State v Bradley Cooper 04/11/11

[Amster]

hmmmm....Brad switched the SIM card?? But, he works at Cisco so that's a normal thing to do?? :waitasec:

 

[ncsu95]

So more non-evidence. The encryption software was Ciscos.

 

[luckyme]

This was collected into evidence October 2008, found on table or in Brad's mothers purse...It appears call log had been erased..or the sim card had been replaced...Thats what I have gotten out of this testimony so far...

Cant they trace it if he bought another sim card? Ive had to order new ones before.

 

[snowshuze]

Mr Kurtz trying to establish everyone at Cisco used this encryption for their cells. But no one else is up on murder charges, with a cleared history up to the date of the murder.

 

[Palomine]

wow kurtz sounds nervous this morning

 

[ncsu95]

I have not had time to read all posts made today, I stopped after seeing this one and have a general comment about this thought. BC paid for the necklace unlike the networking gear which he secured from Cisco. Therefore, despite the value of the networking gear it did not come out of BC's pocket.

I see your point with regards to the networking equipment. However, I still don't think he would be stupid enough to keep the necklace (if he killed her and took it) given the publicity surrounding the necklace at that time. It wasn't recovered by law enforcement until October. No way would he have kept that due to its cost.

 

[snowshuze]

<EDIT> I anticipate kittens.

 

[Just the Fax]

Originally Posted by ncsu95
9. I do not believe he would keep a necklace because it was worth $2800 (because Brad's all about the money), yet would dispose of networking equipment worth much more than that. Brad knew the necklace was a big deal long before he handed it over to police in October. If he murdered her and took it, there is no chance he keeps that once it becomes known that it is a topic of concern for all her friends.
==============================================

He did not hand over the necklace in October. He only admitted during the deposition he had it (probably thought the cops may have seen it in July and did not know significance at the time)...CPD later found it in a drawer after his arrest on 10-29-08.

 

[gracielee]

Housecleaning being done here today, so I have to listen with headphones to hear above the vacuum. Anyone with Kurtz tone of voice should NOT go into the law as a profession. MOO Way worse when heard right into ones ears.

 

[cityslick]

Mr Kurtz trying to establish everyone at Cisco used this encryption for their cells. But no one else is up on murder charges, with a cleared history up to the date of the murder.

The point is the encryption software isn't unique to Cisco employees, thus you can't automatically assume he put that software on his phone for nefarious reasons.

 

[MrsWendy]

So more non-evidence. The encryption software was Ciscos.

I agree. The only information from this witness is that he downloaded data from the phone and gave it back to investigators. He did not analyze any of the data and the "odd" things that he saw are routine for a phone that is connected to Cisco.

 

[FullDisclosure]

<EDIT> I anticipate kittens.

Zellinger Kittens?

 

[luckyme]

Housecleaning being done here today, so I have to listen with headphones to hear above the vacuum. Anyone with Kurtz tone of voice should NOT go into the law as a profession. MOO Way worse when heard right into ones ears.

Yes he seems to be a good lawyer, but the voice is not pleasant. Reminds me of Rachael Ray. I cant watch her show because of her voice.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Cant they trace it if he bought another sim card? Ive had to order new ones before.

I believe the simcard is service provider card...someone?..so maybe they may have some record??? But Cisco provided the code to unlock their system on that phone, so why no contacts??

 

[snowshuze]

I see your point with regards to the networking equipment. However, I still don't think he would be stupid enough to keep the necklace (if he killed her and took it) given the publicity surrounding the necklace at that time. It wasn't recovered by law enforcement until October. No way would he have kept that due to its cost.

Serious question. Would you be able to just throw away a 2800 dollar necklace?

 

[johnfear]

Serious question. Would you be able to just throw away a 2800 dollar necklace?

If it implicated me in a murder, I would melt it down or throw it into the ocean. But you would NEVER find it on my person.

2800 dollars versus life in prison...priceless

And Mr. Cupper is giving a computer lesson...she wants to get "inside the saucer" too.

 

[gracielee]

wow kurtz sounds nervous this morning

As an old-timer of SNL, I think Kurtz sounds like he belongs in the Whiner family. :floorlaugh:

 

[ncsu95]

Mr Kurtz trying to establish everyone at Cisco used this encryption for their cells. But no one else is up on murder charges, with a cleared history up to the date of the murder.

But they have the cell records. They know the numbers he called. If he deleted his contact info, it could have been to hide another affair.

 

[fran]

This agent said he did NOT erase history.

When phone into service? He doesn't know............

State ends.............................

Def, Kurtz............................

Did you get info about this case, did you know what BC did for a living? NO
Did you know he worked at Cisco? Later when trying to find the pin codes.
The mobile guardian was run by Cisco and not BC? yes
Everyone at Cisco uses this type of protection? I don't know.....
He suggested that Cisco could probably help unlock it. Cisco gave him the code.
How many characters? He doesn't know, didn't find out what original # was.

Once you found out that tele related to Cisco, did you do any further investigation on what Cisco used for their systems? no....................more questions about info he doesn't know.....................

Good mobile defense? Not familiar with it....................
note......This is all technical, many here most likely understand it better than I.

Kurtz gave witness some note, pros objected, witness read it...............pros talks, jury removed for a minute.........

Pros said witness already testified he doesn't know about this and email is between two people and witness doesn't know about this.................it's hear-say as he has no knowledge of this issue....

def says this will impact his opinion as an expert...............the email kurtz was discussing was forwarded to witness and now it's personal knowledge on Mr. Welmore...................pros reads over additional email.................ok, pros withdraws 'personal knowlede' part but he has no knowledg of it.........object to witness being asked to read to jury..........

Judge is going to allow it because witness received a 'copy' of original email in February..........

IMHO, it appears Kurtz is trying to undermine this witness as an EXPERT, because he wasn't familiar with this 'inhouse' info and equipment and procedure of Cisco.....

Def is trying to explore possibility of after the witness read the email, that impacted his OPINION of what he's testified to? Oh...............HOW SOMETHING WAS DELETED!.......

Judge, is it your opinion this was an automatic clean up or an action of the def?.................def can ask questions about the email....

Pros says some of this is from info not in evidence. Judge is going to allow it. Jury back in.

 

[Palomine]

Brad feels comfortable in this element of testimony