Brad Cooper Pleads Guilty to 2nd Degree Murder of Nancy Cooper

[oenophile]

Out of order, but...

(And again, Oenophile, this post is not about you and does not refer to you or any opinions you've expressed).

Thank you for that (and you don't need to make it too small to read...)

But now it's come out there's this plea deal offered (still), and if BC takes it, the rationalization for him doing so has predictably shifted to make him still an innocent man, willing to claim guilt for a murder and sacrifice himself and spend up to a decade more in state prison, as an innocent man of course, just to be assured he'll be able to get out someday (you know, since he apparently cannot ever get a fair trial, so why even try, there's no point, it's all unfair) and/or the state's case is so weak that they will do anything to dispose of this case and Brad is willing to plead guilty because... well because. For the rationalizers, there is no possible way BC could or would plead guilty because he's actually guilty of murder and he's getting a great deal and he knows it.

To flip it around, if BC gets this amazing plea deal offer, and he refuses it, doesn't that suggest to the BDI rationalizers that he is in fact innocent?

 

[Grammy Jean]

Out of order, but...



Thank you for that (and you don't need to make it too small to read...)



To flip it around, if BC gets this amazing plea deal offer, and he refuses it, doesn't that suggest to the BDI rationalizers that he is in fact innocent?

I have been a firm believer that BC is guilty but if he should turn down this plea I would have some reasonable belief that perhaps he is innocent and is ready to have his new trial with all the forensic technology claimed by his DT to prove tampering and planted evidence to his computer. I do not think this will happen but it's still a possibility.

 

[oenophile]

I have been a firm believer that BC is guilty but if he should turn down this plea I would have some reasonable belief that perhaps he is innocent and is ready to have his new trial with all the forensic technology claimed by his DT to prove tampering and planted evidence to his computer. I do not think this will happen but it's still a possibility.

Thanks, appreciate the open mindedness!

 

[calgary123]

If Brad turns down the plea deal I would take notice. I would still "believe" he did it based on what I know about the first trial, but I'd be paying a lot of attention to the technical evidence the second time around. If Brad were to present a defence which credibly deals with the technical evidence in his favour, Brad deserves an acquittal. If its just more of the "time-stamps are invalid" garbage, he's going to jail for life. So in that regard, if he rejects the deal, I'd be looking forward to seeing a better defence the second time around and I'd be open to the fact he may have a credible method of refuting the technical evidence-- at the extreme I could even be convinced he didn't do it, but I really do at this point think he did.

 

[MyBelle]

No offense, but that doesn't make a lot of sense. In Brad Cooper's appeal, it clearly states that the reason he won his appeal is due to Jay Ward being limited in his testimony. Now we also know that Jay Ward admitted to not being a expert, isn't it also true he could have requested a certificate from the state at some time, before the trial, verifying that he was qualified?
And, what is his status for the next trial, should there be one?

JMO

Actually, what Jay Ward said is that he isn't a "forensics" expert. He didn't say he wasn't qualified to testify at all.

He said (from Hez's link): I would never hold myself out as a forensic expert. I also told the defense this, up front. What I disagreed with, was the DA taking obvious advantage of the Judge's ignorance in technology to claim that so much of what would normally be within my normal purview as analysis as being "forensics". This is simply laughable,

There was nothing wrong with him posting here because he didn't discuss details of the case or his testimony. And more importantly, the appellate court agreed with him. He should have been allowed to testify.

JMO

 

[oenophile]

If Brad turns down the plea deal I would take notice. I would still "believe" he did it based on what I know about the first trial, but I'd be paying a lot of attention to the technical evidence the second time around. If Brad were to present a defence which credibly deals with the technical evidence in his favour, Brad deserves an acquittal. If its just more of the "time-stamps are invalid" garbage, he's going to jail for life. So in that regard, if he rejects the deal, I'd be looking forward to seeing a better defence the second time around and I'd be open to the fact he may have a credible method of refuting the technical evidence-- at the extreme I could even be convinced he didn't do it, but I really do at this point think he did.

I've never been 100% on board with the time-stamp evidence, which is one of the reasons why I would have liked to have seen it in court. The thing that makes me disagree with you about it being "garbage" is how much the state fought against doing any type of comparison of timestamps entered into evidence. Kurtz wanted desperately to re-enact the Google search on a similar machine and setup, and the judge wouldn't allow it. When Kurtz questioned the agent about the comparison the agent did, the agent conveniently didn't have the information available, and he hid behind national security when asked to produce the notes related to his findings. A real comparison, in court, would have answered a lot of questions about the timestamps. What was the prosecution afraid of? If everything was valid, then there would be nothing to fear about doing a comparison.

 

[tarheellvr]

I have to agree Justice. We can sit here all day and discuss innocence or guilt, but he is the one who, even with a new trial, facing the possibility of never having freedom.

I do think him guilty, but also think he would be wise to consider a deal. This would at least guarantee freedom at some point.

 

[dgfred]

I can think of a good reason...guaranteed freedom..

Well... I agree with Madeleine. Alot of things can happen in prison all that time so not guarenteed.

 

[Madeleine74]

Knowing the evidence, he'd be unwise to turn down this opportunity. I believe his guilt was proved BARD and would be again in another trial. He'll get away with less than he deserves, but if he's willing to openly admit he murdered his wife and sign away several of his constitutional rights, and gives up now, especially after winning an appeal, that will seal it. Most importantly he knows he won't see his children and the children will know he killed their mother and admitted it publicly.

 

[dgfred]

Actually, what Jay Ward said is that he isn't a "forensics" expert. He didn't say he wasn't qualified to testify at all.

He said (from Hez's link): I would never hold myself out as a forensic expert. I also told the defense this, up front. What I disagreed with, was the DA taking obvious advantage of the Judge's ignorance in technology to claim that so much of what would normally be within my normal purview as analysis as being "forensics". This is simply laughable,

There was nothing wrong with him posting here because he didn't discuss details of the case or his testimony. And more importantly, the appellate court agreed with him. He should have been allowed to testify.

JMO

IMO it would not have mattered but since he wasn't allowed to it was grounds for appeal.
Wouldn't the defense have been better off with someone that WAS an expert? Even tho it did work out for them in a way.

 

[Hez]

Actually, what Jay Ward said is that he isn't a "forensics" expert. He didn't say he wasn't qualified to testify at all.

He said (from Hez's link): I would never hold myself out as a forensic expert. I also told the defense this, up front. What I disagreed with, was the DA taking obvious advantage of the Judge's ignorance in technology to claim that so much of what would normally be within my normal purview as analysis as being "forensics". This is simply laughable,

There was nothing wrong with him posting here because he didn't discuss details of the case or his testimony. And more importantly, the appellate court agreed with him. He should have been allowed to testify.

JMO

UBM - I disagree. Imagine the uproar if a prosecution witness just started posting here in the middle of the trial. The cries for a mistrial would have been deafening.

 

[JusticeFever]

I have been a firm believer that BC is guilty but if he should turn down this plea I would have some reasonable belief that perhaps he is innocent and is ready to have his new trial with all the forensic technology claimed by his DT to prove tampering and planted evidence to his computer. I do not think this will happen but it's still a possibility.

I would not expect anything less from you when it comes to being fair.

 

[JusticeFever]

I have to agree Justice. We can sit here all day and discuss innocence or guilt, but he is the one who, even with a new trial, facing the possibility of never having freedom.

I do think him guilty, but also think he would be wise to consider a deal. This would at least guarantee freedom at some point.

Hi Tarheel:
I think anyone who turns down a deal is foolish, imo.
You don't take another chance especially when retrials are known to favor the state........
I couldn't imagine what it would be like to be imprisoned for years and not be able to enjoy the simplest of pleasures . with that said, is it worth going through another trial with the outcome being unsure?
If Brad does turn down the current deal of 2nd degree that was offered, maybe he is hoping for the same thing that happened to Raven Abaroa, Raven turned down 2nd and got the Alford.
But, again that is a big gamble.
Take the deal, Mr. Cooper.

JMO

 

[JusticeFever]

Knowing the evidence, he'd be unwise to turn down this opportunity. I believe his guilt was proved BARD and would be again in another trial. He'll get away with less than he deserves, but if he's willing to openly admit he murdered his wife and sign away several of his constitutional rights, and gives up now, especially after winning an appeal, that will seal it. Most importantly he knows he won't see his children and the children will know he killed their mother and admitted it publicly.

Yes, but those are standard requirements of accepting a 2nd degree murder plea deal. It is possible that some day his daughters will want to see him and would be willing to hear what he has to say. I don't know what they know, what they have been told, but at least they wouldn't have to come and see him in prison to get their answers.....
Over time they may be able to become close again...again...I don't know. And, this is only because I think he is innocent. If I thought he was guilty, I wouldn't want them anywhere near him.

JMO

 

[oenophile]

IMO it would not have mattered but since he wasn't allowed to it was grounds for appeal.
Wouldn't the defense have been better off with someone that WAS an expert? Even tho it did work out for them in a way.

Just to be clear, Jay Ward WAS an expert, perhaps among the best at what he did. And he was precisely the expert needed to interpret the data in court. The problem was that his expertise was excluded because the judge erroneously determined that since his expertise did not include forensic extraction of data and forensic protocols, he shouldn't get to testify for the things that he WAS an expert at analyzing.

 

[dgfred]

That is clearer... thanks.

 

[JusticeFever]

Just to be clear, Jay Ward WAS an expert, perhaps among the best at what he did. And he was precisely the expert needed to interpret the data in court. The problem was that his expertise was excluded because the judge erroneously determined that since his expertise did not include forensic extraction of data and forensic protocols, he shouldn't get to testify for the things that he WAS an expert at analyzing.

Wow, this makes it a whole other ballgame then.......I think Jay Ward was treated unfairly then, although probably still not a good idea to post on a message board/forum while being a witness in an ongoing trial.

We should know what is going to happen by Monday.........we will either be proceeding to trial or hear Brad accepting a plea.

In the case of a new trial, we are probably looking at next year.....

In the case of a plea deal, what happens next? Is Brad resentenced for the extended certain amount of time? I know he is then returned to prison. Do both sides get to speak? How about statements from either side of the family? Since Brad is from Canada, will he be permitted to stay in the US after he serves time? What kind of restrictions will be face if/when he is released someday?
Thanks in advance.

 

[oenophile]

Wow, this makes it a whole other ballgame then.......I think Jay Ward was treated unfairly then, although probably still not a good idea to post on a message board/forum while being a witness in an ongoing trial.

I agree, wasn't a good idea to post on a message board while being a witness in an ongoing trial. A friend of mine was in a similar situation recently, she was an expert witness in a criminal trial. She is also very outspoken. Experts often are. I really really pushed her not to engage in debate on the internet regarding areas of her expertise, which was difficult for her to resist as she was being attacked online.

In this case, the defense should have done a better job prepping Jay, including asking him not to comment about the case outside of the testimony.

 

[Madeleine74]

Jay Ward wasn't even done testifying when he came to WS and posted. He was back on the stand the next morning and his WS postings were entered and he was confronted with the things he had written. I'm sure the defense wasn't happy with his actions the night before; he may have good street cred and techie skills, but his common sense was lacking the evening he came to WS to post.

 

[JusticeFever]

Jay Ward wasn't even done testifying when he came to WS and posted. He was back on the stand the next morning and his WS postings were entered and he was confronted with the things he had written. I'm sure the defense wasn't happy with his actions the night before; he may have good street cred and techie skills, but his common sense was lacking the evening he came to WS to post.

I am not saying what he did was right, but maybe he got caught up in the moment, or maybe he was being bashed and felt the need to defend himself. I don't know....but I am looking forward to Monday.

ETA. Was JW reprimanded by the courts in any way?