April 8th wknd of Sleuthing

[gracielee]

There you go again, adding your opinions as fact.
Brad did not cooperate fully with the murder investigation.
By the time CPD received the video from HT and had a chance to review it, Brad was no longer talking at all to CPD.

IIRC, wasn't that what the argument was about during the deposition? The one that resulted in a call to the judge?

 

[Cheyenne130]

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.

I think their VoIP expert will show something more like how improbable it would be. If they say it's impossible, their credibility will be in serious question. We already know that they have their own cell phone expert. He was standing in front of the camera (with his back to the camera) vehemently shaking his head in the negative while the AT&T records guy was showing the jury the diagram of the cell phone tower.

 

[LyndyLoo]

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.

BBM~~ I'd not take that bet cityslick..as you just know Defense will try to make it a duelling expert defense..ALL I can say, they best have one who has full knowledge of the Cisco Systems as they stood back in 2008...It will be interesting to watch for sure :seeya:

 

[cityslick]

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.

Nah, I don't think he had anything to do with it. I do think he didn't just see NC as a friend (at least during certain points).

 

[cody100]

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.

The entomologist was a very good witness. His conclusion of 1am to 6am were based on assumptions that were questionable scientifically, such as temperature and effect of the street light. He said he did not feel very comfortable setting the time and that it could be as late as 11AM.

 

[cityslick]

BBM~~ I'd not take that bet cityslick..as you just know Defense will try to make it a duelling expert defense..ALL I can say, they best have one who has full knowledge of the Cisco Systems as they stood back in 2008...It will be interesting to watch for sure :seeya:

As Cheyenne mentioned, we've already seen him during this trial.

 

[Just the Fax]

Remember the guy furiously taking notes when the AT&T guy was on?
This is Kurtz's hired gun ....Ben Levitan.


http://www.jurispro.com/BenLevitan

 

[gbay]

Remember the guy furiously taking notes when the AT&T guy was on?
This is Kurtz's hired gun ....Ben Levitan.


http://www.jurispro.com/BenLevitan

Pretty impressive background!!

 

[gracielee]

I couldn't tell from the pics. Can't say I have seen those before either.

IIRC, didn't I hear brad say 'he wouldn't wear those 'ugly-a$$ shoes'? Oh, wait, that was O.J., wasn't it?


:woohoo:

 

[Madeleine74]

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).

The defense sure believed it because they were going with the theory that other cops must have brought the hay into the house when they were there before as a way to explain that hay being there. I don't think the cop was lying at all. And I don't think hay was planted in the house either. I believe it was where the cop says he saw it and I believe he screwed up by not mentioning it.

 

[cody100]

But, cody100 .... what I have a huge problem with is BC himself. Forget BC and his needs at the time. The mother of his 2 little girls goes missing, later found murdered and dumped a few miles from his house - and the guy does zip, zero, zilch. Looks the other way, gets lawyers, shuts up, leaving LE to dig for themselves.

May be way off side, but here's my 2-cents: Did BC ever stop to think for a moment what his daughters may ask him one day in the distant future?

"Daddy, why did you do so little to help investigators in mama's murder case? Why did so many strange things go on; all those midnight store trips - mama's clothes missing; your bickering and fighting and all? OK so maybe you hated her, but she was still our mama. What about us, Daddy? What about what we needed, for mama, from you?"

Pretty callous actions IMO ... the man thinks, operates and speaks for and of himself only.

I understand your viewpoint. I honestly don't know BC so I can't say whether your statements are true or not. Seems like he was open on the first day to helping them, even went outside to get a neighbor to figure out which dress NC was wearing. And he went searching for her. As any smart spouse, he realized they were going to pin it on him so he lawyered up. I assume that appears to folks as not being helpful.

 

[Just the Fax]

IIRC, didn't I hear brad say 'he wouldn't wear those 'ugly-a$$ shoes'? Oh, wait, that was O.J., wasn't it?


:woohoo:

:floorlaugh::lol:

 

[Madeleine74]

It think it's well established Nancy Cooper's body was in that drainage ditch at 11am. What I got from the testimony is the body could have, and likely was, based on the bug evidence and age of larvae, in that drainage ditch at 6am or earlier.

 

[borndem]

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?

Yes, he was a bit rough around the edges, and in-your-face, but he also seemed direct, no-fooling-around, and truthful. WYSIWYG with this guy. He should have dressed "just a tad" (!) more respectfully since it WAS a Superior Courtroom, and this was not for a speeding ticket, but other than that, he was a good tell-it-like-it-is witness. Not afraid to tell the truth, IMO.

 

[cody100]

The defense sure believed it because they were going with the theory that other cops must have brought the hay into the house when they were there before as a way to explain that hay being there. I don't think the cop was lying at all. And I don't think hay was planted in the house either. I believe it was where the cop says he saw it and I believe he screwed up by not mentioning it.

The first assumption is that it is hay, the second that it would be consistent with the other hay, and the third assumption is that the jury might be confused by these statements that aren't scientifically proven. So, of course, the defense might want to explain how it could have been brought into the house just in case jurors bought this guy's story.

Now, I personally think this guy could have seen something on the floor. Whether it is hay or not is definitely in question. Without proper collection and photographing, we don't know, and that is poor police work. So if it were not evidence, why even bring it up at trial. And if the prosecution does go that route, they open themselves up for these statements.

 

[water_dancing]

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.

Yes both had clumps however the expert clearly stated that determination can not be made by appearances only.

They went through the chemical composition of all 3 samples in both the high and low Magnesium groups with ~10 different trace elements. The Fielding Dr matched the shoes on only ONE of the trace element and in that case was only marginally significant.

As fascinated as I am with mica research, I think in this case it is misleading. Mica comes from the top layer of soil. They waited ~2 year to collect the soil samples including one that was a construction area where the top layer could change, have equipment bring soil from other area, etc. Given her description of how mica forms, I would really surprised if a 2 year wait would hold up to scientific scrutiny.

 

[Just the Fax]

I agree cody, that hay 'evidence' should have never made the trial.

 

[borndem]

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

Maybe he will -- he certainly will never do that again -- if he gets the chance, but again, I think most LEOs try hard to do exactly what they are told, no more and no less. This is drilled into them -- again they take a very rank & file military approach. Poor guy.

 

[PolkSaladAnnie]

I understand your viewpoint. I honestly don't know BC so I can't say whether your statements are true or not. Seems like he was open on the first day to helping them, even went outside to get a neighbor to figure out which dress NC was wearing. And he went searching for her. As any smart spouse, he realized they were going to pin it on him so he lawyered up. I assume that appears to folks as not being helpful.

Thanks for your response, cody. Understand and respect your POV. Personally, I think the "neighbor approach" was nothing more wall-paper for all "to see" his so-called helpful reaction. Lawyering up is one thing. Shutting up and being totally non-responsive as to where his shoes, clothes, etc., were at (even though requested much later) is another thing.

The man, IMO, lived with a chronic fear-of-loss-&-discovery from early hours July 12 2008. Actually, he demonstrated his fear of loss ($$$) well before NC's murder.

If truly innocent, he'd surely have presented everything he possibly could - especially for his two daughters sakes - via his lawyer. He opted to do naught. If no-one else asked questions, they most certainly would (one day). It's not that, like way too many folk, I don't buy his story ... I just can't buy it, cody.

 

[sunshine05]

July 12 6:20am Cooper seen wearing the deck or tennis shoes with the white rim at Harris Teeter.

July 12 3pm Cops are at Cooper house

From July 12 at 3pm on, Cooper is under surveillance by the cops and followed when he leaves the home for the next several days, beyond the search warrant and removal of items from the home.

Those shoes were never seen and never found. It is obvious that cooper disposed of or otherwise hid those shoes between 6:45am and 2:59pm on Sat July 12, so they would never be found.

I really can't believe we are arguing about this. None of you can honestly say "yeah, they dropped the ball on this one." ?

The search warrant was from October. You all really think it's good police work that they did not ask BC where his shoes were on 7/15? They asked him for his cell phone that day which he handed over. They asked him to show recent calls, which he did. They did not ask for shoes and clothing. I'm sure the prosecutors were not happy about that because there could have been evidence or evidence that he tried to hide something.

The reason I brought up the shoes at all is because I wanted to know why they did the mica testing on the shoes he wore while looking through the woods all over the place for his wife. Is it possible they were going to try to suggest it was those shoes he was wearing the day of the murder? That seems a tad bit corrupt to me.