April 22 weekend of Sleuthiness

[gracielee]

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.

My comment wasn't meant to imply it was difficult to do. It was meant to imply the morality of so doing.

 

[ncsu95]

Below is a snapshot listing of properties on Greenstone Lane, Cary, but the house numbers only range from 103 to 119. It is a cul-de-sac off Lochmere Drive. It has a 27518 ZIP code. Maybe 178 it is an undeveloped lot. But the house numbers 119 vs. 178 look way off from each other. Greenstone appears to be a typical Cary cul-de-sac -- not very long, so I can't see it stretching all the way to 178. Who knows? It is bordered, loosely, by Lochmere Drive, Kildaire Farm Road, Penny Road and Holly Springs Road. There is a gold course behind the lots on Greenstone, so further development of that area would not be possible. Looking at a Google map helps to visualize this. HTH

(Sorry for the crappy tabs -- or lack of 'em -- my cut/paste was pretty crappy...)


2 0180501 105

GREENSTONE LN
CA
3 0180502 107

GREENSTONE LN
CA
4 0180503 109

GREENSTONE LN
CA
5 0180512 110

GREENSTONE LN
CA
6 0180504 111

GREENSTONE LN
CA
7 0180511 112

GREENSTONE LN
CA
8 0180505 113

GREENSTONE LN
CA
9 0180510 114

GREENSTONE LN
CA
10 0180506 115

GREENSTONE LN
CA
11 0180509 116

GREENSTONE LN
CA
12 0180507 117

GREENSTONE LN
CA

It looks like any number higher than the last valid address shows the same thing in google maps. I googled 286 and 386 and got the same place on the map. That was where my mistake was.

 

[momof7]

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.

I *think* Canadian citizens get free or a National Healthcare type thing. So that would work in BC's favor, he might not have to pay that expense.

I don't know how the alimony would play out. I would be able to speak a little on NC but not at all on Canada in that area.

Kelly

 

[otto]

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.

If the children were Canadian citizens and living in Canada, then they would be covered by the free federal health care.

 

[gracielee]

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.

shame on you, cheyenne! :floorlaugh:

 

[otto]

I *think* Canadian citizens get free or a National Healthcare type thing. So that would work in BC's favor, he might not have to pay that expense.

I don't know how the alimony play out. I would be able to speak a little on NC but not at all on Candian in that area.

Kelly

Alimony would probably be the same as in NC, 3-4 years. I get the impression that child support may be higher in NC than in Ontario.

 

[Albert]

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?

I guess I am as opened minded about tampering as you are open minded about the 6:40am call being automated.

 

[sunshine05]

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.

There are cases of police corruption EVERY DAY in this country. Why would anyone have blind trust in LEO? Bazemore herself proclaimed BC guilty with her statements on 7/16!

Are you seriously surprised at the suggestion that CPD might have planted incriminating evidence? Even after everything I've been pointing out here tonight? And I'm not even saying they did it, but if it is shown that tampering occurred and proven, since they had access to the computers at that time, of course they will be investigated.

 

[Cheyenne130]

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?

He answered what he was asked. I can't give you the verbatim question without going back and looking it up but I know when it was asked and answered I thought how carefully crafted it was to give a misleading answer. The question was something like, "An invalid timestamp is created by moving files?" Answer, "Yes". And he wasn't lying. It does create an invalid timestamp but there are many other things that create invalid timestamps. It left the impression that it was the only reason. MOO

 

[sunshine05]

I guess I am as opened minded about tampering as you are open minded about the 6:40am call being automated.

The thing is - the State has rested. They did not prove the phone call was spoofed.

The defense is not finished yet and are already showing signs of tampering. Will they prove it? I think they will. Time will tell.

But not being able to prove the call was spoofed greatly weakens the state's case. Everyone knows that.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

I don't believe it was a late decision. Where is the proof of that? The Lochmere clique's stories are not credible anymore so we need to step back and re-evaluate and stop pretending that everything they wrote in the affidavits is fact.

There is a poster here (CaryinNJ I think) who said she personally saw BC as an attentive, involved father on several occasions.

Yes - I saw him at the pool with the girls. He seemed very attentive. Very hands on. In fact, I saw him playing with his girls more so than NC. I never got the impression that he didn't want to hang out with his kids or was a bad dad at all.

 

[unc70]

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:

Your own example shows that the three timestamps on one of the files are different. See if you can do a search on your machine and get all six to be the same with each other.

 

[Cheyenne130]

The thing is - the State has rested. They did not prove the phone call was spoofed.

The defense is not finished yet and are already showing signs of tampering. Will they prove it? I think they will. Time will tell.

But not being able to prove the call was spoofed greatly weakens the state's case. Everyone knows that.

Not everyone. I disagree. If they had been able to prove without any doubt that the call was spoofed, this case would be over by now. There would have been no need to call another witness. MOO The states case was not built on proof that the call was spoofed.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

What was the child upset about? Isn't it true that young children decide that when a parent is on the phone, it's a good time to demand attention? I can't recall a phone call with a mother of young children that did not have an awful lot of noise and activity in the background - everything from laughing to crying, minor incidents of injury that were extremely important, spats between siblings and so on. In fact, I've spoken to moms of young children and asked why it is so quiet, and the answer is usually "I'm hiding in the bathroom".

That sounds exactly like what happens in my house when I am on the phone. It seems that my kids (approx same age as the Cooper kids) constantly need something when I am on the phone or in the bathroom. There is usually crying, screaming, wanting mommy.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

KL testified that she spoke with NC and the child every morning on their way to preschool. She testified NC was upset and the child was crying over BC following her to preschool and upsetting Mommy.

KL testified she spoke directly to both NC and the child during the time, which is why I found her refreshing after so many witnesses for the pros testifying to what I consider gossip.

As the parent of young children, I'd give her testimony credence given KL was well aware of the rountine and the state of NC and the child during daily calls.

Do I think that means BC is guilty? Absolutely not.

Altough I have a great marriage it is by all means not perfect. Unfortunately I have had arguments with my husband where voices were raised and things that should not have been said were - in front of the kids. I regret this immensely but it has happened and probably will happen in the future. My 2 girls always seem to take mommy's side (even if I am wrong at times). And if I ever shed tears in front of them from arguing with my husband they always side with mommy and say negative things about daddy. It is awful to see. But, I think a lot of kids will get upset if mommy is upset and especially if mommy is upset with daddy. Daddy is seen as the bad guy

 

[SleuthSayer]

Your own example shows that the three timestamps on one of the files are different. See if you can do a search on your machine and get all six to be the same with each other.

I think that the information that all 6 of them are the same is incorrect. I am attaching the best I could do with getting a screen capture from the WRAL video showing all of the dates. They are very hard to make out. I attached two files, the second one, I played around with the contrast a little to try to make it easier to read.

It appears to me that the time on the open hand file is 17:14:53 and on the open hand file is 17:15:11 (maybe, not sure about the seconds). But, the times are definitely different.

Feel free to try capturing from the video and refining it as much as you can.

 

[LAWsy_ME]

"After fracture, the occult compressive forces of hematoma formation and soft tissue swelling may compromise airway patency. It is our clinical observation that hypoxia develops rapidly and without warning, leading to cardiorespiratory collapse."

This is from Pub Med http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10484094

This explains to me the lack of defensive wounds on Nancy. IMO, she was attacked swiftly and by surprise in the foyer, with strong blunt force trauma to the hyoid bone. With prior knowledge of suicide by strangulation from internet search, brad had the know how and exacted a swift and fatal blow. She became unconscious quickly and had little to no time to react before becoming unconscious. Were the ducks and sticks ever found? JMO

 

[WolfpackWoman]

Brad's affair was in 2007, Nancy had a couple of trysts with the latest (I think) in about 2006. Collecting child support from two fathers for two children probably produces more money than collecting child support from one father for two children.

Brad's affair was in early 2005. Nancy's affair was in 2001 and late 2005. I don't know if there are any affairs on either side that are confirmed for later than that.

 

[sunshine05]

Not everyone. I disagree. If they had been able to prove without any doubt that the call was spoofed, this case would be over by now. There would have been no need to call another witness. MOO The states case was not built on proof that the call was spoofed.

That is a pretty big IF. I agree with you. IF they had proven the call was spoofed the case would be over.

What exactly, in your opinion, was the state's case built on? IMO - the neighbor's stories about BC's affair and NC not having enough money.

 

[otto]

That sounds exactly like what happens in my house when I am on the phone. It seems that my kids (approx same age as the Cooper kids) constantly need something when I am on the phone or in the bathroom. There is usually crying, screaming, wanting mommy.

It seems to be the nature of children. In fact, my dogs do it too. As soon as the phone rings, they decide they need attention.

If Brad wasn't with them (like in another car), then he was not the source of the upset ... whatever adult was with the children had something to do with the upset. Seriously, unless the situation requires a doctor, chlidren that age can usually be cheered up and smiling a minute after they're crying.