State v Bradley Cooper 04/04/11

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I HOPE they're not done with her. I want them to ask her about when she and Nancy were painting!

fran

No the State is not finished the Judge used his discretion to end testimony for the day
 
I guess we'll find out when the defense gets the case. Since you have never actually met NC, I find it hard to believe with 100% certainty that those pictures don't exist.

As you said..no 100% discounting possibility of having picture without necklace..However..Defense posted a picture of Nancy sans necklace on their website in that green dress...then got shown as being doctored to delete that necklace by the person who actually took that picture...So I have to say, IF indeed they have one..why didnt they use that on their website??..

Once again...we have to wait and see :waitasec:
 
Mental cruelty, controlling behavior is no less cruel than physical abuse. Just because we know of no physical abuse doesn't make the other behavior "better" or "acceptable". Because Nancy would not leave without her girls she was trapped. This probably distorted her thinking in so many areas.
 
I guess we'll find out when the defense gets the case. Since you have never actually met NC, I find it hard to believe with 100% certainty that those pictures don't exist.

K&B played their hand on this already. They put the one picture they thought showed Nancy not wearing her necklace ON THEIR WEBSITE to try to make an 'aha!' moment to the public. Turns out the photo was blurry and from far away, and Nancy *was* wearing the necklace at that very party.
 
Scott Peterson never hit or harmed Laci...until he killed her and their unborn son.

A history of abuse is not the only requirement (or even necessarily a requirement) for spousal homicide.

Verbal and mental abuse often scars worse than physical abuse. Control and being trapped have to be a nightmare to a mother with two kids.
 
Scott Peterson never hit or harmed Laci...until he killed her and their unborn son.

A history of abuse is not the only requirement (or even necessarily a requirement) for spousal homicide.

Being a lousy husband isn't a requirement either.
 
After Krista, does anyone have an opinion as to who the state might call next????
 
It didn't rule it out. It didn't prove. It basically made it irrelevant.

I still believe that the prosecution made an impact with this witness and Mr. Trenkle did not make it clear enough in his cross that she wasn't out there in that ditch by 7 a.m. I will follow up with a speculation and say that I have to believe that they have their own entomolgist to call during the defense CIC. MOO
 
It didn't rule it out. It didn't prove. It basically made it irrelevant.


Guess we will have to agree to disagree on that point..as what the defense had to show was that this evidence was IMPOSSIBLE...and until they do that..it is relevant and possible> a juror could add this factoid to their list of circumstantial evidence that paint the picture..JMO of course:seeya:
 
True...that is why it won't be a question by the defense.

Oh wait....I have 'screwed up' thinking here after watching Krista....maybe the defense will ask....."Brad was a crontrol freak...but hey he didn't beat her did he".

Sorry, Krista's testimony got to me.
 
Thank your stars that you weren't taking chemistry at NCSU. Nearly killed me. Toughest C I have ever made. :eek: Oh, how I loved that dayam C.

Like you, I still have scars!

One of the best professors I've ever had was a chemistry professor at State. Crazy old dude (Henze I think was his name). He had a photographic memory and wore a bow-tie.
 
All the testimony from the start till now points to Brad. I have never heard of a random killing where the killer took the victims clothing!
The only thing the defense has is discrediting the Police Investigation, which they have not been able to do.

Brad put his foot in it, during the deposition!
 
True...that is why it won't be a question by the defense.

If Krista knew of or observed physical abuse, I guarantee you the state will make sure they get that in front of the jury. If they don't ask it, then you already know your answer.
 
As you said..no 100% discounting possibility of having picture without necklace..However..Defense posted a picture of Nancy sans necklace on their website in that green dress...then got shown as being doctored to delete that necklace by the person who actually took that picture...So I have to say, IF indeed they have one..why didnt they use that on their website??..

Once again...we have to wait and see :waitasec:

That picture was posted very early on. I imagine they have had access to hundreds of pictures since then.
 
K&B played their hand on this already. They put the one picture they thought showed Nancy not wearing her necklace ON THEIR WEBSITE to try to make an 'aha!' moment to the public. Turns out the photo was blurry and from far away, and Nancy *was* wearing the necklace at that very party.

They mentioned in opening statements that there are pictures (plural) of it. Again, I'd like to see what the defense presents on this.
 
The defense mentioned lots of things in their opening during the 3 long, boring hours of it. I don't believe their spin.
 
They mentioned in opening statements that there are pictures (plural) of it. Again, I'd like to see what the defense presents on this.

That will be interesting because they have to have a witness on the stand in order to be able to show the pictures and ask questions. Who will they be able to put up there to authenticate when a picture was taken? His parents maybe?
 
I am still really confused about the money problem. Krista is in tears up there over NC not having any money (and I believe Krista is telling the truth as she saw it). Yet Nancy's own friend said NC was mad because she couldn't get her and the girls a pedicure on the 12th because she hadn't received the money from BC yet. Those 2 things simply don't add up. If you are so concerned about money, why on earth would you use the money you were given on pedicures. I honestly don't understand this. If it were me, I would have been secretly hiding some of the money I was given ($50-$100/week) to use when I really needed it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
165
Guests online
1,743
Total visitors
1,908

Forum statistics

Threads
599,836
Messages
18,100,121
Members
230,935
Latest member
CuriousNelly61
Back
Top