Pretrial motions

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for the info, Calgary.

I knew that Brad's attorneys had asked for more time, and I thought this was typical defense dilatory tactics. I wonder if the plant was an inmate making a deal or was it a plant from the outside wearing prison stripes just to get info -- and as smart and arrogant as BC is, did he blab nuttin' but the truth to the informant?? Or did he just have to impress a fellow inmate with his perfect crime scenario? I also wonder what makes him tick..."me, me, me I'm in control"; a bit of cruelty, and what else?
 
Hehe,

I used to be a roommate of Brad, hence my interest in the case. Would he befriend someone reaching out to him in a "co-inmate" situation such that he'd make incriminating statements?

I don't think so unless he was really vulnerable. But I also don't think the FBI would put one of their own in jail for so long as to gain his trust. I would think he's smarter than to trust a random inmate being put near him such that he'd open up. We'll see. Brad is bright, but lacks emotional intelligence, from my own point of view.

And this is why I'm so curious. Brad would not let his guard down easily.
 
calgary123 said:
Brad could have been to trial earlier, but his own counsel wanted more time to review the evidence. I'm sure Brad was consulted before they asked to delay the start of the trial.

I'm pretty curious as to what the undercover evidence is. Sounds like a plant situation, and makes me think law enforcement needed more than what they had to firm up their evidence.
Click to expand...

Actually, the fact that this DA only took 4 months to bring him to justice tells me they have a very strong case. I had heard the best evidence is forensic, and is powerful.
This same DA obviously had a strong case on Jason Young the first year, yet he continued to ask for more and more evidence...until there was absolutely nothing else to get, 3 years later.
 
calgary123 said:
Brad could have been to trial earlier, but his own counsel wanted more time to review the evidence. I'm sure Brad was consulted before they asked to delay the start of the trial.

I'm pretty curious as to what the undercover evidence is. Sounds like a plant situation, and makes me think law enforcement needed more than what they had to firm up their evidence.
Click to expand...

I suspect those undercover FBI folks might have something to do with possibly wire taps, and computer forensics and following BC, and maybe a few others, around in the aftermath of Nancy being found deceased. I also tend to think that the DA had plenty to arrest BC, it wasn't but a few months afterwards that BC found himself sitting in jail. Icing on the cake I think.
 
SleuthyGal said:
Hee, thanks Borndem. Actually, my cat jumped into that ecollar all by herself (it belonged to my dog) and I just happened to have my camera handy. So she only looks pissed, she was actually quite pleased with herself.

I don't know if it's the lawyers words or spending years in jail waiting that affect that kind of countenance. I suspect being in jail would do it.

As for finding a jury, I think the most important thing is that people be willing (and able) to hear the evidence presented in the courtroom by both sides and understand the prosecution must meet a burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and if they don't...then a vote for 'not guilty' must follow. I agree WSers would be tossed (probably), although I think several could actually be fair and follow the judges instructions. Just having heard of the case or possibly having an opinion doesn't automatically disqualify a potential juror.

Anyway, yes, after 2.75 yrs it's time to see what the state has. I personally don't think anyone should have to sit in jail that long awaiting trial--this jurisdiction is unbelievably slowwwww.
Click to expand...


I could be quite fair - I can also say guilty very easily :D

Hope you are well ! Its been a long wait but very soon BC will have to face up to some facts. I did watch the video, he does seem less in control than he has presented in the past. Time to think about things I guess, figured out that two trips to the store with differing shoes and routes, wasn't all that smart maybe ? :D
 
Hey RC! It has been awhile. Yep, the piper wants to be paid. I know you could be fair (as could I).

I'm doing fine.

I'm planning to attend a few days of the trial, if I can get a seat in the courtroom.

FBI 'undercover' has me intrigued; I suppose it's possible these undercover guys are actually undercover on another case, not related to the BC case, and their identities need to be protected for that reason. We shall soon see!
 
SleuthyGal said:
Hey RC! It has been awhile. Yep, the piper wants to be paid. I know you could be fair (as could I).

I'm doing fine.

I'm planning to attend a few days of the trial, if I can get a seat in the courtroom.

FBI 'undercover' has me intrigued; I suppose it's possible these undercover guys are actually undercover on another case, not related to the BC case, and their identities need to be protected for that reason. We shall soon see!
Click to expand...

Yes, very intriguing. Why would the Feds send in "undercover agents" for a routine NC murder investigation? These guys cover must have been highly specialized.
 
SleuthyGal said:
....
FBI 'undercover' has me intrigued; I suppose it's possible these undercover guys are actually undercover on another case, not related to the BC case, and their identities need to be protected for that reason. We shall soon see!
Click to expand...

BBM - Excellent thinking, SG! I hadn't thought of that angle.

And I really liked JTF's comment about strong forensic evidence. From what I have read about Mr. Cooper, he probably cleaned his kitchen (?) floor for the very first (and last?) time on or around July 13th, 2008. Luminol may tell us a story!! Apparently it's darn near impossible to get rid of all the blood no matter what you do -- and he didn't have much time to do it. And all those evidence bags they carried out of the house have me as curious as a cat. Of course they take more from a scene rather than less, but they surely had a load of stuff. Tick, tock, tick, tock, BC.
 
Since cause of death was strangulation I don't think we'll see much (if any) blood evidence. No other evidence of cuts or anything that would cause blood loss was noted in the autopsy. Cooper himself had some slight red marks observed on his neck, but nothing significant.
 
Ole boy won't stop at anything. DNA. How long does that take? A day? Then Katie has to go have blood drawn and ask why. "Because baby your father suspects he is not your father". Just speaks more to his dark character.
 
This request comes at an unusually late stage. If this was so important to the case they could (read "should") have entered this appeal a long time ago. Only a small portion of the appeal relates to recent requests.

There is a collateral benefit to the defence if the case is adjourned. For example, witnesses move and lose contact, forget facts as memory fades, even die. We already know the medical examiner has retired.

I also think some of this information should have been disclosed. IF the daughter corroborated her dad's story that Nancy was alive and dressed to go running that morning, thats pretty significant. I capitalize IF for a reason.

If the blackberry was erased, that's sloppy investigation. But the emails would be available through the computers of the known recipients of the emails, and the communications would be logged through several servers.

Nancy slept with her sister's future husband while he was dating her sister? Ewww... not proven, but wow. It is pretty awful to cast aspersions on the deceased, and there is no way the defence is suggesting he was a potential murderer. This is just a deplorable attack on Nancy. It could be true, but certainly is not relevant.

The DNA issue... wow, that's incendiary. His attorneys must have had his permission to make these arguments. This allegation comes out of nowhere and smells of desperation. Saying someone else would kill her to avoid having to pay child support? Brad was the only one targeted for support. There were no suggestions until this filing that someone else could be Katie's father. Thus, who had the real motive at the time? Brad. He was going to be financially devastated from the separation (and I do think the financial proposal from Nancy's lawyer, whose emails to Nancy were being intercepted by Brad, was brutal and unfair to Brad) and as such he had the motive to kill because he has always been about his own financial and social status.

I expect the trial to be delayed. I also think this filing shows that the defence has little confidence they will succeed once the trial happens.
 
I read their motion. They are attempting the spaghetti defense--throw everything against the wall, hoping it sticks. That said, they should have all the discovery, and if the DA's office determined what they thought they should have and has withheld files, that's really not fair. I can't fault them for insisting they get all the data.

As for the other stuff in the motion, it reminds me of the OJ defense of trash the victim, try to make her as unlikeable as possible, and insinuate that everyone else had a reason to kill her, to create doubt.

JA Young deleted the data on NC's blackberry <shaking head, slapping Jim's wrist>. Bad Jim.

I admit reading about the volume of requests to the DA's office to try and get full discovery has me wondering why this DA has withheld files. Why the games?

I'm glad at least the trial will proceed without further delays. But wow BC/his lawyers reallllly don't want their 'day in court' anytime soon.
 
SleuthyGal said:
FBI 'undercover' has me intrigued; I suppose it's possible these undercover guys are actually undercover on another case, not related to the BC case, and their identities need to be protected for that reason. We shall soon see!
Click to expand...

Hi SG!
Where does it say there were undercover agents involved? Judge G read from the law saying that agents, certain family members etc were not to be photographed by the media during procedings. But I don't think that any undercovers were involved. ???
 
Couldn't the defense have filed the Writ/Cert sooner, or did they have no choice but to do it when they did?

I surely hope that all files have been delivered to them, or at least were thought to have completely been delivered. I guess they are just trying to lay groundwork for appeal. ???

And this "daddy/DNA" thing -- come on now. :maddening:That one, I'm just not buyin.'
 
This latest motion is to the appeals court (above the superior court judge). They had to see how the trial judge would rule on their motions. And once he refused their requests then they wrote this new motion to appeal the trial judge's decision and try to get those decisions overturned. They lost on the motion to delay trial, but pending is the (more important) decision on getting their hands on the discovery they asked for in the submission.
 
As for the whole paternity thing. :rolleyes:

I don't think BC doubts the actual paternity of his youngest daughter--I believe this is merely a ploy to:

1. Get that guy (Pearson) to admit to an affair and admit that it's technically *possible* since the affair happened around the time of the daughter's conception and

2. Based on getting him to admit #1, try to make people (i.e. a jury) think that there was someone else now who had motive (and opportunity). If you notice, they are asking for that guy's alibi for the timeframe NC went missing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 154 more.
Total: 2,104 (members: 155, guests: 1,949)

Online statistics

Members online
155
Guests online
1,949
Total visitors
2,104
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,525
Messages
18,125,825
Members
231,082
Latest member
Dylan O' Cone
Back
Top