April 29 weekend of Sleuthiness

[ncsu95]

So you think JA lied and intentionally perjured herself on the stand to help convict BC????

I don't.

Yes I do.

 

[GhostCrab]

Great. As you have asked many posters, where in the testimony has it been said? Facts please, not just your assumptions and beliefs......

IIRC it was in testimony that was streamed live and not blacked out. I imagine someone remembers it better than I do and can give a better cite.

 

[SleuthinNC]

If the Google search was found in 2/2011, then CPD went forward with an arrest with no real evidence and just got really lucky or they already knew the Google search was there. How would they know the search was there prior to it being found by the FBI? Hmmmmm...

 

[Just the Fax]

Great. As you have asked many posters, where in the testimony has it been said? Facts please, not just your assumptions and beliefs......

I recall Cisco saying a test he did dropped around 23 seconds.
Sorry, that does not tell me it is impossible to use a script to allow for a longer connect time.

 

[ncsu95]

$45K is a pathetic salary for anyone that receives a 3 year post graduate degree....JMO

No one forced him to go into public service.

 

[Just the Fax]

Yes it is, and Coomings makes as much as Brad did. Now Benjamin is significantly less at 45k.

And Cummings should have retired years ago...

 

[ncsu95]

Remind me again tho, what do salaries have to do with this case?

The prosecution messed up the case because they don't make enough money or as much as Kurtz (or something similar was the claim).

 

[JBean]

JUst FYI, all the subtle digs at each other are not going unnoticed.
Please take a moment to read TOS and etiquette. From here on in we are just handing out straight up TO's.

The Rules - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Where this post lands is random.

 

[johnfear]

If the Google search was found in 2/2011, then CPD went forward with an arrest with no real evidence and just got really lucky or they already knew the Google search was there. How would they know the search was there prior to it being found by the FBI? Hmmmmm...

I think the answers you all seek are in the response to the Motion to Stay (the massive one) at the bottom.

Yes, they did go forward with that data not available. I believe the notion was that the autopsy and the brisk ruling out of the final pieces: (JP,SH,etc) and those last interviews took it to the GJ.

How did they rule out JP? Other than: "He was watching the kids."

 

[Just the Fax]

looks like I am outnumbered 20-1.
WTH are the Bradley is guilty posters?????

 

[Salem]

GUYS! What the heck? JBean and Fran have been in here all morning.

Your opinions differ - big darn deal!!!!! Just because someone doesn't agree, doesn't mean they should be TO'd? Whereever did you get such an idea?

If you don't like what someone has to say, don't respond or put them on your ignore list. It is very easy to do so - go to your user profile page, in the left hand column, choose the "Edit Ignore List" option and add the user name. You will no longer see their posts, unless someone quotes them - but you can scroll by that.

You need to stop bickering and fighting. This trial is almost over and I can tell you, the mods will be glad!

If you can't stop bickering and fighting, we can lock the thread. It is tiresome. Sarcasm only shows that you have no good arugment. If you don't have a good argument - DON'T argue. Let it go.

Salem

 

[Salem]

You guys need to chill out for a bit.

Salem

 

[johnfear]

In general, I think the trial was premature.

I believe that the pros timed it to be BEFORE the defense could get into the computer forensics and possibly have the thinkpad ruled out as spoiled and inadmissible.

It would have been better and simpler to have gotten all of the data pulled and had two different experts (one defense, one pros) coordinate all of the data, because I am thinking if he's guilty, there's way more information that should be found in there.

 

[Salem]

JUst FYI, all the subtle digs at each other are not going unnoticed.
Please take a moment to read TOS and etiquette. From here on in we are just handing out straight up TO's.

The Rules - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Where this post lands is random.

I'm bumping JBean's post directing you all to the rules for a refresher. The thread will reopen in just a bit, but first you need to visit the rules.

Salem

 

[ncsu95]

I recall Cisco saying a test he did dropped around 23 seconds.
Sorry, that does not tell me it is impossible to use a script to allow for a longer connect time.

That was not the testimony. The testimony was that with one method, it would result in a 22 second call. No more, no less. They were not able to get it to last longer than 22 seconds. Now the theory by the BDI people on here is that the 23 second call at 6:05 was a test call using this method. This doesn't make sense for 2 reasons. First, it was 23 seconds, not 22. Second, if it was a test call that worked (and the 1 second was accounted for through delay or whatever), it doesn't explain the actual call being 32 seconds. But the specific method that can be used to generate a 22 second call will not generate a longer call.

 

[Danielle59]

That was not the testimony. The testimony was that with one method, it would result in a 22 second call. No more, no less. They were not able to get it to last longer than 22 seconds. Now the theory by the BDI people on here is that the 23 second call at 6:05 was a test call using this method. This doesn't make sense for 2 reasons. First, it was 23 seconds, not 22. Second, if it was a test call that worked (and the 1 second was accounted for through delay or whatever), it doesn't explain the actual call being 32 seconds. But the specific method that can be used to generate a 22 second call will not generate a longer call.

It was also one of the State's expert witnesses that testified to that.

 

[oenophile]

Sorry, I just saw your question now....So empty stomach means her death had to have been in the morning hours, or during a jog?

Empty stomach and alcohol content indicate morning hours. Caffeine indicates during a jog.

TOD using stomach contents is not always useful..unless the last meal where known to have eaten...Now that is a very narrow window as the stomach empties in 2-3 hours after ingestion ( as a rule of thumb) and I do recall a piece of onion or something along those lines remained...

We do know the last meal, lots of ribs (testified numerous times) and other foods that were at the party. She was eating into the night. If she was killed when she got home, everything stops. That means that there should be a lot more than a piece of onion left.

Caffeine is NOT exclusive to coffee, as it is also in alot of other beverages such as soda's as American's say, ( Canadians use the term Pop)..and as caffeine can be found in the blood stream following absorption..

Agreed, but she was known to drink coffee before jogging, and there was nothing with caffeine served at the party. As to HP testimony about drinking a diet coke, that is more than doubtful.

then who knows how long ago she had ingested that glass of wine?...but doubt she had that wine before she went jogging..

Right, she ingested a lot of wine at the party, but her alcohol content (note I didn't mention blood, as the ME said there was no blood, it was based on other measurements) was consistent with decomp. If she had been drinking a lot before she died, there should have been more alcohol in the body. The ME practically said that.

 

[CarolinaTitan]

A. I don't think they tried to rule him out as a suspect
B. But since the police didn't investigate beyond him we don't know who else did, but there have been a couple of other witnesses they seem to have had also.
C. They didn't look for any other suspects, yes, I think there were other viable suspects.
D. What is a coincidence in this case? A lot of the coincidences seem to be over inflation of everyday tasks to me.
E. I think on this one you are being overly simplistic since we know the laptop, while in LE custody has other errors, then there is always that pesky erased cell phone of NCs.
F. You have no idea where she shopped for meat.
G. Eye Witnesses may not always be reliable, but there times they are reliable, I don't think we can discount them.
H. I am not sure about that happening with less evidence, but I am not going to go look it up - we will have to agree to disagree on that one.
I. The comment you made is the type that slays me. There is no proof that he did do it, but you want us to believe since there is no proof he didn't that that then means he is guilty. There is no proof that any of us are child molesters either, does that mean because that because there is no proof we aren't that we should all be arrested? We can't say, oh, proof doesn't matter, but since you can't prove you didn't do it that is on you. That is not how it works. The ones making the accusation have to offer up the proof, not the other way around.

I have doubts about how bad her marriage was. She made couple plans for her and BC to spend the evening with another couple for Saturday night. The realtor says he called her but there has been no proof of that, but she had not called her divorce attorney she had on retainer for months - don't you think if she was going to move out suddenly she would have called her attorney also? Then there is JP and his weirdness.

I have questions and they have not been answered in this trial to my satisfaction to say he is guilty.

A) How do you know what the CPD investigated? Apparently, they even searched the golf course looking through drain pipes based on some "psychic's tip". That sounds open-minded to me.
B) They questioned BC 4 days in a row and continually found inconsistencies in his testimony....then he lawyered up. Scratches on neck, said he was cleaning all day but house was a mess, said he went to sleep at 8:30pm, computer activity at 9:30pm, said NC went jogging, no running shoes missing and NC had plans to paint, etc, etc, etc. Those are red flags.
C) Name another viable suspect...someone with means, motive and opportunity.
D) I'm an IT professional who knows much about VPNs, etc. The files that were updated came through the Cisco VPN....which, if you work in a corporate environment, you know happens constantly for security updates, program updates, etc. Not that menacing as the defense would have you believe.
E) How does a Meat department trainer at a Food Lion (not NC/BCs regular grocery store) know NC so well he can identify her while travelling 45 mph on Kildaire Farm Rd...at the same time he's watching 2 hispanic men in a van.
F) Why do suspects and defense attorney's strive to introduce either alibis or other possible suspects? They create reasonable doubt.
G) You need to watch more Crime TV. How did Scott Peterson get convicted? People get convicted every day based on circumstantial evidence. Each person's definition of reasonable doubt is unique. Each jury is imperfect.

To me this is the most compelling fact:

Why were her running shoes not missing? Serious runners wear their shoes out, so you would fully expect her to be wearing her newest shoes that her running partner said she runs in. She didn't rotate.

 

[gbay]

That was not the testimony. The testimony was that with one method, it would result in a 22 second call. No more, no less. They were not able to get it to last longer than 22 seconds. Now the theory by the BDI people on here is that the 23 second call at 6:05 was a test call using this method. This doesn't make sense for 2 reasons. First, it was 23 seconds, not 22. Second, if it was a test call that worked (and the 1 second was accounted for through delay or whatever), it doesn't explain the actual call being 32 seconds. But the specific method that can be used to generate a 22 second call will not generate a longer call.

You are right about the 22 seconds but I also remember some discussion around the 1 second seizure time. Chris had no idea about seizure time and some people thought that 1 + 22 could account for the 23 second call.

 

[oenophile]

We have discussed this for the past 2 months.

Discussed, but not sufficiently answered. That is the problem.