State vs Bradley Cooper 4-21-11

[cody100]

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

Very well said. This is for justice. I too would hope that won't be said or even thought about being said.

 

[Wyn]

Very well said. This is for justice. I too would hope that won't be said or even thought about being said.

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

My comment was regarding the computer evidence but I am amused at how the BII "clique" is trying to spin it.

 

[ncsu95]

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.

Right. But her 11:40 call did ping off of the tower closest to the body site. And the next call went to another tower just a minute or so later.

 

[ncsu95]

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

My comment was regarding the computer evidence but I am amused at how the BII "clique" is trying to spin it.

Please don't lump me in with any "clique". My thoughts and opinions on this case are mine only.

 

[jrb0124]

I'll try to refrain from saying "I told you so" when the jury decides

There are two questions: BC guilty or not? & will BC be convicted or not?

If the trial stopped at this point, and I thought the jury would vote NG, and then BC was found guilty by the jury, and someone posted "told you so", my reply would be "lucky guess". IMO if you think this jury will convict based on the evidence and testimony they have to this point, you are not playing the odds.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

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.

Yes - BC had an affair and disgustingly was with HM in the bedroom closet while the kids where there. That is disgusting in the worst sense of the word. No excuse whatsoever. But, let us not forget that NC had an affair as well (if not more than 1). Also, nothing has been proven that he had a sexual encounter with the woman in France.

If BC had it planned so well, as so many say, why didn't he plan to get rid of the google map search on the computer? Why didn't he plan on a dump site that we better hidden, where it would have taken someone more than 2 days to find the body? So, in my opinion, he did not plan it for months (if he did, indeed murder NC).

Noone knows if either NC or BC had a killer instinct. Nothing, that I have seen or heard, points that way. Sure, they did not get along. They fought bitterly. Many couples do. That does not mean that someone is inclined to kill.

 

[cody100]

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

My comment was regarding the computer evidence but I am amused at how the BII "clique" is trying to spin it.

Thanks for your input. BTW, I am not a BII or SODDI but rather a SAEF. See all evidence first. To be honest, I don't see the humor. But again, thanks for your thoughts and I respect your opinions.

 

[Lori59]

The jurors will not even entertain some of the theories that have been discussed on this forum. They will apply common sense as instructed by the courts and convict Brad. Plain and simple. JMO

 

[Lori59]

Yes - BC had an affair and disgustingly was with HM in the bedroom closet while the kids where there. That is disgusting in the worst sense of the word. No excuse whatsoever. But, let us not forget that NC had an affair as well (if not more than 1). Also, nothing has been proven that he had a sexual encounter with the woman in France.

If BC had it planned so well, as so many say, why didn't he plan to get rid of the google map search on the computer? Why didn't he plan on a dump site that we better hidden, where it would have taken someone more than 2 days to find the body? So, in my opinion, he did not plan it for months (if he did, indeed murder NC).

Noone knows if either NC or BC had a killer instinct. Nothing, that I have seen or heard, points that way. Sure, they did not get along. They fought bitterly. Many couples do. That does not mean that someone is inclined to kill.

I find it amazing to use the argument that if Brad had planned this...why did he leave evidence? Planning does not equate lack of evidence.

 

[Wyn]

There are two questions: BC guilty or not? & will BC be convicted or not?

If the trial stopped at this point, and I thought the jury would vote NG, and then BC was found guilty by the jury, and someone posted "told you so", my reply would be "lucky guess". IMO if you think this jury will convict based on the evidence and testimony they have to this point, you are not playing the odds.

I'm not playing any odds, this really isn't a "game of chance". I'm basing my beliefs on what's been presented, including discounting computer experts whom some think proved something that I feel they didn't.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

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.

At first, 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 also find the google map search a bit strange, to say the least. Everyone seems to state he is very technincal, very thorough, even had the capability of spoofing calls. He supposedly planned this so well. Then, he leaves the google search on the dump site on the computer???? There is no way he would have done that. If he took the time to perform multiple dumps, clean car, clean house, etc, he most certainly would have made sure the dump site search would not have been left on the computer.

 

[otto]

New weekend thread: April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

 

[Wyn]

Thanks, Otto.

 

[jrb0124]

My comment was regarding the computer evidence but I am amused at how the BII "clique" is trying to spin it.

How many members does the BII clique have? Go back through this week's trial threads and see how many different posters you find that state they are convinced BC didn't do it. (May have, on the fence, doesn't look like it, suggesting alt explanations does not = BII). I think you'll find this clique pretty small.

Now, do the same for posters who assert BC guilt and you'll need a bus.

"Not sure if BC did it" does not = BII.

Some feel the need to take a side immediately, without all the info, and defend their opinion/position at all costs, viewing those who do not see things in black and white the same way they do as unenlightented. Well, IMO the opposite is true.

If BC is rendered G by the jury, IMO not a single person who was emphatic about his guilt from day one or before the trial deserves recognition for seeing something apparent (aside from statistics with no other info) that those of us waiting for all the testimony/evidence did not.

If BC is rendered NG by the jury, I doubt we'll see any celebration here (you won't from me for sure), because those of us reserving judgement are not doing so because "we don't get it", we just recognize that: (1) this is more complex in reality than it looked like on 7/12/08 (no matter how hard one tries to force square CE into a circular slot), (2) the trial is still in progress, and reasonable doubt is continuing to foam.

 

[Maja]

I remember the ping to the tower closest to where her body was found as well. (To be clear, I'm referring to Nancy's phone, on July 11.) After watching the live stream, I went back and listened to that testimony that night or the day after, and I remember that ping because it made me say, "Hmmmmmm."

I also find the google map search a bit strange, to say the least. Everyone seems to state he is very technincal, very thorough, even had the capability of spoofing calls. He supposedly planned this so well. Then, he leaves the google search on the dump site on the computer???? There is no way he would have done that. If he took the time to perform multiple dumps, clean car, clean house, etc, he most certainly would have made sure the dump site search would not have been left on the computer.

Perhaps the tamper evidence was from BC trying to rid the computer of the search?

 

[RaleighNative]

Okay, someone please help, and tell me what BII stands for?

 

[momof7]

Perhaps the tamper evidence was from BC trying to rid the computer of the search?

I have wondered this as well, could something have happened during the time he was trying to rid the computer of the evidence that caused it to leave behind evidence? If he didn't start to rid the evidence until the morning of 7/12. This evidence brought up by JW can be viewed that it was not tampering but some type of event was occuring that caught this google map and left it? BC 'thought' it was clean, did not have time to check because at that point there was the call, "Where is NC". He had to get cleaning, looking for her.

For any computer whizzes, is this a possible?

Kelly

 

[momof7]

Okay, someone please help, and tell me what BII stands for?

I think Brad is innocent but not sure!

 

[jrb0124]

I'm not playing any odds, this really isn't a "game of chance". I'm basing my beliefs on what's been presented, including discounting computer experts whom some think proved something that I feel they didn't.

I didn't use the word "game", and its not cool to pull words like that in to frame my comments as callous.

The trial is not over yet, but you seem so sure of a G verdict. You are not basing this on all the testinmony and evidence to date because you have not heard it all - none of us has. Do you know what the remaining defense witnesses will testify to and how that testimony will go over? I recall quite a few posters here predicting things about JW and his testimony (i.e. wait til cross, BZ will demolish him and JW will melt on the stand) - and the exact opposite happened.

 

[Wyn]

How many members does the BII clique have? Go back through this week's trial threads and see how many different posters you find that state they are convinced BC didn't do it. (May have, on the fence, doesn't look like it, suggesting alt explanations does not = BII). I think you'll find this clique pretty small.

Now, do the same for posters who assert BC guilt and you'll need a bus.

"Not sure if BC did it" does not = BII.

Some feel the need to take a side immediately, without all the info, and defend their opinion/position at all costs, viewing those who do not see things in black and white the same way they do as unenlightented. Well, IMO the opposite is true.

If BC is rendered G by the jury, IMO not a single person who was emphatic about his guilt from day one or before the trial deserves recognition for seeing something apparent (aside from statistics with no other info) that those of us waiting for all the testimony/evidence did not.

If BC is rendered NG by the jury, I doubt we'll see any celebration here (you won't from me for sure), because those of us reserving judgement are not doing so because "we don't get it", we just recognize that: (1) this is more complex in reality than it looked like on 7/12/08 (no matter how hard one tries to force square CE into a circular slot), (2) the trial is still in progress, and reasonable doubt is continuing to foam.

Interesting, yet has nothing to do with my original post. C'est la vie.