State v Bradley Cooper 04/04/11

[NCEast]

Can someone tell me where her sister's testimony is? I only see part 1,2,3,4 of today, day 18 of testimony.. must be in here somewhere?

They ended today at 4:00pm--early for a juror's child's doctor appointment. Krista was the last witness of the day. Testimony may have started around 3:00 pm.

 

[LaLaw2000]

The Brad supporters feel that anyone who feels Brad is guilty is biased. I feel it is more than just wanting evidence. There is a mountain of circumstantial evidence pointing to Brad.

We are all entitled to our own opinions, thank goodness. I feel if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, it IS a duck.

I have to wonder if Brad and his lawyers realize how many supporters he has.

JMO

 

[Cheyenne130]

The Brad supporters feel that anyone who feels Brad is guilty is biased. I feel it is more than just wanting evidence. There is a mountain of circumstantial evidence pointing to Brad.

We are all entitled to our own opinions, thank goodness. I feel if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, it IS a duck.

I have to wonder if Brad and his lawyers realize how many supporters he has.

JMO

The other side of that coin is what evidence points to ANYBODY but Brad?

 

[FullDisclosure]

I didn't want to go back and find it in Det. Young's testimony but I did find this, gorealtors.

..."On Tuesday morning, before the defense team began its cross-examination of Young, he testified about jewelry recovered from the Cooper home during a search on Oct. 29, 2008 - two days after Brad Cooper was arrested. Investigators seized several pieces from a dresser in a bedroom where Brad Cooper's mother had been staying. Among the jewelry was a diamond pendant necklace and a diamond ring that belonged to Nancy Cooper."

http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/03/30/1091012/coopers-lawyers-grill-cary-detective.html#


Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/03...yers-grill-cary-detective.html##ixzz1IbCSDtmL

I'm wondering if the "bedroom where Brad Cooper's mother had been staying" could be the master bedroom, where Nancy kept her jewelry? I'm guessing if Brad was already set up in the spare bedroom, Nancy's mom took the master.

 

[NCEast]

The Brad supporters feel that anyone who feels Brad is guilty is biased. I feel it is more than just wanting evidence. There is a mountain of circumstantial evidence pointing to Brad.

We are all entitled to our own opinions, thank goodness. I feel if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, it IS a duck.

I have to wonder if Brad and his lawyers realize how many supporters he has.

JMO

About the Brad supporters.....I took a short nap about an hour ago. I was dreaming that one of the Brad supporters (who is--til otherwise evidence is submitted) was yelling at me about the diamond necklace. We were good friends, she/he just couldn't understand my thought processes about Brad Won't mention who it was, woke with a chuckle when I realized it was a dream.

 

[Lori59]

I had to go into lurker mode the last couple days.....I have to say I believe the jurors will find him guilty. The difference for them compared to this forum is that they took an oath, they are sitting there watching this in person, being in the courtroom is different than sitting on your computers, they will take their duty serious. What they won't due is try to make any other excuse for Brad as so many do on this forum. It's common sense to me.....they will not sit and give him 100 excuses to as why he was at HT making calls while his wife is laying dead with a absurd story that she went jogging after a night of drinking when she had plans with 2 friends for the day. He lied from the get go.... Reasonable doubt does not mean any doubt....and it isn't for each minute behavior but rather the totality of the case. When each behavior of his is put out there ......in total... no doubt. JMO

 

[Cheyenne130]

No, I don't, which is why on cross the real truth came out.

I'm really amazed that the attitude that came out of today's testimony is that the defense negated the testimony of the entomologist. He gave a time of 11 a.m. on Saturday which was either the laying of initial eggs or the laying of ANY eggs. (The defense did a poor job of defining that particular question.) But the first possible time is around midnight to 6 a.m. That was what the evidence showed. So possible (if that's even what he was answering since Trenkle confused that issue) negates the midnight to 6 a.m. probable?

 

[NCEast]

I'm wondering if the "bedroom where Brad Cooper's mother had been staying" could be the master bedroom, where Nancy kept her jewelry? I'm guessing if Brad was already set up in the spare bedroom, Nancy's mom took the master.

Without any testimony or my reading anything solid, I have been under the assumption that the mother was staying in the master bedroom. Totally unsubstantiated, but it's what I have envisioned throughout.

 

[DogWood]

I'm wondering if the "bedroom where Brad Cooper's mother had been staying" could be the master bedroom, where Nancy kept her jewelry? I'm guessing if Brad was already set up in the spare bedroom, Nancy's mom took the master.

IIRC, she was staying in the room Brad previously occupied when Nancy was alive....the one with the crib in it. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't want to go through Detective Young's testimony to find it tho..

 

[Cheyenne130]

IIRC, she was staying in the room Brad previously occupied....someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

That's what I heard in the testimony. The jewelry was found in the dresser of the room that was Brad's room but his mother was staying in that room.

 

[NCEast]

IIRC, she was staying in the room Brad previously occupied....someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't want to go through Detective Young's testimony to find it tho..

I didn't remember the detective's testimony. You are probably right. Finding the jewelry in that room is even more impressive with respect to Brad's 'hiding' it.

 

[cityslick]

The Brad supporters feel that anyone who feels Brad is guilty is biased. I feel it is more than just wanting evidence. There is a mountain of circumstantial evidence pointing to Brad.

We are all entitled to our own opinions, thank goodness. I feel if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, it IS a duck.

I have to wonder if Brad and his lawyers realize how many supporters he has.

JMO

I'm not a BC supporter, in fact I think it's probable that he did it, but the state hasn't proved their case to me yet. Some of you don't understand because you won't even consider the other side of some these arguments. Let's take today for example:

Officer gets up there and says he saw hay and thinks it was significant because he saw hay on Fielding drive, but yet never photographed/wrote down/let someone know about it until a considerable amount of time later. Brad guilty folks dismiss it as just not part of his job.

Geologist gets up there and says white mica is found in clumps on his running shoes and the crime scene, but then on cross states that the chemical composition did not match Fielding drive. How does one automatically jump to the conclusion that those shoes were at fielding drive when a) only 3 locations were compared and b) the chemical composition doesn't match?

Bug expert gets up there and says the body was put there between 1am - 6am. That's great I say, finally some hard evidence that proves she was dead before 7am. Then on cross he says there is no confidence in his estimates due to poor quality of samples and it's possible the eggs could be laid as late as 11am.

These are the issues people like me have with this case and why I'm going to continually question both sides of the debate. Ok I get it, he was a lousy husband and a lousy human being. He treated her like garbage, was very controlling. But that doesn't make him a murderer. And and this point, outside of his questionable actions to LE, there is nothing else there for me that proves he did this. If they can prove he faked those calls, let him go to jail. If the can prove conclusively that she was not alive after 7am, let him go to jail. Let me be clear, I want him to be guilty, not just because it'll be justice for that family, but because it'll mean this whole thing for the past 2 years hasn't been a waste (time, tax payer money, emotion, etc).

Just trying to give the perspective of someone who wants the truth to come out, whatever that may be.

 

[Palomine]

If SODDI I would expect one of 2 things:

1. The necklace to be gone (as in stolen) or
2. The necklace to still be around NC's neck or found on/near her body.

I would not expect it to be in the home, in Brad's possession, given the testimony by many people that she always had that necklace on. That is one huge coinky dink that I don't believe is a mere coincidence.

or Nancy's cell phone to be seen in the car and then Brad ended up with it even though he wasn't supposed to have keys to her car

 

[NCEast]

I had to go into lurker mode the last couple days.....I have to say I believe the jurors will find him guilty. The difference for them compared to this forum is that they took an oath, they are sitting there watching this in person, being in the courtroom is different than sitting on your computers, they will take their duty serious. What they won't due is try to make any other excuse for Brad as so many do on this forum. It's common sense to me.....they will not sit and give him 100 excuses to as why he was at HT making calls while his wife is laying dead with a absurd story that she went jogging after a night of drinking when she had plans with 2 friends for the day. He lied from the get go.... Reasonable doubt does not mean any doubt....and it isn't for each minute behavior but rather the totality of the case. When each behavior of his is put out there ......in total... no doubt. JMO

I agree with everything you wrote.
But, I have to say that if there is only one juror who is adamant that no physical evidence was presented--as are a few on here--that one hold out will throw the balance of the jury.

 

[LaLaw2000]

I hope the weather won't affect the buffering?
I read the WRAL weather for tomorrow and they are saying tornado conditions too for this area. Not good.

O/T:

That same weather blew through here this afternoon. New leaves, twigs, and small branches both front and back yards. Still expecting more rain tonight.

The trial video was stuck in buffering mode all day. I have ATT Fast Acess, but that finally went out also. All fixed now.

Hope you, gracielee, and everyone in your area stay safe in the morning!

 

[borndem]

_ wasn't doing good. Potty accidents, and having probs at preschool.

Way, way too much for those tiny little shoulders to bear. Even though it might cost her whatever memories she might have for her Mom, part of me hopes she has forgotten all of it. Oh, so very, very sad for this sweet little child.

 

[less0305]

I think there was also a diamond ring that belonged to Nancy in the drawer.

If I'm not mistaken, there was a strand of pearls also.

 

[sunshine05]

I'm really amazed that the attitude that came out of today's testimony is that the defense negated the testimony of the entomologist. He gave a time of 11 a.m. on Saturday which was either the laying of initial eggs or the laying of ANY eggs. (The defense did a poor job of defining that particular question.) But the first possible time is around midnight to 6 a.m. That was what the evidence showed. So possible (if that's even what he was answering since Trenkle confused that issue) negates the midnight to 6 a.m. probable?

Yes, because it still doesn't prove the TOD. It still leaves open that he could have done it....or someone else could have done it. You know, if they had proof she was in his car, this would be a big piece of evidence to help support that he did do it but this alone still leaves it in question.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Yes, because it still doesn't prove the TOD. It still leaves open that he could have done it....or someone else could have done it. You know, if they had proof she was in his car, this would be a big piece of evidence to help support that he did do it but this alone still leaves it in question.

What evidence is there that someone else did this? (Serious question.)

 

[FullDisclosure]

Hummm..I think it might be helpful to review just what is Circumstantial Evidence versus direct evidence....and it appears this particular case is based mainly on circumstancial evidence NOT direct..NO ONE saw Brad move her body, no one saw Brad, strangle her, no one has a video of him doing either of these things...However there is a long list of circumstantial evidence directly pointing at Brad..and no one else..

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-circumstantial-evidence.htm

Circumstantial evidence is evidence in a case which can be used to draw inferences about a series of events. It is also known as indirect evidence; the opposite is direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence is an important part of any criminal trial, and both sides in a trial will generally try to find circumstantial evidence to support themselves. Contrary to popular belief, it is possible to obtain a conviction with the use of circumstantial evidence, if it is backed up by corroborating evidence and other factual information.


I am sure there are some who NEED direct evidence in any trial..however it is NOT neessary in order to obtain a conviction....

My list of a few of the circumstances

11) Well documented testimony how Brad treated Nancy...

~snipped for space~

I respectfully disagree regarding #11, as I believe that the testimony about how Brad treated Nancy has not been well documented. We have heard the same stories that Nancy told her friends (and anyone else who would listen) over and over.

I have also been looking back at the affidavits of her friends and off the top of my head I have two points:

1. In Jennifer Fetterolf's affidavit she states that "When she (Nancy) found something she wanted from a store, such as a bathing suit or clothes, she would have to tell Brad where she found it and the size. Brad would drive to the store and purchase it for her. (This was above and beyond the $300 cash budget. I don't see that as something an abusive husband would do. I see that as someone who is trying to get a handle on spending while still trying to please his wife would do.)

2. In Theresa Hackeling's affidavit she states that "One time Nancy said that Brad called her a 'dumb ****** in front of the real estate agent while looking at properties. I remember being shocked at such a comment. (If this really happened, why didn't it come up in the real estate agent's testimony. It makes me wonder...)

I'm not saying that Brad was a saint. But I don't think he was the abusive monster he's being made out to be. Krista even called him "sheepish" in her testimony today (after he confessed to the affair) and arrogant pricks are not commonly sheepish.

I'm not a "Brad supporter." I really want to get at the truth. I hope that they have the right guy, but if they don't I hope the wrong guy isn't convicted based on exaggerations, stories, and theories that haven't been proved. The state, IMO, needs to have SOME proof.