State v Bradley Cooper 03-30-2011

[ncsu95]

I am still thinking fax via computer for the dialing.

clone a harddrive and place in the PC, have your PC make the call, listen to incessant fax beeping for 38 or so seconds and maybe even let the PC redial since the fax didn't go through, swap the harddrive out to the original one. Toss the one used to place the call.

No evidence and your home phone was used.

A couple of people indicated that the CDRs would show that as a fax call.

 

[ncsu95]

I feel badly for Det. Y - I'm sure he'd give anything had that phone not wiped. And if that is the very thing that hangs this case or keeps a jury from convicting the inmate, well, then I will just have to know that there is a higher judgement - and BC will face that judgement one day because I'm still completely convinced that he is the guilty party. Det. Y is a fine law enforcement officer and he's also human. Nobody can truly believe that police officers don't make mistakes. I don't think it was a mistake to investigate BC to the fullest. I think it was right on target.

This case won't hinge on that phone being wiped. If he's acquitted, it's because they don't have sufficient evidence to prove he did it.

 

[Cheyenne130]

This case won't hinge on that phone being wiped. If he's acquitted, it's because they don't have sufficient evidence to prove he did it.

I agree. That phone being wiped has very little significance other than to show ineptness in that part of the investigation.

 

[ncsu95]

IIRC, WRAL 6:00 news reported that CPD did interview her, and when they did, she was equivocal -- not positive. You may recall that WRAL tried to have a tidbit on the news nearly every night for a while after NC's body was found.

That's not what she says in her affidavit.

 

[Albert]

But the question wasn't if a call was received from the house, wouldn't that indicate she was alive? The question was if NANCY called Brad at 6:40, wouldn't that indicate she was alive. No matter who you are or what you believe, if Nancy called Brad at 6:40, then she was alive at 6:40. It doesn't mean she was alive at 6:41, but would mean she was alive if Nancy called Brad at 6:40. That was a simple question.

Q: If ncsu95 posted to websleuths at 6:40pm yesterday would that indicate that ncsu95 was alive at 6:40pm

If you were asked this question then how would you answer?

 

[snowshuze]

Sounds like a party outside the courtroom?

 

[ncsu95]

Q: If ncsu95 posted to websleuths at 6:40pm yesterday would that indicate that ncsu95 was alive at 6:40pm

If you were asked this question then how would you answer?

I would say if ncsu95 was actually the one making the post, and not someone or something doing it for him, then that would mean he was alive at 6:40.

 

[FullDisclosure]

Sounds like a party outside the courtroom?

Perhaps someone is impersonating their favorite prosecutors and defenders. :crazy:

 

[Cheyenne130]

That's not what she says in her affidavit.

In the affidavit she states that she called CPD on Sunday (she doesn't say what time) and left a message. At a later time/date CPD called her back and left a message. (Again it's not specified when they left the message.) She then says that they finally connected. (Assuming when she called them back?) It's likely that it was Monday before they connected and at that time she gave them her statement so to say that CPD didn't follow up is inaccurate. They called her back. She then called them back and gave her statement. We have no idea what she said in her statement to CPD when they interviewed her via the phone or exactly when that was. It may have been after the body was discovered.

 

[Albert]

Actually, it would have to hit 2 specific buttons (offhook and redial).

It can be done by simply hitting redial, this will cause the phone to go offhook and dial the previous number. It is possible for the called party to terminate the call, however the calling party (home phone) would eventually disconnect and reorder tone would be played. I don't know what the disconnect cause code would indicate for the home phone. So it is possible to do this with a mechanical device by depressing the redial button.

 

[CrimeAddict]

There is an ad for Kurtz and Blum part time paralegal if anyone is interested, its posted on Craigslist.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Bottome line - the spooked call is about 99% gone, but the pros and defense already knew that, just had to bring it up in the trial. I predict same is going to happen with the computer - there is no smoking gun. If there was, that card would have been prominently played in the opening arguements, and the process to get there would have been explained, so the jury would not give up earning that $15 a day to come hear another day of 'foundation' testimony. This is a bunch of smoke and mirrors - confused and cloud the picture for the jury, maybe they'll buy it.

(bold by me.) I actually asked the ADA (Zellinger) why their opening was so short and he said that's just a basic/brief outline of the case.

Obviously they decided to keep their opening *very* short (28 min), as opposed to the defense, who went OnAndOnAndOn for 3 hrs worth of a yawnfest that had everyone in the courtroom antsy that last full hour. For whatever reason, the prosecution did not bring in details of all they are going to show. That doesn't mean they don't have something, it simply means they decided not to introduce it during opening arguments. Take that as you will.

 

[JiminWilton]

Q: If ncsu95 posted to websleuths at 6:40pm yesterday would that indicate that ncsu95 was alive at 6:40pm

If you were asked this question then how would you answer?

If I were emulating Detective Dreamy I would say, "I have no evidence to show that NCSU95 was alive at that time."

If I were answering honestly, I'd say, "No."

But the question was, "If NANCY called...." not, If a phone call was received from residence to cell. Big difference. And I still maintain it would have looked more "I'm cooperating and simply want to find the truth" than "He did it and I'll do nothing to help your case, Mr. Kurtz"

 

[ncsu95]

In the affidavit she states that she called CPD on Sunday (she doesn't say what time) and left a message. At a later time/date CPD called her back and left a message. (Again it's not specified when they left the message.) She then says that they finally connected. (Assuming when she called them back?) It's likely that it was Monday before they connected and at that time she gave them her statement so to say that CPD didn't follow up is inaccurate. They called her back. She then called them back and gave her statement. We have no idea what she said in her statement to CPD when they interviewed her via the phone or exactly when that was. It may have been after the body was discovered.

Her affidavit says she is positive it was Nancy Cooper. It doesn't say she was unsure. That is what I was referring to.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Q: If ncsu95 posted to websleuths at 6:40pm yesterday would that indicate that ncsu95 was alive at 6:40pm

If you were asked this question then how would you answer?

Hummmmm let me think...well someone posted in his name..we dont KNOW or have evidence that he was alive when he posted..IT would have to be someone who had access to his acct. with W/S..So NO I can assume that since there is no evidence that no one else could use his signon information :twocents:

 

[gracielee]

I would say if ncsu95 was actually the one making the post, and not someone or something doing it for him, then that would mean he was alive at 6:40.

But how would any of us know it's NCSU and not Mrs. NCSU?

 

[SleuthyGal]

Sounds like a party outside the courtroom?

Those are the jurors in this case! Remember I said they seem to have a (very) good time when they are on breaks? People in the courtroom can hear laughing and general merriment from the jury, whose jury room is right next to the courtroom. One of the jurors got married (according to what the judge said this am and there are a couple Bdays this week as well)

 

[luckyme]

Good Gawd is that a copy machine making that noise?

 

[CrimeAddict]

But how would any of us know it's NCSU and not Mrs. NCSU?

Were they wearing booties?

 

[Albert]

If I were emulating Detective Dreamy I would say, "I have no evidence to show that NCSU95 was alive at that time."

If I were answering honestly, I'd say, "No."

But the question was, "If NANCY called...." not, If a phone call was received from residence to cell. Big difference. And I still maintain it would have looked more "I'm cooperating and simply want to find the truth" than "He did it and I'll do nothing to help your case, Mr. Kurtz"

Is "If Nancy called..." a speculative question? Other than that I do see the point being made about being a cooperative witness and I do agree with what you are ncsu are saying.