April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness

[otto]

I see that there is a law which exempts FBI documents and materials from being subject to discovery. It's in place to protect their procedures, and to prevent the development of counter measures by computer savvy guys like Cupper. Still, that law should not interfere with the defense hiring independent experts to analyze the same information. The images were eventually made available, but it was quite a struggle for the defense to have access to the information. There were a lot of roadblocks that the prosecution put up simply to delay the transfer of information to the defense.


Pages 136-139... what in the world is that about!???

I honestly hope that those last few questions were not the reason that police thought Brad was guilty. That is straight out of the mouths of the nosey neighbors and not evidence of murder. Not one point on that list has anything to do with circumstantial evidence of murder.

It looks very much like a list compiled by police, including attempts by police to duplicate questions similar to a psychological test like the MMPI (where the same questions are asked 7 times in different ways - truth test).

For example

Nancy didn't ask you to wash her dress did she
You didn't tell Nancy you were going to wash her dress did you

 

[otto]

Kurtz is good, and his timing in terms of requesting that the Judge recuse himself was brilliant, as it preceded defense witnesses. The Judge more or less had to sit back (a little) and let witnesses speak or answer questions without prosecution interference. Kurtz had already called the Judge on evidence error once before when the tape of the custody hearing included excluded information. Judge error was an option for the defense that was waiting for the right time, and it happened once again with Kurtz being limited in his ability to qualtify an expert (did I get that timing wrong ... when was that request made?).

Still, he's good.

 

[TallCoolOne]

For all intents and purposes, when the police chief called her press conference, she eliminated that this could have been a stranger on stranger crime. I do not think that is wise for anyone, especially those in the community in which she serves. And it doesn't leave you with confidence that they were not going to go the distance to stick this crime on BC.

How many more murdered joggers have there been in the area?

 

[otto]

Joggers in area, missing women, or murdered wives from the last few years? In the area? Lots, I suspect.

 

[otto]

Skewered. That's the best word to describe what happened with JW.

 

[BrownRice]

I wonder if the mods would let us have some fun after this is all over and have an awards thread "The web sleuthys". We could take nominations and poll votes for categories like "nicest", "snarkiest", "most genuine", "most stubborn", "favorite poster in the BDI camp", "favorite poster in the BII camp", "favorite fence sitter", "wittiest" (I nominate JohnFear), "poster most deserving of a banning", etc.

That would be entertaining.

Can we also have a game for who can pick the posters who were banned/TO'd and came back as "new" posters?

 

[cody100]

Good morning everybody. I see the chat was prolific last night.

 

[cody100]

Kurtz is good, and his timing in terms of requesting that the Judge recuse himself was brilliant, as it preceded defense witnesses. The Judge more or less had to sit back (a little) and let witnesses speak or answer questions without prosecution interference. Kurtz had already called the Judge on evidence error once before when the tape of the custody hearing included excluded information. Judge error was an option for the defense that was waiting for the right time, and it happened once again with Kurtz being limited in his ability to qualtify an expert (did I get that timing wrong ... when was that request made?).

Still, he's good.

I have been very impressed with Kurtz. He is brilliant and very analytical in his approaches. To me, he run circles around the prosecution in my opinion.

 

[otto]

There did seem to be a bit of a popularity contest between the wives in Nancy's neighborhood, but that's no reason to extend that gang heirarchy, is it?

 

[GhostCrab]

[Q

So: random attacker people, don't concern yourselves with hacking theories because it makes no sense.

It would if CPD we the ones doing the "hacking". I am with JohnFear, it is very strange that everything was cleaned up except for a 41 second map search. So much of the state's evidence does not sit well with me.

 

[otto]

I remember listening to Nancy's mother's testimony when she mentioned Brett W. It seemed like her family would have prefered if Nancy had continued with the man she was seeing in 1998-99, shortly before marrying Brad. She married Brad in 2000, BW was divorced in 2001, and I guess they must have been seeing each other in 1999 when ... wouldn't he still have been married and wasn't that just a few months before Brad and Nancy got married? 2000?

Did Nancy tell her politically connected friend no thanks, that she wasn't interested in Green Cards in Florida because she was married and is that why the friendship fell apart?

 

[otto]

[Q

So: random attacker people, don't concern yourselves with hacking theories because it makes no sense.

It would if CPD we the ones doing the "hacking". I am with JohnFear, it is very strange that everything was cleaned up except for a 41 second map search. So much of the state's evidence does not sit well with me.

That's right. It makes no sense that Brad hacked phone calls to himself because police have said there is no proof (nothing) that this happened. If investigators were involved in "spoilation of evidence", the verdict should be not guily. There should be no telerance for investigators messing with evidence, espeically when they have the FBI at their disposal.

Cleaned up except for 41 seconds? What was wrong with that 41 seconds? Did it have the incorrect time stamp? Was it forewarded or backdated, or unknown? Just messed with?

 

[TallCoolOne]

Again, you are making a leap. You have no way of knowing what NC told her friends about JP but because you want to see everything in a light least favorable to BC you are going to assume that you know. Shame and I hope you are never called to sit on a jury.

Also, you've no idea what my opinion is. You assume that because I find your posts distasteful that I must believe BC to be innocent. In fact, I have yet to make up my mind and the day that this trial comes to a close I could as easily feel that he is guilty as he is innocent. What you fail to see is that most of the posters that you accuse of supporting BC are doing no such thing. We are merely supporting the idea that a person is innocent until found guilty and refuse to allow the prosecution to skirt their responsibility to provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt because that is our civic duty.

Actually that is the civic duty of a juror, not as an observer. As an observer we are allowed to form our options as we see fit. We, as observers have not taken an oath.

 

[GhostCrab]

That's what I think too. And put me in the Brad is guilty group. :maddening: I have absolutely no reasonable doubt.

If that were the case, the state should have brought it up on re-cross. I am not techy AT ALL, can those who are confirm that deleting files would alter time stamps?

 

[cody100]

[Q

So: random attacker people, don't concern yourselves with hacking theories because it makes no sense.

It would if CPD we the ones doing the "hacking". I am with JohnFear, it is very strange that everything was cleaned up except for a 41 second map search. So much of the state's evidence does not sit well with me.

Every time I think about wiping out NC's cell phone, it irritates me all over again. How do you do that after the warnings that are given on that BB and the warnings from the defense to handle that with care? The soild examination was very weak, and the entymologist was knowledgeable but admitted he could not pin the time down except to say it could be as late as 11AM that morning.
The Google map testimony from the defense was shut down before everything came out. If the Judge allows defense to bring in an acceptable forensic computer expert, perhaps we will know more about what happened on BC's computer.

 

[TallCoolOne]

Joggers in area, missing women, or murdered wives from the last few years? In the area? Lots, I suspect.

No, I'm asking randomly murdered joggers. People are complaining that LE stated early on this was not a random act of violence, so I am asking for them to provide evidence that there have been others, to support their disagreement that this was not an act of random violence. Am I making sense?

 

[kljohnson0458]

Given BC read at WS's, my boss said yesterday when I asked about the attorney's he said there is little doubt they (State and Defense) read these boards. It may have been one of the defense who posted at JW. I did not even tell him that BC's computer showed he'd been at this site.

 

[GhostCrab]

No, I'm asking randomly murdered joggers. People are complaining that LE stated early on this was not a random act of violence, so I am asking for them to provide evidence that there have been others, to support their disagreement that this was not an act of random violence. Am I making sense?

There is at least one other that I can think of...not a jogger, but a woman who delivered newspapers. I believe she was pregnant, not sure, but other local posters can help me out. There are other instances in the news all the time.

 

[cody100]

Given BC read at WS's, my boss said yesterday when I asked about the attorney's he said there is little doubt they (State and Defense) read these boards. It may have been one of the defense who posted at JW. I did not even tell him that BC's computer showed he'd been at this site.

You could be right, but my guess is both sides are very busy trying to prepare for the next day in court to wade through our postings. IMO However, that said, anything is possible, and it could be someone in either Prosecution or Defense's office if you are correct.

 

[cody100]

There is at least one other that I can think of...not a jogger, but a woman who delivered newspapers. I believe she was pregnant, not sure, but other local posters can help me out. There are other instances in the news all the time.

She was pregnant, I believe, and no one has been arrested in that case.