Preyevateye
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2014
- Messages
- 50
- Reaction score
- 0
Thanks
Wasn't it booted up again 1 year or so later?
Darn dates... regardless, on next boot up since brought back to Mesa PD.
I agree with you about BK. Her notes throughout that hearing were sympathetic to BN. At one point she commented that JM was "browbeating" BN about turning over his copy.
Reading others instead of seeing is an inferior way to get information, but even given the lack of visual and audio cues, I am quite sure BN doesn't deserve sympathy for how JM handled him. And that's about as diplomatic as I get on the subject.
And what were his findings? I mean yes it is hard to say whether it was the clone or the original modded, but it's not impossible in some cases ( especially if the clone (image) was made via EnCase) if you know what you are doing so they should be able to get to the bottom of this.
And one more thing was the HDD "flashed (fired)" or did it break down due to natural causes?
I'm pretty sure my McAfee can, I don't see why Spybot couldn't as long as the pc is turned on and the program has been authorized to run.
I think he thinks he's an expert in many fields, but I don't believe he's as knowledgeable as he believes in computer forensics.
I would agree with this. I also remember her agreeing with BN that Juan didn't know much about computers and that that was the word around the courthouse.
It kind of made me wonder if they are playing it as his weakest link.
BK almost seemed as if she knew BN personally because she repeated that he was a very nice person. IDK
I also thought BK seemed a little "off" on Friday though and that maybe she was a bit stressed out with all she has going on with the website.
Just my take on it.
Well first of all, for a computer "expert", his company website is pathetic. And secondly, anyone who would brag about winning "Emmys" but neglect to mention that they are regional Emmys, the majority of which were likely won during his time working for KPNX-TV, a local news station, is more than likely to embellish his credentials during a hearing such as this.
MOO
JSKS has already allowed testiphony served up by the especially cruel lying torture murderess that TA possessed a paper copy.
IMO, the central issue will be whether the DT can prove, as they allege in their motion, purposeful and egregious prosecutorial misconduct resulting from the State's intentional deletion of "a plethora of *advertiser censored*" from TA's computer (evidence tampering), and then lying about it to the court in order to obtain a conviction.
I actually believe he instilled himself into this case to stroke his ego. Nurmi didn't contact him, everyone was trying to Photoshop TA's eye in the shower photo way before BN came on the scene. I think he saw what was going on, tried it himself, then called Nurmi to say he could blow the case wide open. Trouble is everyone else saw JA with her arm raised & a knife in her hand lol.
Yes, the misconduct charge is central, but again, I'm not worried about it because I don't believe Flores or JM did anything wrong, and nothing BN said indicated otherwise.
For me, then, what is key now is whether or not JSS will allow in spurious charges of TA looking at child *advertiser censored* on the computer. Yes, CMJA was allowed to testify about that fictitious swirling piece of paper. Yes, JM demolished her story.
But....loose allegations of child *advertiser censored* on the computer told to the jury plus her paper story plus Brazilian waxes and pigtails and what not...at some point its reasonable to worry that at least one juror will believe the pedo story enough to vote against the DP.
No. It was only booted once, in 2009 without a write blocker. The activity in 2008 when they picked it up doesn't count. After that, there was only 2009 incident and that's it. And, obviously, the state could not have done all the DT is claiming they did in the 12 whole minutes it was on that day.
BBM
JA's counsel is claiming far worse than that *advertiser censored* was missed and then found; although they're claiming that as well when they state that Dworkin found none before, but BN did in 2014.
They are claiming that the State intentionally deceived the court regarding *advertiser censored* on TA's computer; ergo, the DT's filing is to dismiss all charges.
View attachment 65082
The motion specifically alleges "purposeful and egregious prosecutorial misconduct".
It details an allegation that "a plethora of *advertiser censored*" was found on TA's computer, that the prosecution knew it, intentionally deleted it, and then lied about it in order to gain a conviction.
View attachment 65091
The motion specifically excludes the possibility that *advertiser censored* was deleted in error "inadvertently" in the course of forensic examination. It makes clear that there is no agreement between the parties that viruses 'accidentally' caused the deletions.
Rather, in their filing, LKN, JW, and JA accuse "someone" of intentionally seeking to "alter [the] content" of TA's Compaq Presario, and then successfully executing said alteration, coinciding with Detective Flores's actions of June 19, 2009.
They further accuse the State of "deceit" in so doing.
If the court ordered the powering on of that computer at the DT's request, proving the allegations in the motion will be a tall order indeed.
From what has been tweeted thus far, the DT does not appear likely to prevail and I believe that JSKS will have no alternative but to deny the motion.
What do you know what HWB (hardware write blocker) they used? Tableau, WiebeTech, FastBloc?
Now the only salient question, IMO, is whether or not the DT can make an argument, preposterous or not, that will result in JSS allowing them to assert TA had child *advertiser censored* on his HD.
That would matter, and is at the heart of the matter. The rest just doesn't in the big picture.
An Emmy is an Emmy.
I doubt there are many people who know there are about 4 categories of Emmy awards and that when someone wins a regional Emmy, it is not for work that has been seen on a national level such as with the Primetime and Daytime Emmy awards. I don't think there is much competition in each regional category either and more than likely film students and interns also win regional Emmys but I admit I've never really looked into it.
I just think that most people would specify they have won Regional Emmys unless they are deliberately trying to mislead.
MOO
The defense speaks in hyperbole. In court, they only produced links to *advertiser censored* sites, not *advertiser censored*, and the unlawful behavior they accused the prosecution of evaporated when Juan pointed out that on the date in question it was the previous defense team who insisted the computer be powered up who were likely responsible for the 'deliberate' deletions, which were not deliberate after all. If you recall the hearing, just after Juan said that, Nurmi immediately backed down, and said something like "well then if that's the case LE should have protected it, or Ms. Arias has a case for ineffective assistance of council."
Well first of all, for a computer "expert", his company website is pathetic. And secondly, anyone who would brag about winning "Emmys" but neglect to mention that they are regional Emmys, the majority of which were likely won during his time working for KPNX-TV, a local news station, is more than likely to embellish his credentials during a hearing such as this.
MOO