State v Bradley Cooper 04-19-2011

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Kurtz wanted to give this guy knowledge of the FBI tools? Mr. boot-leg?
 
I be the judge won't rule until after lunch.

Poo poo on what I think.
 
Can he still be allowed to testify but not as an expert or will he be out as a witness if the judge disallows him being tendered as an expert witness?

Not sure Cheyenne..But doubt he will be given the hat of expert...and his cross exam on his experience could very well sink his credibility in the jury's eyes. IMO
 
Will allow the witness but NOT to what Kurtz wanted.
 
Witness is in as networking expert. Not forensic examiner.

Kelly
 
Gessner's ruling is what I expected. Now I predict Boz objecting to many questions, saying that they are outside Ward's field of expertise.
 
Gessner's ruling is what I expected. Now I predict Boz objecting to many questions, saying that they are outside Ward's field of expertise.

This pretty much blows the defense out of the water. They have no one to back up the claim of tampering, which is the only way out of the smoking gun testimony.
 
Not sure Cheyenne..But doubt he will be given the hat of expert...and his cross exam on his experience could very well sink his credibility in the jury's eyes. IMO

Thank you. I think the judge just answered for me. He can testify as to the security risks of the network but not forensic examination or the forensic analysis of the FBI data.
 
The Judge is splitting the baby here..expert only on security and penetration but NOT as forensic expert so therefore cannot interpret FBI's findings...Rhut Rho...Kurtz will NOT BE HAPPY:truce:

ETA~~ When are they due back..too busy typing and didnt hear that?
 
Kurtz is going to cry in his lunch. LOL! He is pizzed off. He might as well just say I don't want the witness now Your Honor.
 
Did you lose your feed? I couldn't hear what Kurtz was saying there at the end 'your honor, we are going to need........'
 
This pretty much blows the defense out of the water. They have no one to back up the claim of tampering, which is the only way out of the smoking gun testimony.

Not sure that I would go so far as to say they don't have something up their sleeves, but the Defense was dealt a serious blow today.

I will be very interested in what comes up next.

Kelly
 
the judge is splitting the baby here..expert only on security and penetration but not as forensic expert so therefore cannot interpret fbi's findings...rhut rho...kurtz will not be happy:truce:

Eta~~ when are they due back..too busy typing and didnt hear that?

12:45
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
186
Guests online
3,487
Total visitors
3,673

Forum statistics

Threads
604,595
Messages
18,174,157
Members
232,716
Latest member
llamb79
Back
Top