April 8th wknd of Sleuthing

[Tipstaff]

Watching some of the testimony. It seems DD was a good friend to NC. Anyone have an opinion of CD other than coming to court in a T-shirt? Seems a bit 'off' or is it just my take?

 

[Just the Fax]

The cop saw the pieces of hay on July 15 before the search warrant was served. He should have said something about it to one of the lead detectives but he didn't. That was a mistake. The search warrant was issued and the crime scene tape went up and Cooper had to leave the home. His shoes were never found.

Poor guy. Bet that patrol officer will never make detective now.

 

[Just the Fax]

Wonder if one of his stops was at Goodwill to make a donation? Did they ever find the zipped pullover jacket he wore that morning? He was in shorts and t-shirt by the afternoon. At least one dumpster got a present. Maybe several did.

The October 2008 SW yielded 4 pairs of shoes , but they were unable to recover a similar pullover jacket seen on video.

 

[gracielee]

If the state shows BC definitely (w/out a doubt) rigged/spoofed the phone calls I will definitely come off the fence. 100%.

the problem is, I think short of DNA, not much in life is 100%. When I think about it, was there anything in the scott peterson case that was 100%?

 

[LyndyLoo]

Poor guy. Bet that patrol officer will never make detective now.

I'll bet he is just kicking himself you know where??..maybe they should make it mandetory for future patrol officers doing what he wa asked to do..and secure a site or residence, that he take along a video camera..or at least a phone with video capabilities..so he would have something to refer to when making his notes after the fact...LOL..Just a suggestion for their "Suggestion Box"..:floorlaugh:

 

[cityslick]

My only common sense response to that young officer not documenting that piece of straw, is very simple and common sese for me..He was sent there to secure the residence for serving the SW and seizure of that residence..advising Brad of the same..HE was NOT there to document just observe things werent altered or changed....It was much later and in heinsight, that piece of straw clicked in his head....No more no less..Incompetent..Nope not according to his job description.

I cant help but feel the HATE from some towards both LE and Prosecutors..Maybe hate is a strong word..certainly distrust, and lack of respect..Anyway. I understand people wanting or expecting prosecutors toprove their case..But to continually BASH a Det. everyone associated with the prosecution is very telling :truce:..Yes, I have witnessed poorly prosecuted cases before, even underhandedness..but really in truly it is very telling to me of just who is On a Fence, and who is NOT...:crazy:

He was at Fielding earlier in the day and then he saw the straw at the house. He never bothered to tell anyone about it until the lightbulb went off 20 months later. How do you defend that?

Sometimes it's strange that some of you will defend anything the Prosecution/LE has done in this case when it's clearly a mistake. It's ok to admit mistakes, it doesn't mean you all of sudden think BC is innocent.

 

[Madeleine74]

Poor guy. Bet that patrol officer will never make detective now.

Probably not. Aside from the hay mistake, he didn't come across as very bright in general. Not able to think quickly and not confident.

 

[cityslick]

Watching some of the testimony. It seems DD was a good friend to NC. Anyone have an opinion of CD other than coming to court in a T-shirt? Seems a bit 'off' or is it just my take?

His testimony came off as 'vindictive' (perhaps too strong of a word). He seemed like he had some sort of axe to grind.

 

[gbay]

IDK, but I thought, when I heard the testimony about those shoes, that they had them analyzed to show that the particular mica was not on those shoes -- mainly to have soil from a known place in Cary show that the particular type of mica was not in the search area around the lake -- IOW, it was not just everywhere in Cary. Dunno. Just my impression.

Actually the shoes they analysed showed the same white mica clumps that were at the location where the body was found. I wondered about the other shoes at the time and was thinking that they were using this to show he had been at this site another time - pre meditation. It was a bit confusing.

 

[Just the Fax]

His testimony came off as 'vindictive' (perhaps too strong of a word). He seemed like he had some sort of axe to grind.

Not sure how I would act if one of my friends/neighbors was accused of murdering his wife and I believed he was guilty.

 

[Just the Fax]

Actually the shoes they analysed showed the same white mica clumps that were at the location where the body was found. I wondered about the other shoes at the time and was thinking that they were using this to show he had been at this site another time - pre meditation. It was a bit confusing.

I thought the mica testimony was weak.
Bringing in his Nike shoes made no sense and only confused the jury.

 

[cityslick]

Not sure how I would act if one of my friends/neighbors was accused of murdering his wife and I believed he was guilty.

He was different. Can't really explain it. Perhaps because he had an interest in NC that went beyond friends.

 

[cityslick]

I thought the mica testimony was weak.
Bringing in his Nike shoes made no sense and only confused the jury.

That day (Geologist and Bug expert) started out looking it was going to be a good day for the prosecution and it really wasn't. Was this also the same day they couldn't get the friend from Paris to admit to earlier statements that he thought BC/french girl had a fling?

 

[LyndyLoo]

He was at Fielding earlier in the day and then he saw the straw at the house. He never bothered to tell anyone about it until the lightbulb went off 20 months later. How do you defend that?
Sometimes it's strange that some of you will defend anything the Prosecution/LE has done in this case when it's clearly a mistake. It's ok to admit mistakes, it doesn't mean you all of sudden think BC is innocent.

I was not so much defending but explaining how this would happen..and You are right?..He was NOT the brightest bulb in the pack, and did not use his higher brain when he initially saw that piece of straw...Certainly not likely to end up as an Investigator down the road of his career. I dont see it as a mistake so much as inexperienced...and since that piece of straw never got retrieved..Its NOT evidence of anything other than an heinsight observation. It certainly does NOT show Brad is innocent at this point because of this either:sigh:

I sure hope the defense puts on a perfect case..to convince the jurors that there had to have been somebody else who did this besides Brad. Mistakes or inexperiences of a few on the team of Investigators//LE does NOT undo ALL of the rest of the evidence..JMO

 

[Just the Fax]

I felt the entomologist was credible.
His professional opinion was she was killed between 1AM and 6AM.
All Kurtz did was show that could not be stated with scientific certainty.
Nevertheless, it was his professional opinion.

 

[NCEast]

Not sure how I would act if one of my friends/neighbors was accused of murdering his wife and I believed he was guilty.

I have been there--and it's horrible. And my friend was guilty and pleaded guilty during the second week of the trial, even though I didn't and couldn't believe it for the year preceding the trial. He was a big businessman here... and had a girlfriend. The wife was a professional, the girlfriend (that nobody knew about) barely made it through 7th grade). She is the one who actually killed the wife, got a plea deal because she spilled on the boyfriend/husband, and both are serving long sentences.
Just finding out that my friend had a girlfriend was enough to bother me greatly but then to find out he conspired to murder his wife nearly did me in. Actually, I'm still not over it and it's been 4 years.

 

[cityslick]

I was not so much defending but explaining how this would happen..and You are right?..He was NOT the brightest bulb in the pack, and did not use his higher brain when he initially saw that piece of straw...Certainly not likely to end up as an Investigator down the road of his career. I dont see it as a mistake so much as inexperienced...and since that piece of straw never got retrieved..Its NOT evidence of anything other than an heinsight observation. It certainly does NOT show Brad is innocent at this point because of this either:sigh:

I sure hope the defense puts on a perfect case..to convince the jurors that there had to have been somebody else who did this besides Brad. Mistakes or inexperiences of a few on the team of Investigators//LE does NOT undo ALL of the rest of the evidence..JMO

If I had to guess, they'll probably put some family/friends that speak positive to BC's character, perhaps disprove some of the things that NC's friends testified to. They'll probably put a couple of those eyewitnesses up who claimed to had seen NC that morning. And you know they are going to put their own VOIP/cell phone expert that will try to explain how it's not possible he faked that call (even with the flurry of activity that morning.

 

[cody100]

Probably not. Aside from the hay mistake, he didn't come across as very bright in general. Not able to think quickly and not confident.

He didn't appear believable either in my opinion because he could have easily mentioned it to others at the time. But 20 months later, he suddenly remembers it. I understand it wasn't his responsibility, but adding it so much later appears to be padding the file to meet with the prosecution's case (In my opinion).

 

[cityslick]

I felt the entomologist was credible.
His professional opinion was she was killed between 1AM and 6AM.
All Kurtz did was show that could not be stated with scientific certainty.
Nevertheless, it was his professional opinion.

It was his opinion, but an opinion he had no confidence in due to poor samples. Trenkle got him to even back off of the hard 6am time (he said it was possible the body was there 6am or 11am).

 

[Just the Fax]

He was different. Can't really explain it. Perhaps because he had an interest in NC that went beyond friends.

CD knew NC was essentially a single woman.
I could see him "inebriated" (his words) and making a suggestive advance toward NC at a party. From testimony I have heard, I haven't seen anything that would suggest CD was seriously pursuing NC. Yea, Kurtz wants us to think NC spurned him so that would be a motive for murder.