State v Bradley Cooper 03-30-2011

[less0305]

Ok - fair enough. Look under every rock, etc.

However, what is the likelihood this would have been a secret? Or that she would have been able to keep a secret? Do you honestly believe she would not have told ANYONE that she had a boyfriend? If she did - how would hiding that information help find her when she was "missing"? Or - after she was gone - help find her killer?

She would have told SOMEONE the details of this alleged affair - it was her nature. And - she would have likely needed some help to pull it off - either with covering for her or with the ability to watch the kids.

When someone is killed - affairs surface QUICKLY. It's human nature as friends / relatives try desperately to figure out why.

If there was evidence - Kurtz and BC would be parading it around. And evidence this damning would have been alluded to in the opening.

Oh - and one last thing - based on the neighborhood and what's been said about everyone being in everyone's business - do you think this could have been kept under wraps?

There's just too much that does not make sense. And since my entire legal career has consisted of watching Judge Judy - she said "if it doesn't make sense, it's not true".

Not to mention that not EVEN BC tried to pawn it off to the cops as she was having an affair or relationship or secret phone calls or secret emails with anyone else!!! He went with the jogging/stranger rape/killer and he stuck with it knowing good and well a "boyfriend" or one of their neighbors/friends would have been sussed (sp?) out and PROVEN not to be the case. He had to go with a stranger, it was his best bet.

 

[Maja]

2006 Five (5) years ago.

Two years old at the time NC was murdered. Still, runners typically don't run in shoes that old.

 

[FullDisclosure]

When was the call to/from Nancy's cell between her and JA while Nancy was at the party? (This is a question for anybody because I can't remember.)

EEP! I wrote that wrong and went back and edited it, but not in time! The call was from Brad's cell!! It was at 11:32 pm on July 11. I went back and listened several times to the testimony that day to be sure, because I had originally thought they said it was from Nancy's--sorry for any confusion I caused here!! :loser:

 

[lib's mom]

I was wrong. I had forgotten Brad checked Nancy's email THREE times, not just once on July 11, 2008.

It's in the December 2, 2008 search warrant, which is posted in the Legal Docs. thread.

 

[Cheyenne130]

EEP! I wrote that wrong and went back and edited it, but not in time! The call was from Brad's cell!! It was at 11:32 pm on July 11. I went back and listened several times to the testimony that day to be sure, because I had originally thought they said it was from Nancy's--sorry for any confusion I caused here!! :loser:

(You're not a loser!) Thanks. I thought I had missed something. A call from Brad's cell phone at 11:32 definitely doesn't match up with what he has stated to anyone about his timeline for Friday, July 11th.

 

[NCEast]

Yes indeed..and we have not heard this evidence yet!! (Cant wait!!)..and I am sure Brad thought he had covered his tracks..but got sideswiped when JA called the police..and he got interrupted from his busy day ( and night previous)..JMO

I admit it..Brad looks so guilty to me...so I am seeing things from that perspective..so please dont shoot me:truce:

I won't shoot you as I think he looks guilty, has behaved guilty....and is guilty. My perspective may be slanted because I just don't like the person he is nor the husband he was. I know this sounds harsh, but I'm being honest.
I fully think he was capable of killing her in a moment of rage. If he is found not guilty, life for all of us will go on. And if so, then I will always feel in my heart of hearts that he got away with murder.

 

[lib's mom]

When was the call to/from Nancy's cell between her and JA while Nancy was at the party? (This is a question for anybody because I can't remember.)

10:30ish, I think.

 

[LyndyLoo]

(You're not a loser!) Thanks. I thought I had missed something. A call from Brad's cell phone at 11:32 definitely doesn't match up with what he has stated to anyone about his timeline for Friday, July 11th.

So given this timeline..that means that Brad sleeps with his phone..as he stated he went to bed with kids at 9PM and didnt get up again until 4AM..Hummmm..busy bee..even when he is in bed..Once a techy always a techy I guess..Just has to be connected :floorlaugh:

 

[gbay]

When was the call to/from Nancy's cell between her and JA while Nancy was at the party? (This is a question for anybody because I can't remember.)

At 9:50 pm there was a call from Nancy to Jessica Adam

 

[Cheyenne130]

I was wrong. I had forgotten Brad checked Nancy's email THREE times, not just once on July 11, 2008.

It's in the December 2, 2008 search warrant, which is posted in the Legal Docs. thread.

December 4, but you are correct. He intercepted three emails on that day alone, the last one at 10:13 p.m. I'm guessing we now know why google was involved in the investigation. It might still involve google searches but we know for sure it's google email.

 

[jmflu]

For those who were not up late late last night and came straight to today's feed today, Brad's last girlfriend before Nancy checked in and wrote a very interesting post about Brad. She hadn't posted in a couple years... You ought to go back and read it!

 

[LyndyLoo]

December 4, but you are correct. He intercepted three emails on that day alone, the last one at 10:13 p.m. I'm guessing we now know why google was involved in the investigation. It might still involve google searches but we know for sure it's google email.

Yikes..some of this stuff is all new to me..course being pdf disabled cant read all the docs..but TY for mentioning these items..but of course it isnt evidence until testified to by Expert in court...I am sure alot of these loose ends will be clearified and verified when he/she testifies..:great:

Its NOT A WONDER defense is working so hard to discredit witnesses and trying to keep evidence out...Course it is their job

 

[sunshine05]

Okay -- but it isn't a lie, yet. Haven't heard any email evidence. I still doubt, with all the time he had until the computers were seized, that he didn't cover his tracks.

I think BC will be shown to have lied over the times and checking of the emails because Kurtz mentioned in his opening that it will come out in this trial that he did lie about some things in the deposition. My feeling is it will be related to the emails.....but we'll see.

 

[less0305]

These are actually two unrelated issues. If you are suggesting that because he has a Blackberry, he has a SIM card so he should know what one is, that's not necessarily true.

Whether or not you have a SIM card is not a property of the device manufacturer (Blackberry, Apple, Motorola, Nokia, etc). It is a property of the wireless carrier, specifically of the underlying cellular technology used by that carrier.

AT&T's cellular technology is called GSM and GSM phones have SIM cards. Verizon's cellular technology is called CDMA and CDMA phones do not have SIM cards (at least not in the U.S.).

So, if he got his BB from AT&T it does have a SIM card. If he got his BB from Verizon, it does not have a SIM card.

As far as what a SIM card is, it provides a GSM phone with all the information it needs to make and receive calls and/or send and receive data. E.g. the identification number for the phone so that the cell network knows who/where you phone is, the phone number, etc. A GSM phone will not work without a SIM card. It typically does not have personal information on it (address book, e-mails, photos, etc). It's just the technical stuff that the phone needs to work on the cellular network. The SIM card is a tiny little rectangular card with a little notch on one corner. It is often underneath the battery in a phone.

If you and your spouse both have GSM phones and for whatever reason you want to swap phones but don't want to have to tell all your friends that your phone number changed, you and the spouse can swap phones and as long as you put the SIM card from your phone in the spouse's phone and vice-versa, you can make and receive calls with the same number as before. But, if you have a lot of "stuff" on the phone (e-mails, photos, address book, etc) it is going to stay with your original phone unless it is on removable storage.

Now, if you are thinking that your phone has a little tiny card that you put in a slot on the side, that is not a SIM card. That is a Micro SD card. That is used to store personal stuff on (e-mails, photos, etc). It is unrelated to the operation of the phone and the phone will work fine without it, you may just not have any space to store anything.

So, you can debate whether the detective should have known what a SIM card is because he is a detective, but the fact that he has a BB does not tell you anything about his SIM card knowledge.

Bless you SS!!! Thank you for explaining this in a way I never could have!! I just went through this about six weeks ago. I can not get AT&T at my house. I can only get Verizon. I bought a new phone and it wouldn't work. Lo and behold, it was GSM. I called Straight Talk and they told me to return the phone and purchase a CDMA phone because it uses Verizon and has no sim card. I don't think people who have sim cards realize that there is a huge population out there who use phones that do not have sim cards and really don't know much about them. My annoying co-worker has AT&T, therefore, has a sim card in his Smart phone and the dork doesn't have one single clue what a sim card is. (I call him a dork and annoying - not because he doesn't know about a sim card - I have TONS of other reasons to call him names - I know, I should be ashamed, but I'm not.)

 

[ncsu95]

Do you think she had a secret boyfriend?

I think she was working towards it...yes. We know she reconnected with men from her past.

 

[water_dancing]

At 9:50 pm there was a call from Nancy to Jessica Adam

Where did you find this?

During JA's testimony, she stated that she(JA) called NC's cell that evening to invite NC over to JA's house to have wine with her and a friend. Was there a 2nd call between them that evening?

 

[Cheyenne130]

I think she was working towards it...yes. We know she reconnected with men from her past.

How do we know that?

 

[ncsu95]

The painting plans were confirmed on Fri afternoon. Nancy was already thinking she was going to paint because that's what she told CC on Fri morning. Do you think CC was lying?

I do not know if she was telling the truth, lying, or remembered differently after talking with Nancy's friends.

 

[ncsu95]

If I understand correctly, Brad Cooper has had a PI through Kurtz office? I would imagine by now, had Nancy Cooper been promiscuious, we'd have heard about it by now, wouldn't we? If there was a 'secret lover' wouldn't one expect to have it slip out by now? JMO

I thought it had (JP)

 

[sunshine05]

I was just listening to some of today's testimony because it isn't always easy to catch everything. It is my impression, based on the testimony that the proof of an automated phone call have pretty much been shot down. Do you all agree?

He asked Det. Young about the call forwarding abilities of their landline phone and Young confirmed that he spoke to TWC and they did not have call forwarding activated.

Secondly, he discussed the possibilities with Cisco experts and was told it was not possible with that phone and that the worldwide call logs were checked.

Third, he flat out asked Det. Young if he ever found any proof that the call was generated through automation and he said "no".

So where does this stand? Are we done with the theory that the call was generated automatically?

By the way, the testimony begins at around 7:00 into this recording.

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9358297/#/vid9358297