April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness

[unc70]

IMO, and this is my opinion only, I think there is a difference between 'snooping', and having duplicate copies of each and every correspondence sent to himself. Again, this is my opinion. Snooping is one thing, going to the trouble of setting up the roadrunner account to duplicate everything is a whole 'nother can of worms. IMO, that is a whole nother level of 'snooping'.

Not any trouble to set up. Would be the same (less than 1 minute) effort needed to setup your iPhone or BB to receive email in addition to receiving it on your PC. You set the option on the shadow account to leave emails on the POP server after downloading; it would show up in the POP server logs but not anywhere else.

Same with following the cell phone usage of a spouse. Usually about 6 months of all calls under the same account are available online. People having affairs or otherwise doing something secretive tend to use Trakphones and other prepaid phones and use text messaging rather than leaving an email trail.

None of this is secret. In fact, it is one of the staples of the publishing industry. How to detect cheating, how to cheat, how to protect yourself in a divorce or even how to "win" -- these articles are all over the popular press, mostly in pubs aimed at women. Just browse the magazines in your local grocery store.

 

[Cheyenne130]

He was qualified by the court as an expert witness. Do you really believe he would risk tarnishing his reputation on pro-bono work for a complete stranger? Why would he do that? This is live broadcast open court and you're suggesting he was biased so he wasn't truthful about the files? I don't think so!

I'm suggesting that he most definitely had an agenda. He said so himself when he answered why he would offer his services pro bono. I'm suggesting that he answered the questions that were asked but the answers were misleading for the larger question at hand. MOO

 

[Cheyenne130]

He was qualified by the court as an expert witness. Do you really believe he would risk tarnishing his reputation on pro-bono work for a complete stranger? Why would he do that? This is live broadcast open court and you're suggesting he was biased so he wasn't truthful about the files? I don't think so!

ETA: It's interesting you trust a complete stranger's opinion on an internet site more than an expert (deemed by a biased judge) in network security.

Both of these people, JW and the poster on this board, are strangers to me. I trust the opinion of the "stranger" on this board because the information is accurate. I did not agree with the information provided by JW because it was misleading so not accurate. MOO

 

[ncsu95]

So why was it fine with Brad, why did he encourage Nancy & the girls to move to Toronto, UNTIL he saw the rough draft of a separation agreement? Numerous people, including Nancy's family, have said 'Brad set a date of the end of april, that he wanted nancy and the girls out by'.

Probably an emotion based decision because he was tired of the bickering. But later realized what it actually meant.

 

[sunshine05]

I'm suggesting that he most definitely had an agenda. He said so himself when he answered why he would offer his services pro bono. I'm suggesting that he answered the questions that were asked but the answers were misleading for the larger question at hand. MOO

That's really unfair for you to suggest this witness had an agenda. He was very honest and credible and had nothing to gain by providing "misleading" answers.

 

[ncsu95]

I see his point. I am the same size and body type as N was and I am a hardcore runner, so I assume my physical fitness is above average. And you can best believe that if I were attacked I would fight back hard. We had a runner attacked in our neighborhood several years ago and when we (my friends and I) run we carry mace and are always aware of our surroundings.

I swear I am horrible at this...for some reason, I assumed you were a guy.

 

[SleuthSayer]

And your explanation still leaves the strange issue that all the visible timestamps for each .bmp file have the idential values. All six values are identical.

I didn't attempt to explain the timestamps because I didn't see them and also didn't hear any of the testimony about them. That's why I asked sunshine what specific aspect about the .bmp files she was referring to and why I said that I don't find the fact that they have .bmp extensions since that's exactly what I see on my system.

How does one do a search where last access is the same for open hand and closed hand? At the same time that there is some issue with one or more of the 5(?) hidden timestamps for each file as indicated by the invalid timestamp shown on the report?

Dunno, because again, I didn't see the report or hear the testimony.

 

[sunshine05]

Both of these people, JW and the poster on this board, are strangers to me. I trust the opinion of the "stranger" on this board because the information is accurate. I did not agree with the information provided by JW because it was misleading so not accurate. MOO

Misleading, how? You do know he was limited with his answers because the state tried everything in their power to keep his testimony out, don't you? What are they hiding?

 

[ncsu95]

How should she have sent mail, then? She had a computer, and that was her resource. She didn't have several computers, plus one at the office. Mainly because she couldn't HAVE an office, yes? I guess she could have gone to the library, or to a friend's house. I've know several women in abusive situations that had to do just that.

She didn't have to use roadrunner mail (which is how he was able to intercept it....and I don't believe she knew he was). But she could have used any number of free online email services. That doesn't mean he couldn't use a key logger or something to figure out her password, but it wouldn't have been as easy as it was using the roadrunner account.

 

[SleuthSayer]

IMO, and this is my opinion only, I think there is a difference between 'snooping', and having duplicate copies of each and every correspondence sent to himself. Again, this is my opinion. Snooping is one thing, going to the trouble of setting up the roadrunner account to duplicate everything is a whole 'nother can of worms. IMO, that is a whole nother level of 'snooping'.

Cool, we'll agree to disagree on that. If you are reading your spouse's e-mail and they have not agreed that it's ok with them and they don't even know that you are doing it, it doesn't really matter what mechanism you are using to do it.

 

[jilly]

In North Carolina, twelve month separation then either party can file for divorce. "No fault" with assumption of "equitable" division of property. Alimony possible, but less common than most people think.

Separation agreement is not required, though many people file one which declares that from that point on they are financial separate, etc. and which clarifies some points in case either were to start dating someone else.

Divorce can be granted whether a property settlement has been agreed upon or not. Custody and support agreement for children will be imposed by court if a mutually agreed terms has not been reached.

This is a broad outline of the process here in NC. IMNAL and I have probably left out something important.

Just curious here unc70 but getting back to Albert's question - what if one party doesn't want a divorce? In this case would the NC Divorce Judge encourage counselling? Do the NC Divorce Courts ensure that all avenues of reconciliation have been addressed before granting a divorce?

Does NC have a Family Court Division where parties can go for a separation agreement and division of assets without counsel and therefore no cost?

I'm just wondering why Nancy chose to go to one of the top lawyers and their hefty fees when first, neither her or Brad could afford it and second, if there was a family court, it would have been free.

 

[sunshine05]

I didn't attempt to explain the timestamps because I didn't see them and also didn't hear any of the testimony about them. That's why I asked sunshine what specific aspect about the .bmp files she was referring to and why I said that I don't find the fact that they have .bmp extensions since that's exactly what I see on my system.

Dunno, because again, I didn't see the report or hear the testimony.

I assumed you had seen the testimony since you did the big write-up about the files, but watch the last part of tape 2 and the first part of tape 3.

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9473363/#/vid9473363

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9474261/#/vid9474261

In the first part of 3, you will see the files in question.

 

[sunshine05]

Both of these people, JW and the poster on this board, are strangers to me. I trust the opinion of the "stranger" on this board because the information is accurate. I did not agree with the information provided by JW because it was misleading so not accurate. MOO

Now we know the "stranger" on this board didn't even see the court testimony that he's commenting on.

 

[Albert]

I am only going to address this point because the others are just are different opinions that we will never agree on.

There are some interesting things from this trial though. Such as the mica testimony and CPD taking the shoes BC wore while searching for NC and having them analyzed. Were they hoping no one would notice those weren't the shoes he was wearing in the HT video? Why did they do that testing? And why did they present the results as evidence at all?

Why did they have the testimony about the piece of straw that was "remembered" 20 months after the fact?

Then the wiped phone.

Then the very evasive detectives on the stand.

Is is such a huge leap that they would plant this search on his computer? Not to me.

Why would it make sense for BC to put incriminating files on his computer of a search of Fielding Drive?

Mica testimony--- In my opinion, this was done to show the exclusiveness of the mica on Fielding Drive. I don't think there was an attempt to fool anyone. Perhaps this would have never been entered into evidence if the defense did not claim that the CPD was inept. The prosecution had no choice but to show a very thorough investigation. However there are those that will continue to think otherwise.

Straw--- I have no thought or answer for this, basically it meant nothing to me.

Wiped phone--- I am not of the option that this was done intentionally, however those that feel the CPD is corrupt will claim differently.

Evasive detectives--- I think the detectives testified in a very professional manner and they were not going to fall into any traps that the defense was trying to set.

Planted evidence--- Those that feel CPD is corrupt have their own right to propagate a conspiracy. However, you must admit that the window of opportunity to commit such an act was very limited. You must also admit, as you already have, that it was nothing more than a shot in the dark to assume that BC was in the office at 1:15pm.

 

[zenreaper]

In North Carolina, twelve month separation then either party can file for divorce. "No fault" with assumption of "equitable" division of property. Alimony possible, but less common than most people think.

Separation agreement is not required, though many people file one which declares that from that point on they are financial separate, etc. and which clarifies some points in case either were to start dating someone else.

Divorce can be granted whether a property settlement has been agreed upon or not. Custody and support agreement for children will be imposed by court if a mutually agreed terms has not been reached.

This is a broad outline of the process here in NC. IMNAL and I have probably left out something important.

I can't believe I forgot this, an I KNOW family law, DUH!

North Carolina, and I believe South Carolina, is one the few, if not ONLY states that have POST Separation ADULTERY. So if it was proven she slept with JP, she got NOTHING...Wow.

 

[unc70]

I think this would have only impacted the property settlement. BC and North Carolina would probaby have jurisdiction. Its property here in NC, she is not in state, BC gets first rights. However, I don't know what the actual laws for this type of thing. IMNAL either. But waiting the mandatory time in Canda worked in NC favor, the children would be considered residents I would imagine. Canada would have jurisdiction over the custody part of it.

When my ex and I divorced, he had moved to another state, the kids stayed here in NC with me in the house we had bought together. He sued from that state but because the property and children were here my attny had moved to NC courts because the property/children were legal residents here, NC courts and jurisdiction. I don't know if that would be similar in a country to country situation though and possibly dealing with dual citizenship for the children.

I keep hoping we can get a legal opinion on that to clear up any misconceptions. So the divorce part, he could sue from NC, she could sue from Canda, custody property would take a lot longer to clear up.


Kelly

If she were living and WORKING in Canada, that would impact the sahm dependent spouse thing and any prospect for alimony. Living in Canada would also affect things like the cost of health insurance for the children. Not sure how all these things interact with each other in their situation.

 

[SleuthSayer]

I assumed you had seen the testimony since you did the big write-up about the files, but watch the last part of tape 2 and the first part of tape 3.

I decided rather than listen to someone from either the prosecution or defense tell me what happens to do the test myself and see what actually happens. That's what I posted. I made it clear that I was describing what was happening on my system.

To me, it sounds exceptionally unlikely that someone went and planted two files on his laptop or that it would even occur to them to plant cursor cache files. But, I've said several times on here (mostly in the context of prosecution/defense "plants" on WS) that I don't believe in conspiracy theories.

But, you are obviously free to believe whatever you like. Rock on. :rocker:

 

[Albert]

That's really unfair for you to suggest this witness had an agenda. He was very honest and credible and had nothing to gain by providing "misleading" answers.

But how fair is it for to claim that the CPD planted evidence. What do they have to gain other than an arrest warrant. And we are to expect that they would do this knowing the risk of a prison sentence, if discovered, would be very likely. Seems like the reward vs risk is not equal.

 

[Cheyenne130]

And your explanation still leaves the strange issue that all the visible timestamps for each .bmp file have the idential values. All six values are identical.

How does one do a search where last access is the same for open hand and closed hand? At the same time that there is some issue with one or more of the 5(?) hidden timestamps for each file as indicated by the invalid timestamp shown on the report?

Maybe I am missing something. I admit that I have worked with XP and with 7, but not with Vista. And I cannot recreate exactly how Google worked back in 2008.

I also have to question why those and other files from the July 11 search would not have changed by any activity between then and when the computers were seized on July 15. I don't know which other Google apps shared those gstatic images/files and would also change some of the dates.

The values for the open hand timestamps were all the same. The values for the closed hand timestamps were all the same but not the same as the values for the open hand. (It's right about the 19 second mark, Day 30, part 3.)

 

[sunshine05]

Mica testimony--- In my opinion, this was done to show the exclusiveness of the mica on Fielding Drive. I don't think there was an attempt to fool anyone. Perhaps this would have never been entered into evidence if the defense did not claim that the CPD was inept. The prosecution had no choice but to show a very thorough investigation. However there are those that will continue to think otherwise.

Straw--- I have no thought or answer for this, basically it meant nothing to me.

Wiped phone--- I am not of the option that this was done intentionally, however those that feel the CPD is corrupt will claim differently.

Evasive detectives--- I think the detectives testified in a very professional manner and they were not going to fall into any traps that the defense was trying to set.

Planted evidence--- Those that feel CPD is corrupt have their own right to propagate a conspiracy. However, you must admit that the window of opportunity to commit such an act was very limited. You must also admit, as you already have, that it was nothing more than a shot in the dark to assume that BC was in the office at 1:15pm.

Why is it the prosecutor's job to waste the juror's time to prove CPD tested for mica on shoes that were never shown to be worn at the crime scene? If anything the state helped to prove the ineptness of CPD.

And to listen to witness testimony about a piece of straw that was never photographed and only remembered 20 months later?

And D. Daniels - BC was wearing long sleeves (written in his log book) when questioned and shown that he did indeed have on short sleeves that day, said "oh, that was just a typo". Come on!

And now you can't even open your mind to the possibility that the computer was tampered with? Did you watch JW's testimony at all?