State v Bradley Cooper 04-18-2011

[Cheyenne130]

I considered this as well, but I think it would have been way too risky. The child would tell, and I bet she's been asked.

Killing your wife is WAY riskier. He had many, many hours to replace memories. MOO

 

[less0305]

Amazing how it is perfectly fine that the phone expert didn't know how to access the call history of his phone, but the crime experts are scorched for not knowing much about smart phones. So funny, if it weren't ridiculous.

 

[Madeleine74]

If my spouse went missing and turned up dead and it was under suspicious circumstances, I would assume I would be at least a person of interest until I proved I had nothing to do with the death. I would not be naive enough to think that LE would never look at me as a possibility.

 

[jumpstreet]

this is my prediction for tomorrow..if defense calls witness
3 very very very long hours of slow talking, and repetitive question by defense
followed by 15 minute rapid fire direct questions by the pros

then more slow ..slow talking then rapid fire direct

I hope I can stomach the defense side of the trial

I remember reading record trial length for NC is 8 months give or take... anyone else think there's a chance here to break the record?

 

[johnfear]

Amazing how it is perfectly fine that the phone expert didn't know how to access the call history of his phone, but the crime experts are scorched for not knowing much about smart phones. So funny, if it weren't ridiculous.

Well, they did erase the smart phone, and he (save for a google map) potentially get away with a pretty interesting criminal setup. (allegedly)

 

[ncsu95]

And Air Canada - I'm surprised he didn't flee in those first few days.

Could he have been looking up flight information for his parents maybe?

 

[Cheyenne130]

Back to the 6:40 call: the state can't prove how it was done and the defense can't prove that it was Nancy. Someone else said this days ago and I agree. The 6:40 call is a wash and doesn't benefit either side. In terms of evidence, it's like it never happened. MOO

 

[SleuthinNC]

Amazing how it is perfectly fine that the phone expert didn't know how to access the call history of his phone, but the crime experts are scorched for not knowing much about smart phones. So funny, if it weren't ridiculous.

Just like saying BC lied about his call history so he is guilty of killing his wife but Det. Young lied on the stand in this trial and that is perfectly fine because he's just a great cop doing his job. Again, ridiculous.

 

[ncsu95]

Brad lawyered up quickly. Normally a person doesn't have a defense team until they are arrested. It was his right to refuse to talk with them, and he exercised his right after the first couple of days, even before he became a person of interest. Although I think he was a person of interest by nightfall on the 12th.

He lawyered up after the body was found. The search warrants and "crime scene" search began almost immediately. Why wouldn't he have gotten a lawyer at that point?

 

[Tipstaff]

IIRC, BC was never officially named a suspect or POI.

IIRC the issue with declaring someone officially as a suspect, or POI was that it would (or might) obligate the prosecution to share more info with the defense/defendant prior to any subsequent arrest. [ I'm a little fuzzy on it, and it's based on memory of what others on WS who seemed knowledgeable enough at the time were posting...]

Clearly LE was 'interested' in him from at least the time of discovery. Declaring him officially as such though would have supposedly 'tripped' something 'official' that LE didn't see the need to trip. [ again, just going off memory from some of the 2008 discussions... ]

"They're taking his kids, but LE isn't even officially stating they're interested in him..."

This is all true but BC didn't get a family law attorney to protect his children he got a Criminal Attorney. It is all about BC.

 

[dramamama]

Are you saying you didn't hear how hard she pushed that Brad was responsible?

For all we know, she just thought they had a terrible fight, and she wasn't answering the phone, or had been hurt, because they did have a volatile relationship. She didn't say murder. She said she was worried because things were very volatile.

 

[Tipstaff]

Could he have been looking up flight information for his parents maybe?

Yep, the ones he didn't even call personally.

 

[Albert]

If Brad isn't guilty, then the 6:05 call was to find the cell like defense said in opening arguments. The 6:34 call would have been Nancy calling Brad. The cell phone records didn't see that call, so it would have meant he was in a dead area (no pun intended). Then she retried at 6:37.

If Brad is guilty, it would have something do do with him testing or initiating the spoofed call.

The only problem with the 6:05am being used to find his cell phone is that this call went directly to voice mail which would not have generated a ring tone on his cell phone. We know it went to voicemail because this call does not appear on the billing record. So, was his cell phone powered off or was the cell phone set to call forward all to vm?

 

[johnfear]

We have to come up with a google app faux ad for all of this.

"Don't forget to Coopercise your closed hand cursor files". This makes sure incriminating circumstantial evidence can never be used against you. With Google Coopercise, we'll take your hard drive MFT to ten times DBAN and make it so even the FBI can't recreate your last searches.

But, if you really want to be thorough, next time throw your Cisco-issued laptop into Lake Wheeler and ask the investigating detective if he's seen your laptop. Cisco will issue you a new one and you can look like you're furthering communication with local law enforcement by reporting said laptop stolen.

 

[Danielle59]

Perhaps you are always available to answer your phone. But there are many times when i hear my phone ring, and am busy with the kids or driving, and miss calls. If they don't leave a message, my phone automatically prompts me to see the "missed call" which takes me straight to my call history. As well, since BC had no personal contacts on his phone, he must have used his call history feature from time to time to look up numbers to return calls. To say he didn't know how to look it up is ridicuous. Even my moher, who doesn't know how to text message, knows how to look up a call history.

IMO, this was yet another attempt to make a comment to pre-empt any suspicion he felt was coming. NC usually left to run @ 6am. He even stated initially that she left @ 6am. Perhaps he was behind because one of the kids woke up, or whatever, but at some point, he realized the alibi call would not be possible if she was already out running, so he changed the time to @7. (after checking call history) So, he makes this innocent statement to not only cover this, but also so people like us would be having conversations on this board about whether or not he could spoof a call because he couldn't find his call history.

No, I can't always get to my cell because sometimes I forget where I leave it, or I don't get to it fast enough, but it does tell me I missed a call and I push a button and it takes me to the last call. Same with VM, and I don't even know the VM number, just glad it takes me there when I push the button.

I was also just looking at my cell, and pushing the green button does not take me to the call history, for example, on Saturday I called Progress Energy four times, but when I push the green button it only shows the name once and when I press for details it only shows my last call. While searching around I found the call history and each call is listed out, all four calls to PE are shown with their time. My call history also seems to go back to May 2010 but when I push the green button it only shows the last 30 calls.

 

[SleuthSayer]

Amazing how it is perfectly fine that the phone expert didn't know how to access the call history of his phone, but the crime experts are scorched for not knowing much about smart phones. So funny, if it weren't ridiculous.

Well, I'm not predisposed to believe that the detective should or should not know about smart phones. However, it doesn't seem that you have to be a smart phone guru to know that if your goal is to get information from the phone and you get a warning saying that you are about to erase everything on the device you should stop and get some help before doing anything else.

 

[Cheyenne130]

We have to come up with a google app faux ad for all of this.

"Don't forget to Coopercise your closed hand cursor files". This makes sure incriminating circumstantial evidence can never be used against you. With Google Coopercise, we'll take your hard drive MFT to ten times DBAN and make it so even the FBI can't recreate your last searches.

But, if you really want to be thorough, next time throw your Cisco-issued laptop into Lake Wheeler and ask the investigating detective if he's seen your laptop. Cisco will issue you a new one and you can look like you're furthering communication with local law enforcement by reporting said laptop stolen.

I think I would like to have your wife's contact information. A serious warning might be in order. (Since you are learning too many tricks here!) hwow:

 

[Madeleine74]

Could he have been looking up flight information for his parents maybe?

You mean the parents he admitted in his depo he didn't call on the 12th or the 13th or the 14th? Yes, his parents. He didn't tell them what was going on for some period of time.

 

[johnfear]

I think I would like to have your wife's contact information. A serious warning might be in order. (Since you are learning too many tricks here!) hwow:

We are LONG divorced. She couldn't stand my sense of humor and decided that therapy was out.

I have no doubt I would be the only place the Cary PD looked though, even if I were under lock and key in their own interview room.

Cases like this are what keep me from wanting to date. The world is full of crazies.

 

[less0305]

Could he have been looking up flight information for his parents maybe?

Did they actually come?