Brad Cooper: Appeal info

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
JusticeFever said:
You watched the entire trial, go you!! I get lost during anything technical, like the phone experts (boring......zzzzzzz) and computer forensics and I don't understand them at all.

I am glad the defense will be able to put on their own computer expert this time.

So, what did you think of the ducks?
Click to expand...

The ducks were hilarious. And I think she threw the sticks away because she was moving and they don't move well. Ask me how I know:)
 
Does anyone know if the cadaver dog hit on the trunk of Brad's car?
 
SStarr33 said:
LOL, $233K is nothing considering the case.
Click to expand...
for a single indigent case?
That is the more than a full time senior assistant DA makes in 2 years.

A defense attorney saying his client is innocent is not exactly earthshattering news
 
Just the Fax said:
for a single indigent case?
That is the more than a full time senior assistant DA makes in 2 years.

A defense attorney saying his client is innocent is not exactly earthshattering news
Click to expand...

A. He worked on it for more than a year.
B. Midpoint for a deputy county attorney is $133k
C. That doesn't include benefits
D. Kurtz also had to pay his staff

So yes, it is appropriate given the case, especially when it is pretty clear that his client is indeed likely innocent.
 
Just the Fax said:
for a single indigent case?
That is the more than a full time senior assistant DA makes in 2 years.

A defense attorney saying his client is innocent is not exactly earthshattering news
Click to expand...

Um, he spent over two years on the case. He had to pay himself and his staff. What did they get back then? $75 per hour?

BTW, 233K ain't nothing compared to what the state is going to have to pay out for the re-trial and what they will have to pay Brad for his wrongful conviction. Not to mention what it is going to cost to determine who tampered with his computer and take them to trial.
 
Don't believe any tampering happened... and the cost would be for someone to prove that.

Could save all the money by just believing the defense lawyer it seems.
 
dgfred said:
Don't believe any tampering happened... and the cost would be for someone to prove that.

Could save all the money by just believing the defense lawyer it seems.
Click to expand...

Excellent point!
The criminal defense lawyer has spoken!!!
Set the incarcerated killer free.
 
SStarr33 said:
Um, he spent over two years on the case. He had to pay himself and his staff. What did they get back then? $75 per hour?

BTW, 233K ain't nothing compared to what the state is going to have to pay out for the re-trial and what they will have to pay Brad for his wrongful conviction. Not to mention what it is going to cost to determine who tampered with his computer and take them to trial.
Click to expand...

Yes, the tampering allegation seems quite specific. Very interesting......The costs for the retrials in that area are going to be staggering imo.
 
MyBelle said:
Yes, the tampering allegation seems quite specific. Very interesting......The costs for the retrials in that area are going to be staggering imo.
Click to expand...

Then Judge Gessner should have let Brad's defense team call their own computer expert witness.. It was that simple.

JMO
 
SStarr33 said:
Other interesting points:

1. They knew the verdict was guilty when the jurors walked in and the ones they knew they had on their side were "visibly shaken".

2. He basically said that Brad was stoic.

3. He is 100% sure the computer was tampered with and that Brad is absolutely innocent. I wish you could see him say it. He is SURE.

4. He said they had a tremendously good chance at appeal.

5. He was unsure they would win because of all of the evidence they were unable to provide to the jury.

6. He said that Gessner was admittedly ignorant about technology. He thinks that we now need a technology court like they have business court with a judge who is savvy about complex business litigation. Or that they should allow the judges to have independent advisors to help them.

7. He said "he did not google that site on that date". So maybe Brad googled it in the past and they changed the dates???? IDK.

8. He said there was physical evidence that it was not Brad and that the State's case is made up of "naked allegations."

9. He talks about social media and how helpful it was for their case.

I love Kurtz.
Click to expand...

I haven't watched the interview and I don't have a strong opinion as to whether Brad Cooper is guilty or not, but from watching his trial it was obvious to me how strongly Kurtz believed BC was innocent. I kept thinking if Kurtz is that convinced BC is innocent then maybe he really is. And no, I don't think Kurtz was putting on an act.
 
whoanellie said:
I haven't watched the interview and I don't have a strong opinion as to whether Brad Cooper is guilty or not, but from watching his trial it was obvious to me how strongly Kurtz believed BC was innocent. I kept thinking if Kurtz is that convinced BC is innocent then maybe he really is. And no, I don't think Kurtz was putting on an act.
Click to expand...

I agree and here is a link to an article from Mr. Kurtz after Brad was granted a new trial and the correct reason Brad Cooper's conviction was overturned.

www.kurtzandblum.com/blog/letter-to-the-editor
 
Just the Fax said:
Off topic....kinda

Kudos to Judge Fox.
He was not about to let another wife killer possibly walk.

A federal judge on Thursday denied a motion for a new trial for Jeffrey MacDonald
http://www.wral.com/judge-rejects-bid-for-new-trial-in-fatal-vision-case/13839177/#15tFO6wbJePYa9Oo.99
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link. Not off topic, imo, because retrials and appeals are being discussed. Interesting how the Judge and jury totally disregarded the testimony of the defense witness, Stoeckley, as unreliable and couldn't be believed because she was a drug user yet she described a toy in the McDonald home. How could she possibly know that unless she was in the McDonald home? I never followed that case so I have no opinion as to his guilt or innocence but that piece of it always bothered me.

there seems to be a troubling pattern in North Carolina with both judges and juries blindly believing whatever witnesses the prosecution throws at them and finding a reason to totally ignore the testimony of a defense witness.

Juries in other cases, such as Cooper and Young have totally ignored reliable witnesses who are testifying for the defense. The Cooper jury ignored multiple witnesses who said they saw Nancy jogging. The Judge refused to allow a defense witness testify at all, which is why there is a retrial ordered. The jury in the Young case believed the prosecution's witness Gracie Daum even after she admitted she suffered a brain injury and had memory problems.

I'd be very concerned if I lived in NC. Heck, I'm very concerned and I don't live there.

JMO

"Helena Stoeckley herself was not credible or reliable," he wrote. "The court cannot find, based on this hearsay statement from the unreliable Stoeckley, that she was in fact threatened by (the prosecutor) and therefore induced to testify falsely.
Read more at http://www.wral.com/judge-rejects-b...tal-vision-case/13839177/#kpzWIyrkgSYkEMQ9.99
 
Here is an interview with Amanda Lamb. At the very end, she says she recently spoke to a juror at one of her book signings who bought one of her books. She says the jury was out "for several days". She claims the juror told her that there was never any dissension in the jury room--that they all thought he was guilty from the very beginning but they went back through the evidence to make sure they were all on the same page that it was first degree.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

And she also has the nerve to make a comment about misinformation. Wow.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/dan-zupansky1/2012/02/08/love-lies-amanda-lamb
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 109 more.
Total: 2,591 (members: 110, guests: 2,481)

Online statistics

Members online
110
Guests online
2,481
Total visitors
2,591
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,785
Messages
18,113,501
Members
230,991
Latest member
DeeKay
Back
Top