April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness

[ncsu95]

So as far the Food Lion guy seeing NC. It is actually 1.8 miles from the Cooper house to Kildaire & Lochemere. NC was training to run a half marathon. Average half marathon pace is a 9 minute mile. That does not put his sighting out of the realm of possibility at all.

9 minute mile for her or average overall? I trained hard last year and did a half in 1:57:49, which is just under 9 minute miles (I'm a big guy too....6'5, 245). I finished in the top 3rd overall. I'd save the average is closer to 10 minutes.

 

[cityslick]

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

Didn't I hear also that she's friended on FB with a number of NC's friends?

The book doesn't bother me, although she probably shouldn't be doing the reporting since it's supposed to be non-biased from a journalistic point of view.

 

[ncsu95]

Ok maybe this is common knowledge and I just missed it somewhere but I had no idea that Amanda Lamb had already written her book about this case.

I hope not. That would be ridiculous.

 

[ncsu95]

The cross examination of defense witnesses yesteday made it clear to me that the prosecution was quite comfortable trying to put words in people's mouths, or imply they said something that they did not say. I think it was really upsetting CD (yesterday morning) to have it suggested that she said things she didn't, or to suggest that she was contradicting her earlier testimony. The prosecution asked a dirty question too, asking her, as a child psychologist, to give an opinion. Good for her for stating that she was not testifying as an expert.

It's not much of a leap to believe that the prosecution will suggest that the calls were spoofed even though there is no proof (confirmed by the lead detective) in the hope that the jury will mistakenly think that it was proven.

I caught that yesterday too. I put it in the same category as using Facebook to try and discredit JW. Of course, it worked for some people on here.

 

[gracielee]

Well damn, I just wrote my 'ripping the guts out' posts on yesterday/last night/this mornings thread.' Sorry, my guts are ripped out, can't duplicate 'em over here.

 

[RaleighNative]

1) Any reason the e-mail BC sent to NC on 7/12/2008 is not allowed as evidence?

2) To me the defense shoots themselves in the foot bringing up NC's past infidelity. All it could do is paint a picture of why BC would have a motive to take her out. Years of unfaithfulness yet ready to throw in the towel over him doing same. Pros could show how BC was building anger for SEVEN years and finally lost it.

1) No idea
2) I disagree. It seems NC had 2 affairs at minimum (JP and florida guy). Right now the defense is bringing up witnesses who believe they likely saw NC jogging on a path, and a mysterious van. My guess is later the defense will bring up her affairs, along with people who were very angry with NC due to those affairs. I think the defense is going to present multiple motives and scenarios which the CPD did not investigate, and therefore stress they railroaded BC without doing a thorough investigation.

 

[MrsWendy]

<snip>
2) To me the defense shoots themselves in the foot bringing up NC's past infidelity. All it could do is paint a picture of why BC would have a motive to take her out. Years of unfaithfulness yet ready to throw in the towel over him doing same. Pros could show how BC was building anger for SEVEN years and finally lost it.

There is a slight risk to the defense by bringing this up. But the prosecution spent a large amount of time hammering the "Brad was evil... Nancy was a saint" line. So the defense brought on a few witnesses to counter that by showing that neither of them was perfect.

 

[ncsu95]

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

I noticed that too. And Amazon has it for December. I still think it is in poor taste to have that cover before the verdict of the trial. What if he is found Not Guilty?

 

[ncsu95]

I think you're both right. Defense made the claim that someone has tampered with the computer so it is up to them to prove that to the jury. Prosecution made the claim that Brad spoofed the call but they have not proved that he did.

That was my point exactly. There are people on here that need absolute proof, including who planted the evidence on the computer, before it will be credible, yet accept the 6:40 call as being spoofed despite no proof at all as testified to by the lead detective. Personally, I want proof on both, which is why I'm having a really hard time with this case. I believe the 6:40 call was real. But I believe the google search was real. Yet I also believe there is some validity to the defense argument about tampering because the prosecution does their own version of Kurtz kittens every time the defense tries to get it introduced. So I don't know what the hell to think. I'm just glad this burden didn't fall on me (as a juror). If I were, I obviously would have seen the testimony on the google search and the defense cross...so I would have more information....but if I were voting right now based on what I personally know through video and reports from people in the courtroom, I would vote not guilty despite me believing he is probably guilty. And that sucks to feel that way.

 

[SleuthinNC]

9 minute mile for her or average overall? I trained hard last year and did a half in 1:57:49, which is just under 9 minute miles (I'm a big guy too....6'5, 245). I finished in the top 3rd overall. I'd save the average is closer to 10 minutes.

Even going with 10 minutes it's not a huge stretch and certainly not off by 15 minutes more like a minute or 2 either way. If the guy clocked in at 7:24 it is more likely it was closer to 7:15 when he was at that intersection where believes he saw NC.

 

[SleuthinNC]

I noticed that too. And Amazon has it for December. I still think it is in poor taste to have that cover before the verdict of the trial. What if he is found Not Guilty?

I don't have a problem so much with the book itself, if it is NG it won't get published. I do have a problem with her reporting on it for WRAL and wonder where she got her detail from to write the book.

 

[gracielee]

LOL, I know that had to be sarcasm. Here's the book, you can read the cover and decide for yourself.

http://www.paperbackswap.com/Love-Lies-Amanda-Lamb/book/0425241483/

I think it probably isn't the best judgment on the part of WRAL to have her reporting on this case. It does however explain some of the WRAL articles and headlines.

Thanks, I have found both of Amanda Lambs previous true crime books to be excellent reads. Already have it in my Amazon cart. Simply because she has a 'cover' doesn't mean the book is completely written. I'm sure she has certain chapters completed or nearly complete and will finish the rest when the trial ends. I see nothing wrong with a local crime reporter writing crime books. That's how Ann Rule got her start. When McGinnis wrote his Fatal Vision, he was a part of the defense team of Jeffrey MacDonald.

 

[GhostCrab]

I don't have a problem so much with the book itself, if it is NG it won't get published. I do have a problem with her reporting on it for WRAL and wonder where she got her detail from to write the book.

AL is apparently Facebook friends with several of the prosecution witnesses. And the day that I stopped into court I sat in the back and noticed that when Mr. Rentz walked into the courtroom for the start of the day he stopped by the room where AL sits and had a friendly conversation with her. I agree that WRAL should not have her reporting on this case.

 

[ncsu95]

And how exactly do you know that NC did not profess her love to JP? See, that is the problem with the BDI-er's, you are so inclined to spin any fact into a guilty verdict, and if that doesn't work, you just make things up out of thin air.

As for the question about the defense PROVING that there was tampering???? The defense has no such burden. What they are doing is trying to create doubt in the mind of the jurors and that is what JW testified to.

Geez, do you all even care if this man is innocent or do you just need your movie of the week ending. Not everything is so cut and dry.

:goodpost:

 

[macd]

Did any of the testimony indicate which browsers BC used on his work laptop?

 

[WolfpackWoman]

Did any of the testimony indicate which browsers BC used on his work laptop?

Internet Explorer. Not sure if a version was specified though, my thought was 7?

 

[unc70]

CW dropped a little bombshell during her cross. She was discussing NC's affair in 2001. NC told her that he was "politically connected".

Whether that man is from NC or FL, maybe they are connected because I have not seen their name appear in any court documents.

From the docs, it appears that the CPD has the name, but the defense did not. Thoughts?

 

[Wyn]

And how exactly do you know that NC did not profess her love to JP? See, that is the problem with the BDI-er's, you are so inclined to spin any fact into a guilty verdict, and if that doesn't work, you just make things up out of thin air.

As for the question about the defense PROVING that there was tampering???? The defense has no such burden. What they are doing is trying to create doubt in the mind of the jurors and that is what JW testified to.

Geez, do you all even care if this man is innocent or do you just need your movie of the week ending. Not everything is so cut and dry.

You don't think, if Nancy professed her love to JP, that she'd have told someone? She didn't mind spilling the details of everything else she did. Based on Nancy's behavior, and what her friends knew, I doubt she did. Seems like he was just someone to entertain her. If it makes you feel better about your stance to say "you just make stuff up out of thin air, I'll be happy to add it's MY OPINION. Although that's a given. :innocent:

I care that a murder victim and her family get justice and that the right person is punished. IN MY OPINION, Brad Cooper is the murderer. I'm watching/reading/listening to the exact same evidence as you, but I don't agree with your opinion. My right, correct? I'm not looking for a flip "movie of the week" ending. This is reality, not made for tv. As a matter of fact, regarding the computer testimony, I think too many people expect some sort of CSI moment.

Looks like some posters are really bored today, a little edgy. I have a suggestion to ease your burden....scroll on by if you don't like my opinions.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

Eyewitnesses were sincere, but ultimately not accurate and/or simply did not see Nancy. They saw someone they thought was Nancy and felt they should call or get involved. No one remembers her wearing a BB cap.

RZ thought she might have had an ipod and said she was wearing no jewelry. But she didn't get a long look, just long enough to say "Hi!" RZ also told police she thought someone hit NC with their car and then dumped her body instead of getting help. She was worried about that. She was fixated on not being called by police. She mentioned that about 10 different times. She had talked to a few different cops, some at a couple roadblock areas, but for some reason she didn't count that as speaking with police. She couldn't remember which cop(s) she spoke with except for Det Daniels. She had spoken with at least 3 others, had their business cards, but no one called her, except for when they did and she missed the call.

Food Lion guy said he saw NC between 6:55am and 7:10am at Kildare & Lochmere, but Nancy's house was 2 mi away and she wouldn't have been at that spot for another 15 or so min.

I missed the Fielding Dr witnesses, but my understanding is they saw a van with some Hispanic men down Fielding Dr. on Sun 7/13/08.

Why do so many of you automatically feel that all of the eyewitnesses that claim they saw NC were wrong? How do you know? That is a big assumption to make that ALL of them were incorrect. Is it just because them seeing NC doesn't fit with you theory that BC definitely killed her? Isn't it a strong possibility that ALL of these witnesses were correct in what they saw? Afterall we are not talking about only 1 eyewitnesses, but more than 1. I find it odd that they would ALL be wrong.

 

[Wyn]

:goodpost:

Not really. :crazy:

ETA: IN MY OPINION, of course!