April 15th wknd of Sleuthing

[kar]

Haven't heard that Gracielee...Still scanning for information...

I heard at least 5 so far. Very scary day,. Just got our power back on. A tornado touched down 1 block from my house! Sorry I am shook up, this was way too close for me!!!

 

[SleuthSayer]

I haven't seen any evidence yet that they checked Cisco for these. I'm sure if they did they would have brought it up at trial. This is $3k+ worth of equipment. I'm betting it is tracked at some level (at least the router).

Doubtful.

Really, pretty much nothing is known about the router and FXO card. Presumably, he had such items at his house at some point if he connected his own little VoIP network to the TWC digital phone. However, that's about all that is know. Of the things that aren't known:

1. Exactly when he brought them home
2. Whether the ones he brought home were the same ones ordered in Jan '08
3. When they were removed from his house
4. Where the ones that he ordered in Jan '08 are
5. Where the ones that he had at home are (if they are not the same as above)

Presumably we don't know (4) and (5) because no one has really tried to look for them. If they were returned to Cisco, they could be very difficult to find, particularly given that no one knows specifically what it is that they are looking for. And even if they were found, there is no way to know when they were returned.

 

[ncsu95]

So glad to see that you are posting and hope everything is ok. I've been worried about you since we didn't hear anything after the storms finally passed.

Thank you. We lost power for a while and ventured out to see the area damage. Then I went out to see if I could help people. Then had to deal with my very grumpy 2 year old. Then finally got to sit down.

I really appreciate the messages from many different people. I love that we can all look at the evidence of this trial from different points of view and still maintain a respect for each other as people. It means a lot to me and I appreciate all the messages.

 

[SleuthinNC]

I was thinking the same thing but just let it be. I work from home full time. I have multiple sip phones logged into work using my regular router. Are we sure that they system he set up earlier in the year required the use of the bigger router and fxo card?

The only way to know the answer to that is if we see call records from the time the Cisco system was in place to see if they were still using the same TWC phone number or not.

 

[ncsu95]

Doubtful.

Really, pretty much nothing is known about the router and FXO card. Presumably, he had such items at his house at some point if he connected his own little VoIP network to the TWC digital phone. However, that's about all that is know. Of the things that aren't known:

1. Exactly when he brought them home
2. Whether the ones he brought home were the same ones ordered in Jan '08
3. When they were removed from his house
4. Where the ones that he ordered in Jan '08 are
5. Where the ones that he had at home are (if they are not the same as above)

Presumably we don't know (4) and (5) because no one has really tried to look for them. If they were returned to Cisco, they could be very difficult to find, particularly given that no one knows specifically what it is that they are looking for. And even if they were found, there is no way to know when they were returned.

I didn't think he connected the home phone to it. I thought he did it to use the wireless sip phones. Also, wouldn't he only need the fxo card at home if he wanted to route it out TWC? He could use the home phone connected to an IAD without the router/fxo. I use a cordless phone logged in with an IAD so I can have a phone to walk around my house with (it's logged in to my work).

 

[SleuthSayer]

I was thinking the same thing but just let it be. I work from home full time. I have multiple sip phones logged into work using my regular router. Are we sure that they system he set up earlier in the year required the use of the bigger router and fxo card?

I believe that the way we got to the notion of a bigger router is as follows.

The Cisco expert testified that, to have connected his VoIP network to the TWC Digital Phone, he would have needed some type of FXO connection. He apparently had the two connected at some time, so presumably he had an FXO at home.

The prosecution showed the Cisco expert an invoice showing an internal Cisco order placed by BC for a 2-port FXO card. My understanding is that the order was from Jan '08. The specific card that was ordered would have required a bigger router that has slots for WICs. The Cisco expert said specifically a 28xx or 38xx router.

The implication that the prosecution was offering is that the one ordered in Jan '08 was the one he took home. But, AFAIK, no one knows that for sure.

So, if you assume that the one he ordered is the one he took home, yes, he needed a larger router. But, if you assume that he had a different FXO at home, then we have no idea what router he would have had.

 

[SleuthSayer]

I didn't think he connected the home phone to it. I thought he did it to use the wireless sip phones. Also, wouldn't he only need the fxo card at home if he wanted to route it out TWC? He could use the home phone connected to an IAD without the router/fxo. I use a cordless phone logged in with an IAD so I can have a phone to walk around my house with (it's logged in to my work).

Others here have stated that he set up his own little small business like VoIP network with Cisco IP Phones (both wired and wireless) and that this network reached the outside world via the TWC Digital Phone. IIRC, they concluded that from something that he explained in the deposition. I haven't had (and don't expect to have) 6 hours to invest in watching the deposition, so I am relying on what others have said.

 

[SleuthinNC]

I didn't think he connected the home phone to it. I thought he did it to use the wireless sip phones. Also, wouldn't he only need the fxo card at home if he wanted to route it out TWC? He could use the home phone connected to an IAD without the router/fxo. I use a cordless phone logged in with an IAD so I can have a phone to walk around my house with (it's logged in to my work).

He was using the wireless phones to replace the home cordless phones so he would have connected to TWC or they had to change the phone number they gave to friends, family, etc. He could use and IAD but would then also need to run an external UCM server vs. UCM Express directly on the router.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Others here have stated that he set up his own little small business like VoIP network with Cisco IP Phones (both wired and wireless) and that this network reached the outside world via the TWC Digital Phone. IIRC, they concluded that from something that he explained in the deposition. I haven't had (and don't expect to have) 6 hours to invest in watching the deposition, so I am relying on what others have said.

This is in the second deposition video if you want to go straight to that part. The first number is the time of day and the second number is the time into that particular video:

12:05:20 39:23 VOIP at home. Telephones - remote control / monitoring, initiating phone calls

This is from the FANTASTIC index created by Skittles in the link above these threads. (Thank you again, Skittles!!)

 

[grommet]

Okay, so once again, here we go:

You guys want me to jump to the guilty side based on this:

1) He may have made a spoofed call to cover for an alibi that required careful planning and coverup (I mean, he bought it in January, no? Disposed of it in July? Picked up other pieces along the way) and there are a number of ways to do it and NO EVIDENCE of any of it? Tell me it was his accomplice, I'll believe you, but not this.

2) He may have hovered over the area of Fielding Drive on a google map for 3 seconds (the whole thing was only 41 seconds, but that area was 3 seconds) on the day before his wife went missing, and it's three miles from his house and he had NO business being there.

3) Her mom, dad, sister, brother, et al and etc. say he MUST have done it.

4) A bunch of people who lived in his neighborhood and told inconsistent stories about the levels of what was going say he MUST have done it.

5) We (admitted on the stand by DD) have NO, ZIP, ZERO eyewitnesses of any kind to any type of any violence between the two of them other than a few instances of cursing and screaming?

6) The divorce process went on for SIX months and he definitely was all up in her business about it, controlling the cash flow and snooping like a dumb-@$$.

7) He was READING her emails from old boyfriends and didn't say/do anything about that until one day in July (allegedly).

8) He actively participated in borrowing tons of money from her fam for his AND Nancy's benefit.

9) There may or may not have been eyewitnesses the morning she supposedly jogged and what not who saw her/didn't see her, but the bottom line is NO ONE CARED enough to pay any attention until hind sight kicked off.

10) The DETECTIVES in a MISSING PERSONS case took dozens of photos of the missing person's house and SPOKE to each other about red scratch marks, now rub marks on the defendant's neck and NO ONE thought to sneak a photo, for "prosperity(sic)'s" sake?

11) All of these people are AWARE of some computer expertise on the part of the defendant and snatch up all of his computers and lock them away between July and October and a bunch of smart phones, etc. but somehow erase one of them and act like they know NOTHING about smart phones, etc. and now want us to believe it really didn't matter anyways.

You guys want to look at all of this and try and tell someone that you can't prove a negative?

Okay, maybe CPD is not corrupt (I never really thought they were "framing" or "maligning" him on purpose) but you want to tell me that this, coupled with everything else we were watching for the last six weeks of our life (some of us nearly three years) and you guys want to call it EFFECTIVE police work, and EFFECTIVE prosecution.

Are we watching the same set of circumstances here?

At this point, I've decided I will forever remain on the fence, but only because of this:

Gritguy and the like won't have to write long, compelling, intelligent narratives for me in a trial where the person is obviously guilty (JY for instance) and the main reason I will be watching those other trials is because of curiosity, BUT...you guys think that what has been shown to this jury shows him as guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Really?

You are THAT sure. I cannot believe you haven't seen some major snafus in what I've written. This is not JUSTICE. This is JUST A MESS.

I left out the lies part of this for one reason and one reason alone. He didn't lie to anyone and say "I didn't do it". He didn't LIE about that. He didn't say anything at all. And sometimes when you see someone who lies constantly, the only time they are telling the truth is usually when their mouth is closed.

Oh, and you want me to believe it was because he suddenly got angry and snapped, but planned it for months....riiiggghhht. Forgot that part.

I'll be the first to say that it's possible BC committed this crime. Heck - I'll even go as far to say that he is the likely perpetrator. I mean, who else could it be? But based on the evidence I've seen these past 6 weeks, I can't say without a reasonable doubt that he is "the one". Think about that statement for second - beyond a reasonable doubt. If you can convince yourself that it's possible BC didn't commit this crime based on the circumstantial evidence you've seen, then you must come back with "Not Guilty". Not because you're 100% convinced of his innocence...but rather that you're only 75% convinced of his guilt.

If you don't know what the heck I'm talking about, go add "12 Angry Men" to your Netflix queue, and when it arrives in the mail - pop a giant bag of popcorn and watch it with your family. Not only is considered a cinematic masterpiece, but it's a reminder of the burden of proof that still remains the lynchpin of our justice system.

 

[ncsu95]

He was using the wireless phones to replace the home cordless phones so he would have connected to TWC or they had to change the phone number they gave to friends, family, etc. He could use and IAD but would then also need to run an external UCM server vs. UCM Express directly on the router.

Thanks. I wasn't thinking about the home phone number. That makes sense...he would have still routed the calls out TWC.

 

[WolfpackWoman]

I don't know the answer to this question--so you VOIP people (or anyone really) may have to jump in. Can you mask your number? So, if the home number is dialed, it's routed to the IP phone? And that's the number that's displayed when it's called out? That way they don't have to change their number, or have their friends call a different number, and it still acts as if it's the home number all along? Because, I agree, it'd be ridiculous to have a different number for the Spring (is that the right time frame??), and then switch back.

 

[less0305]

I'll be the first to say that it's possible BC committed this crime. Heck - I'll even go as far to say that he is the likely perpetrator. I mean, who else could it be? But based on the evidence I've seen these past 6 weeks, I can't say without a reasonable doubt that he is "the one". Think about that statement for second - beyond a reasonable doubt. If you can convince yourself that it's possible BC didn't commit this crime based on the circumstantial evidence you've seen, then you must come back with "Not Guilty". Not because you're 100% convinced of his innocence...but rather that you're only 75% convinced of his guilt.

If you don't know what the heck I'm talking about, go add "12 Angry Men" to your Netflix queue, and when it arrives in the mail - pop a giant bag of popcorn and watch it with your family. Not only is considered a cinematic masterpiece, but it's a reminder of the burden of proof that still remains the lynchpin of our justice system.

All I can say is: If Bradley walks from the criminal trial, I sure hope the Rentz file a civil lawsuit immediately and have Bradley go straight from criminal to civil proceedings. He's guilty and needs to pay for his crime. If he had money problems in 2008, I hope a civil judgement will keep him in the poor house for the rest of his life, at which time he will face a higher judgement than any he faced on earth.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I'll be the first to say that it's possible BC committed this crime. Heck - I'll even go as far to say that he is the likely perpetrator. I mean, who else could it be? But based on the evidence I've seen these past 6 weeks, I can't say without a reasonable doubt that he is "the one". Think about that statement for second - beyond a reasonable doubt. If you can convince yourself that it's possible BC didn't commit this crime based on the circumstantial evidence you've seen, then you must come back with "Not Guilty". Not because you're 100% convinced of his innocence...but rather that you're only 75% convinced of his guilt.

If you don't know what the heck I'm talking about, go add "12 Angry Men" to your Netflix queue, and when it arrives in the mail - pop a giant bag of popcorn and watch it with your family. Not only is considered a cinematic masterpiece, but it's a reminder of the burden of proof that still remains the lynchpin of our justice system.

The original or the remake? (I have to say that I'm partial to the original.)

 

[SleuthinNC]

I don't know the answer to this question--so you VOIP people (or anyone really) may have to jump in. Can you mask your number? So, if the home number is dialed, it's routed to the IP phone? And that's the number that's displayed when it's called out? That way they don't have to change their number, or have their friends call a different number, and it still acts as if it's the home number all along? Because, I agree, it'd be ridiculous to have a different number for the Spring (is that the right time frame??), and then switch back.

You can give your VoIP system a phone number that you choose but not a phone number that belongs to a phone service provider. So the Cooper home phone number was registered to TWC that number can be moved to another phone carrier like AT&T but not used as just a VoIP number without an associated provider if they want to talk to other phones outside of their personal VoIP system.

I hope that makes sense.

 

[WolfpackWoman]

Makes perfect sense--thank you!

 

[gritguy]

The case: I can see a person being concerned with some facts in the case and the procedure followed by CPD and having a perspective that the case is not made beyond a reasonable doubt. I am convinced, at this point, that he did it, and a good part of that is just from watching his deposition where to me he puts on a clinic on how to tell self-serving stories. To me the trail points clearly to him. Next week will be interesting for certain.

The freight train: Man, everything went dark, and it got louder and louder kind of a deep rumbling, and then everything outside went sideways. We rushed the kids to the safest spot but out the windows I saw trees snapping and things flying - everybody's ears popped. Maybe a minute or so I can't really say and it was over and back to normal cloudy/rainy stuff. The neighborhood was a wreck. At least twenty trees in my backyard alone, a lot of them big, were pulled from the ground or snapped like twigs, all in seconds. Various things attached to houses are sprinkled around and unfortunately some houses were hit by trees. Anything not attached to something is not where it used to be.

One big feeling was relief after journeying outside, up until somebody came by with initial reports that people have been killed elsewhere nearby by the storm.

It has been interesting reading your accounts from different locations. Power just came back on here, though not the network so I'm thankful for 3G.

I see from wral it is true there were deaths from the storm.

 

[Tipstaff]

Gritguy and NCSU95 so glad to look in here this morning and see that you are fine after the Tornado has passed. Can't imagine the scary time as you waited for the storm to pass and awesome news you and your families are fine.

Also grateful all other WS'ers that posted are well and safe.

 

[Tipstaff]

All I can say is: If Bradley walks from the criminal trial, I sure hope the Rentz file a civil lawsuit immediately and have Bradley go straight from criminal to civil proceedings. He's guilty and needs to pay for his crime. If he had money problems in 2008, I hope a civil judgement will keep him in the poor house for the rest of his life, at which time he will face a higher judgement than any he faced on earth.

IRONIC is it? This would make working out a separation agreement look like a piece of cake. Each of the adults could have recovered from a difficult marriage, two beautiful children and life goes on! Ironic, Ironic, Ironic.

And then the "higher judgement' well I for one would rather not have that hanging over my head.

 

[LaLaw2000]

My granddaughter is stationed at Pope AFB right at Ft. Bragg. She is Security Forces (MP), and her husband is Army MP. They just got back there yesterday morning from visiting here. She called me about midnight and told me they were fine and that she had just gotten off duty. Her husband is still on duty. They were both called in to their respective areas.

Ft. Bragg is closed down except for key personnel. Power should be restored some time today. The post will not open up until power is restored.

I was gone to a festival all yesterday afternoon and did not get home until late. I had no idea all of this had happened until my granddaughter called me.

I do hope that all of our North Carolina posters are safe and have no damage to their homes. I may not agree with some of you, but I certainly want to know that you are safe!

:seeya: