April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness

[johnfear]

Right after the CSA log testimony that I posted earlier, K asked Chappell, What is the significance of 158 Greenstone Ln. to your forensic examination? Chappell answered that he wasn't familiar with that address.
(For the record, I am not 100% sure of the address--I was scribbling as fast as I could and suffering from severe writer's cramp. I think it's right, but not sure. It hasn't come up again in testimony unless it was in the blacked out testimony for the defense, in which case all I can say is, "AAAARGH!")

I do wonder what the significance is, if any? Is it a red herring?

One of the things I keep wondering is what the number is. It is not possible for their to have been a 158 Greenstone Lane in Cary unless it misnumbered. Most of the numbers on that area (near their house in Lochmere) are in the 1-teens, like 113-119ish.

I can say for certain that four of the houses on that street are houses that seem to be owned by women who were divorced around the time the house was deeded to them. They are in the 300K range. It is not far from either the house they lived in on Wallsburg, nor Fielding drive.

 

[kellyroll]

One of the things I keep wondering is what the number is. It is not possible for their to have been a 158 Greenstone Lane in Cary unless it misnumbered. Most of the numbers on that area (near their house in Lochmere) are in the 1-teens, like 113-119ish.

I can say for certain that four of the houses on that street are houses that seem to be owned by women who were divorced around the time the house was deeded to them. They are in the 300K range. It is not far from either the house they lived in on Wallsburg, nor Fielding drive.

It's 178 Greenstone Lane. I looked it up yesterday, after seeing in the document posted earlier in this thread - the one about NC fooling around with JP on the couch at the C home. Couldn't figure anything significant. Looks like it's close to Lochmere golf course.

 

[Cheyenne130]

It's 178 Greenstone Lane. I looked it up yesterday, after seeing in the document posted earlier in this thread - the one about NC fooling around with JP on the couch at the C home. Couldn't figure anything significant. Looks like it's close to Lochmere golf course.

I just looked up Greenstone Lane in the Wake County real estate search and the numbers go from 103-119.

 

[iucpa]

Notice the publication date is 8/2/2011 and 7 people have it on their wishlist.

I wonder how quickly this book will be canceled when he is found not guilty?

 

[MoonFlwr]

Aside from the Google Maps search, what other incriminating evidence is their against BC?

(If the jury buys the computer tampering...the Google Maps evidence will be questionable).

What else is there?

 

[GhostCrab]

Aside from the Google Maps search, what other incriminating evidence is their against BC?

(If the jury buys the computer tampering...the Google Maps evidence will be questionable).

What else is there?

There are a lot of strange coincidences, testimony from her friends and family that bc was a horrible husband, stuff that can really tug at someone's emotions. But as for hard evidence, there is none. And if I were to vote today I would have to say ng because I could not be responsible for putting someone in prison based on the case the state has presented.

 

[MoonFlwr]

There are a lot of strange coincidences, testimony from her friends and family that bc was a horrible husband, stuff that can really tug at someone's emotions. But as for hard evidence, there is none. And if I were to vote today I would have to say ng because I could not be responsible for putting someone in prison based on the case the state has presented.

Basically you said what I was thinking, GhostCrab.

Good to hear some feedback - I wasn't sure if I'd misunderstood or missed out on some info. Thanks for the reply!

 

[Bottle Cap]

Back to reality for a second, forgetting every crime show you've ever seen on tv.

Planting evidence is a crime. A lot of people's careers are at stake. One unsolved murder isn't going to be the end of a career, but planting evidence in such a high-profile case would be.

So back to crime, which begs means, motive and opportunity. The defendant definitely had the means to manipulate files...if he didn't have full admin rights, those means might have been curtailed. Motive to clear the search would be obvious. Opportunity would be obvious too - he could log into the network at will.

LE: means, possibly. They'd have to get in, plant the stuff, and get out undetected. Motive, questionable...given it could wreck careers...and in light of that, you'd think if they could get that far in, they'd make sure everything added up. Opportunity - either it was collusion with all involved, or a renegade LE computer whiz...in which case the whole chain of custody testimony was perjury.

Given Brad's bent towards surreptitious computer activity, given his network access capability, given the fact that they went to lunch just after the time given for the google search, it's entirely possible he didn't have time to go in and delete it to his satisfaction...did it at a later date, and incompletely.

If LE planted the evidence, why do it in such a time frame as they did? Why not plant it for when he was firmly in the office, not getting ready to leave for lunch, given the the time they left isn't engraved in stone?

Common sense.

 

[jmflu]

Those strange coincidences are circumstantial evidence, and there's a ton of that listed numerous times in this forum.

 

[WolfpackWoman]

If LE planted the evidence, why do it in such a time frame as they did? Why not plant it for when he was firmly in the office, not getting ready to leave for lunch, given the the time they left isn't engraved in stone?

Whoever planted the files wouldn't want to do it when he was firmly in the office, likely because it would overlap with other internet history. That would be a pretty big red flag if you had overlapping logs and internet history files.

 

[metafizik]

I'm sorry. This doesn't make sense to me. Where is the .cur file then? Or are you suggesting he deleted that but saved a .bmp file and left that there?

The logs we are talking about were from 7/11 at 1:14. The files (which are supposed to be in incremental times were shown in sequence on the FBI document. They all had identical times to the millisecond. That is a huge red flag, as this was supposed to be zooming in on areas of the map.

So 2 red flags - they are .bmp files(supposed to be .cur) AND the times were all identical.

Question for techies - Can one manually save files as temporary internet files? I have no idea but I do know these .bmp files were found in the temporary internet files. If so, why would a person do that if we are to believe they wanted to access them later?

The only thing different about a temporary internet file and any other file is the directory where they are located and the fact that aside from the file extension they have hexadecimal file names that only have meaning to the browser. I was able to save a file to that directory with no problem on the Linux system I am using at the moment. I would think one could also save a file to this directory in Windows as well. I have no idea why someone would want to save a file to that directory since there are usually 1000's of files there.

 

[GhostCrab]

But even the circumstantial evidence is weak. You are drawing huge conclusions from situations that could easily be explained in an innocent manner. But you are choosing to find the sinister in everything bc did. I personally want more than that.

And as for LE here in North Carolina....google the name Duane Deaver.

 

[Bottle Cap]

Whoever planted the files wouldn't want to do it when he was firmly in the office, likely because it would overlap with other internet history. That would be a pretty big red flag if you had overlapping logs and internet history files.

Ok, now you're confusing me. They planted evidence for a time frame when he was at work. But that's not really what they'd want to do?

I'm sure, if they had access to everything he was doing, there'd be another gap in activity - sheesh, people go to the bathroom - that would be a firmer, more concrete time frame.

 

[WolfpackWoman]

Ok, now you're confusing me. They planted evidence for a time frame when he was at work. But that's not really what they'd want to do?

I'm sure, if they had access to everything he was doing, there'd be another gap in activity - sheesh, people go to the bathroom - that would be a firmer, more concrete time frame.

Sorry if I was confusing. You don't want it smack dab in the middle of being at work, because it would overlap. So, as a person planting evidence, you'd want to put it at the tail end of internet history, which would be pretty easy to determine. I think it'd be harder to put it in a gap for a bathroom break, because you don't know what's going on there. It may be a conference call, someone in his office, etc. Just makes more sense to put it at the end of activity, instead of in the middle.

 

[Bottle Cap]

Sorry if I was confusing. You don't want it smack dab in the middle of being at work, because it would overlap. So, as a person planting evidence, you'd want to put it at the tail end of internet history, which would be pretty easy to determine. I think it'd be harder to put it in a gap for a bathroom break, because you don't know what's going on there. It may be a conference call, someone in his office, etc. Just makes more sense to put it at the end of activity, instead of in the middle.

A person can't do a google search during a conference call?

 

[WolfpackWoman]

A person can't do a google search during a conference call?

Of course they can. But I think you'd have a hard time convincing a jury that a 41 second search during a conference call is valid in looking for a place to dump a body. And again, with the overlapping logs for other things as well, not just internet history. Just gets to be too much of a stretch for me personally.

ETA: But all of this is a non-issue, since it occurred at the end of the computer activity before lunch, and this is just plain speculative on my part.

 

[unc70]

Back to reality for a second, forgetting every crime show you've ever seen on tv.

Planting evidence is a crime. A lot of people's careers are at stake. One unsolved murder isn't going to be the end of a career, but planting evidence in such a high-profile case would be.

So back to crime, which begs means, motive and opportunity. The defendant definitely had the means to manipulate files...if he didn't have full admin rights, those means might have been curtailed. Motive to clear the search would be obvious. Opportunity would be obvious too - he could log into the network at will.

LE: means, possibly. They'd have to get in, plant the stuff, and get out undetected. Motive, questionable...given it could wreck careers...and in light of that, you'd think if they could get that far in, they'd make sure everything added up. Opportunity - either it was collusion with all involved, or a renegade LE computer whiz...in which case the whole chain of custody testimony was perjury.

Given Brad's bent towards surreptitious computer activity, given his network access capability, given the fact that they went to lunch just after the time given for the google search, it's entirely possible he didn't have time to go in and delete it to his satisfaction...did it at a later date, and incompletely.

If LE planted the evidence, why do it in such a time frame as they did? Why not plant it for when he was firmly in the office, not getting ready to leave for lunch, given the the time they left isn't engraved in stone?

Common sense.

If "he was firmly in the office", pretty good chance he was also interacting with others who would be able to say he wasn't on his computer, or he was doing something else. They already had to get the coworker agree that they left for lunch could have been later than his original just after 1:00, clarified to 1:00 to 1:15.

As for planting or tampering with evidence or lying on the stand, we see proven examples of that every day and we know that only a tiny percent are ever found out. Even with that, think how many recent cases we have had just in NC of malfeasance by police, sheriffs, troopers, and even DAs and Clerk of Courts. Many involved have gone to jail, but it keeps happening. Did it happen in this case? Maybe. Does it happen regularly? Absolutely.

 

[jmflu]

But even the circumstantial evidence is weak. You are drawing huge conclusions from situations that could easily be explained in an innocent manner. But you are choosing to find the sinister in everything bc did. I personally want more than that.

And as for LE here in North Carolina....google the name Duane Deaver.

When you have a ton of situations that could easily be explained individually, the sum of them looks very damning.

 

[unc70]

When you have a ton of situations that could easily be explained individually, the sum of them looks very damning.

Are you talking about the CPD?

 

[jmflu]

41 seconds or not, that's where her body was found. It stands to reason he wasn't looking for a place; he had already found it and was making sure he knew how to get to it quickly.