April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness

[otto]

I'm pretty confident in saying No. If he was going to do that, why not just use another computer at the office that wasn't his (like a lab computer).

So the question becomes who modified the file timestamps to suggest that the search was done on July 11, and why did police think that was irrelevant and not worthy of mentioning during testimony?

 

[ncsu95]

Brad himself said he spent the majority of his time at work and training for his competitions. On his site he said 12 or 13 hours a day on the week-ends. I think he would have been perfectly fine with nancy taking the girls, but for that pesky separation agreement. He didn't want to have to pay. Brad himself bought the 'interview suit/clothes' for nancy to job hunt in Toronto. Why would he do that if he didn't want her to go. He checked into renting a moving van as opposed to hiring movers. DD bought her ticket to fly home from Toronto after driving up with nancy and the kids. It was all set. Brad wanted her out by the end of April. And then that pesky separation agreement, with child support and alimony turned up in nancy's stolen email, and all plans were off. MOO Brad kept up with his French cutie. Brad would have been perfectly fine IMO. He never even met his nephew, didn't know his name. Brad's not into family much.

I don't believe he was training for an ironman in 2008. I though he stopped training after the HM stuff came out.

 

[unc70]

It is interesting you should repost my post at this particular moment, just as unc has forecast that something is about to be revealed that will shock us.

Now, he can recant if he likes. But as I have been saying, people know people and they know things, that eventually come out as their being biased on this board.

What I know comes a little from what I read on this and other sites, but primarily by following the trial testimony and evidence really really closely. While a lot of you here and elsewhere were laughing about JW, talking about how boring it was, or how technical, a few us us were soaking it in and processing and processing and processing. That few are not emotionally invested beyond the desire that the legal system operate as it should.

Evidence tampering is looking much more likely, both on NC's phone and on BC's laptop. Ben Levitan will be on to deal with cell phone issues. Then some really uncomfortable testimony by friends and lovers of NC including return engagements for some of the early friends of Nancy witnesses. Finally, a Google expert.

A bunch of people are increasingly at risk for conspiracy, perjury, and a host of other charges. It should be a bumpy ride.

I have no inside information. I watch the news, blogs, etc. and keep my ear to the ground. I do not want to get anywere near this case. IMNSHO.

 

[Madeleine74]

I looked at the HP affidavit since it had been a long time since I read it. I was looking specifically for the earring back comment. It isn't there. Not in a legal affidavit.

Must have been written elsewhere, perhaps in some notes taken or through an interview or something given to the DA's office at some point in the last couple of years.

Since fingers have been pointed at HP, I wanted to try and find this smoking earring.

Sorry, earring conspiratorists. Much ado about nothing.

 

[ncsu95]

I just remembered something. Brad himself told detectives he was in his office, bouncing around on the Internet and doing Google searches the morning of July 12. IIRC no one had asked him what he was doing on his computer, but he volunteered this info.

I wonder if Brad thought there could be incriminating evidence and he was already trying to give an explanation for it? Seems like a very specific detail to offer up when no one has asked.

Much like offering up that the missing wife who he didn't see when she left that morning to go running was wearing a black/red/gray jogging bra.

He was doing google searches. The home PC showed that. The theory was that he was doing that to create another alibi.

 

[gracielee]

I think so. He/she is not mine! We are recreating Woodstock in May at our farm and he is appropriately dressed for the occasion - and I just loved it!!!!

Recreating Woodstock, like in Country Joe 'one two three what are we fightin' for?' :great:

 

[otto]

No, that's not unusual in and of itself. It's the fact that she went running and should have had shoes and socks, and most importantly, Brad had a clairvoyant moment and offered up the info of the one and only thing she was wearing.

I think the point is that women are found in remote locations wearing anything from all to some to none of their clothing. If Brad put her there, it almost seems more likely that he would have put all of her clothes on. The prosecution theory is that the murder happened close to midnight. That's plenty of time to do something with clothes. I'm not convinced that anything can be concluded based on what she was wearing, or the fact that she was wearing her earrings.

 

[ncsu95]

My own impression of the witness testimony was that it was possible to do it, Brad had access to and receipts for cisco equipment, and that it was possible to do it and not leave any trace. As a non-techie, that was the understanding I came away with after listening to his testimony. And I'm stickin' with it. :seeya:

Fair enough...as a techie, I need proof that he spoofed it, which we didn't get. I believe the call was made by a person.

 

[ncsu95]

I just love it when you use the little guys!:great:

'Make's me wanna dance, throw my head back, dance' :woohoo:

I'm doing it more because of you (hopefully in an appropriate and non-snarky way towards other posters).


Now it is fftobed:

 

[gracielee]

Get Donald Trump involved and pair everyone with a famous or (in) famous detective/crime-fighting agent and film a reality show where they try and solve cold cases? I call Batman!

Oh, I went to a Mystery Week-end at The Biltmore Estate once. It was really cool. The actors and actresse were all dressed in the attire of the
1920's, acting out a murder. One of my daughters took me with some friends of her's from work. It was something like a live game of Clue.

 

[ncsu95]

I wasn't being smart with you. There's a lot of posters and I honestly couldn't remember!

Sorry, I didn't take it as that. Just clarifying where I have been for over a week. After reading about the cross of Chappelle, I am now hanging on the fence on the other side. I won't completely fall off until the end at this point (I made that mistake once). The google search was the evidence I was waiting for...but what I learned tonight completely destroys that for me. And the prosecution didn't offer any other testimony as to what could have legitimately caused it.

What a weird case this has been.

 

[ncsu95]

No, that's not unusual in and of itself. It's the fact that she went running and should have had shoes and socks, and most importantly, Brad had a clairvoyant moment and offered up the info of the one and only thing she was wearing.

Yes, him offering that was very strange. But again, there are lots of cases where a woman was found in a bra and nothing else (including shoes/socks). One case had a woman with a bra and ankle bracelet (jewelry) left on her.

 

[ncsu95]

He did make vague references to 'there being something on the computer' dadada dah You know, that spooky music right before something scary happens in a movie. :fence: Me thinks judge would be ready to burst with fury. I mean, he was scary about the tweets. Witnesses just don't post online, during a trial. Even Judge Ito would have burst a vein.

I agree with that. I wouldn't have.

 

[Madeleine74]

No, he wasn't talking about the Mac. He told detectives he was "in his office working, bouncing around on the Internet, doing Google searches..."

And there are google searches with strange time stamps on his IBM laptop...the laptop that was in his office.

I think it's very possible that Brad was doing something to his own computer and specifically with that data. Why didn't he just wipe it all clean? Could he have wiped that data clean to the point the FBI could not find it? I don't know.

But he pointed out he was bouncing around on the Internet, in his office, on his computer. And I know that Brad lies cause he proved that over and over and over.

 

[ncsu95]

So the question becomes who modified the file timestamps to suggest that the search was done on July 11, and why did police think that was irrelevant and not worthy of mentioning during testimony?

Exactly. What do you BDI people think?

 

[ncsu95]

I looked at the HP affidavit since it had been a long time since I read it. I was looking specifically for the earring back comment. It isn't there. Not in a legal affidavit.

Must have been written elsewhere, perhaps in some notes taken or through an interview or something given to the DA's office at some point in the last couple of years.

Since fingers have been pointed at HP, I wanted to try and find this smoking earring.

Sorry, earring conspiratorists. Much ado about nothing.

It was testified in this trial though that she went back and modified it, right (or am I remembering it wrong because of all the discussion)?

 

[gracielee]

I do not believe robbery was the motive if BC didn't do it. I have no real theory as to what happened.

Nancy was a strong, fast woman. She ran fast, had stamina, strong legs. And she could be loud. We've heard that 'way to go, Brad' across the auditorium upon Brad's graduation. These 'sight' witnesses certainly would have heard her screaming and yelling. Rather than a couple short lines on her neck, she'd have had lots of hand prints, finger marks, as she clawed to free herself, kicking and screaming. They always tell us women to drop and kick at an attacker, because our legs are the strongest parts of our bodies. And something I've always told our daughters, since the time they first began venturing out in the world alone. 'Don't ever let anybody take you away, even if they have a weapon.' 'Fight, scream, run where you are, because if they take you away, chances are you won't ever come back'. 'So take your chances where you are and fight hard.' Nancy was a fighter, she wouldn't have gone quietly or easily. And she had little to no defensive wounds on her. If she was out jogging, she would have been able to defend herself. She didn't wear an I-Pod, and she was tall and strong. MOO

 

[ncsu95]

Oh, I went to a Mystery Week-end at The Biltmore Estate once. It was really cool. The actors and actresse were all dressed in the attire of the
1920's, acting out a murder. One of my daughters took me with some friends of her's from work. It was something like a live game of Clue.

Some old church friends did a murder/mystery dinner back in February. My wife and I were going to play characters. The week of the dinner, my grandmother passed away, so we had to back out because her burial was the same day. My character turned out to be the murderer. I would have loved that.

 

[ncsu95]

Nancy was a strong, fast woman. She ran fast, had stamina, strong legs. And she could be loud. We've heard that 'way to go, Brad' across the auditorium upon Brad's graduation. These 'sight' witnesses certainly would have heard her screaming and yelling. Rather than a couple short lines on her neck, she'd have had lots of hand prints, finger marks, as she clawed to free herself, kicking and screaming. They always tell us women to drop and kick at an attacker, because our legs are the strongest parts of our bodies. And something I've always told our daughters, since the time they first began venturing out in the world alone. 'Don't ever let anybody take you away, even if they have a weapon.' 'Fight, scream, run where you are, because if they take you away, chances are you won't ever come back'. 'So take your chances where you are and fight hard.' Nancy was a fighter, she wouldn't have gone quietly or easily. And she had little to no defensive wounds on her. If she was out jogging, she would have been able to defend herself. She didn't wear an I-Pod, and she was tall and strong. MOO

Yet she didn't fight Brad?

 

[gracielee]

I have a basset hound and loooooove them!

They are so cute! There's one that lives down the road from us, always barks at me when I walk my dogs. Faces to die for.