Oh, had it been the other way around, NC would have been arrested the day his body was found. No doubt. She was more focal in her hatred and her desperately wanting to get out of the marriage. Brad was just a little more tech savvy, a little more conniving, a little more controlling, a little more quiet about his hatred. Remember, Brad was the one who stole away in the closet in the dark and went to France to have his affairs. He did a pretty good job of trying to conceal his intentions towards Nancy. That's the very reason I believe he started planning this at the very earliest in April - I'm tending to believe it might have been even as early as February. He's *as everyone says* an engineer - very technical and has to have everything in order. Couldn't be on the fly - had to be planned. So it did take a little longer to arrest him than it would have taken to arrest her. Bottom line is - Nancy didn't have a killer instinct. Brad did.

If his body was found where hers was, she would not have been arrested that day. She would have never been arrested because it wouldn't have been believable that she could move him.

 

[unc70]

I believe the state will have a rebuttal witness that will disprove what JW tried to portray regarding the computer. MOO

I have no doubt they will call a rebuttal witness, but they will need to very careful not to nullify the "forensic" exclusion they have used to keep out the rest of JW's testimony. Using their "forensic" evidence to impeach his "network" expert testimony would be tricky and any slipup would let JW comment on the FBI testimony. I suspect that was part of the reason they really did not cross JW.

The pros. will also need rebuttal for Ben Levitan and for the Google expert. Quite likely by that time, their whole case against BS will not be in tatters but fully shredded.

 

[LaLaw2000]

I have resigned myself to just reading and thanking the posts I agree with. In all of the time I have been here I have never had a T/O and want to keep it that way.

Having said that; we are not in a court of law, nor are we on a jury here. We are not held to those standards. In the end, nothing any of us have stated here will make any difference. It is up to the jury. I will be so pleased when a guilty verdict is handed down and justice is served for Nancy, her twin, her siblings, and her parents. That is what I am here for. Brad Cooper will pay for Nancy's murder.

My 'ignore list' just grew big time.

MOO

 

[momof7]

I have no idea what Kurtz's ability is in crossing the computer experts because I didn't get to see any of it. I know that the agent remained in the courtroom throughout JW's testimony. I believe there had to be a reason for that. MOO

This is just one of the parts I am having trouble with. Honestly, how can I say I even understand JW's testimony without hearing agent testimony etc.
Are there parts in that testimony that will make JW's seem totally useless? Maybe. Nobody knows. Don't know if that testimony had all the bells and whistles needed for the jury.

And I agree, he sat thru that testimony for a reason, what is it? Just leaves me wondering.

Kelly

 

[FullDisclosure]

We have the privilage of revisiting testimony. Will the jurors?

Thanks for your comment, Maja. I've given that a lot of thought. We get to go back and revisit the testimony. We get to discuss the testimony as it happens, throw out different ideas to consider, etc. The jurors don't have that opportunity. (I love how part of the Judge's spiel is, "You are not to form any opinions... .)

I've been to court for several full days of testimony, including the testimony of Det. Chappell when he was on the stand for the State. Something very interesting happened as a result. I fell off the fence with a mighty THUD when I saw the Fielding Dr. search in a power point presentation. Then I saw Chappell totally stonewall during cross. I also took copious notes. When I reviewed the notes, the questions raised about the time stamps, the one missing cookie, and whether/how he obtained any info from google reps made me climb back onto the fence. I have to say that it is a completely different experience to sit in the courtroom and listen without distraction/multi-tasking/discussing testimony on the forum as it happens. It is also interesting to go back and look at notes--there is so much that I just scribbled down as quickly as possible and then digested later when I looked at it. I cannot imagine being a juror and taking this all in day after day after day and then waiting until the end to try to put it all together. That is really what they're being asked to do. I know they are human and form opinions, but if they're taking the Judge's instructions seriously, they're trying not to.

Sorry about my rambling. The whole trial process is so interesting to me, and a man's life hangs in the balance. (Before you jump on that comment, I realize that a woman's life has ended, and that is tragic.) I refuse to rush to judgment, and even though this is a forum, I'm trying to think like a juror. I don't fault anyone for already having strong opinions. I just wish people could respect those of us who want to wait until the end to "render our verdict." For me, the jury is still out.

 

[ncsu95]

There has been a lot of talk about her being found in only the jogging bra. I just did a google search for "murder victim found wearing only a bra" and got lots of hits. There are many instances of murder victims being found in only a bra and nothing else. One had a bra and an ankle bracelet.

murder victim found half nude - Google Search

 

[ncsu95]

Should we make an easter weekend thread?

We should all step away from this site for the weekend and spend it with our families. That is what I'm going to do.

 

[SleuthinNC]

I have no doubt they will call a rebuttal witness, but they will need to very careful not to nullify the "forensic" exclusion they have used to keep out the rest of JW's testimony. Using their "forensic" evidence to impeach his "network" expert testimony would be tricky and any slipup would let JW comment on the FBI testimony. I suspect that was part of the reason they really did not cross JW.

The pros. will also need rebuttal for Ben Levitan and for the Google expert. Quite likely by that time, their whole case against BS will not be in tatters but fully shredded.

It was also discussed that the defense is trying to get in an addition witness to testify regarding the computer forensic evidence as well. There is going to be a lot of rebuttal.

 

[cody100]

The Google Maps search always seemed a little too convenient for me. "He did WHAT? You got to be kidding!" My first thought was to ask if it might have been a weather site using G M, or some such. Then the zooming.

Had pretty much dismissed the tampering arguments, not so much because it would be difficult or that far-fetched, but because it would require a higher standard of proof. You better be right if you claim evidence tampering.

As a geek who is also involved with the societal implications of technology, I see this as an important case. In spite of all the "forensic" BS, JW presented just enough evidence to show not just that tampering was possible, but that it almost certainly had happened. A Google expert to tie it all together will finish off completely the last thread of the presecution's case. And the reputation of the CPD and FBI.

I have good reason to believe that you are correct in what you say. It is horrific to think that this could happen, but Kurtz is too persistent in trying to show this evidence and the State is way too concerned about allowing it to happen. If Kurtz had not asked to have another witness added to discuss the forensic evidence from the FBI, then I would have thought he was trying to do some "smoke and mirrors" presentation. I think there is evidence of tampering on that computer, in my opinion. If it is there, the credibility of the prosecution's case will be greatly impacted.

 

[ncsu95]

I'll try to refrain from saying "I told you so" when the jury decides that not only did the defense not prove that tampering occurred, that the most logical explanation for those phone calls was Brad did it. Had the means, had the motive. I guess a lot of geeks are going to be disappointed because they don't "get" the emotional elements of this case. The jury is stacked with women who failed to see the charming Brad being dad at the pool. But they'll relate to NC's plight.

Just wish someone would ask Brad what he did with the ducks that day? Dropped them in a dumpster with those mis-matched shoes? Just another one of those oddities that makes you go hmm. You know it's the little things that add up.

I would hope nobody does an "I told you so" regardless of the verdict. This isn't about us.

 

[Wyn]

I would hope nobody does an "I told you so" regardless of the verdict. This isn't about us.

No it's not, but you'd think so based on some of the pro-Brad posts. I don't feel the computer testimony is going to free Brad so I'll reserve my right to say "I told you so" when it doesn't. :twocents:

 

[Madeleine74]

NC phone. The 11:40 am call which she would have made while she was either on her way to or at the pool in HP neighborhood used the tower near the site the body was found.

HP house and pool are in Apex. So Nancy was physically in that area, which would make sense that's the tower that was used.