State v Bradley Cooper 04-19-2011

[Maja]

41 seconds just doesn't seem long enough. He's thinking about murdering his wife and presumably he's carefully checking possible areas to put a body. This should not be a quick, random thought during a premeditated murder. All we have connecting Brad to the location where Nancy was found is a 41 sec zip code map search that FBI say zoomed directly to the correct location where she was found and then end of search. I don't find that realistic.

If you already know the location from driving to it and want to get an overview to see it from another angle, ya might just take 41 secs. I tried it. Went to google earth and put the search in then looked at my computer clock for 41 secs. Actually 41 secs is longer than I thought it would be.

 

[jrb0124]

I suppose the $$$ was not enough to buy someone on the witness stand to lie for Brad Cooper

What did the witness (JW) lie about today?

Are you suggesting that if there was (hypothetically) a computer forensics expert testifying for the defense that the timestamps were off that person would be lying?

What if 5 got up there and said it? would they all be lying - just because they are defense witnesses?

There have been cases (specifically in NC) where the state has has been wrong about evidence. I can provide you with some links if you are interested.

 

[ncsu95]

It's not a big thing but I did feel that the witness this afternoon mischaracterized the ease of getting into a WEP encrypted wireless network. It is definitely more than akin to having a screen door to keep someone out of your house. It still requires a tool to get past the encryption. It would be more like using a credit card to open a door with a flimsy lock. MOO

Not really. Just watch any of the youtube videos I posted showing this could be done in under 4 minutes with free tools.

 

[gritguy]

Who would want to frame Brad Cooper and why? And how would that person have known on 7-16-08 that there wouldn't already be incriminating physical evidence tying Cooper to his wife's murder, or better yet physical evidence tying someone else to her murder?

And then, how would that person have known how to hack into both the network and Cooper's work laptop, get past his security software and password protection, create a google search and then change the timestamp?

And why would anyone go to this much trouble to frame an innocent man? But they only put some obscure file change timestamp? They don't bother really tying him to the dump site? They don't do anything else? Just change a file's time?

And you all seriously believe this?

It's that or aliens hovering over his house with technology so advanced they could hack his PC do a closed palm search, update their facebook status and play Call of Duty all at the same time! :crazy:

 

[ncsu95]

I suppose I have to throw out my theory that there should have been additional computer searches of the area. If he had already selected the area, 41 seconds was long enough to confirm the area and surrounding route.

If the search is legit, that is exactly what he did. It's the only thing that makes sense.

 

[Maja]

The tool that Ward guy showed runs on Unix. How many casual computer users use Unix as their O.S. of choice? I personally don't know any. The ones I know who use Unix are the serious gearheads.

Did any of the computers in question at the Cooper home run unix?

 

[Cheyenne130]

Not really. Just watch any of the youtube videos I posted showing this could be done in under 4 minutes with free tools.

That's what I said. You still need some tool, like a person might need to pull out a credit card to jimmy open a lock. WEP is still a lock. It's just not a good one and can easily be bypassed if someone wants to take the time. Having no encryption would be the screen door. That would be an unsecure network that anyone can jump on if they are close enough to the rounter/access point. MOO

 

[jrb0124]

Agreed. Pretty much the best place to do it under the circumstances.

So if he didn't do it, then:

1. Van of strangers with sock fetish get her and later neighbors retroactively introduce a 41 second search of the dump site to frame brad? That is bold hoping LEO will discover that. And if they go that far why not hack in a search to an actual site about strangling people and cleaning evidence and then they have him good. Why do all that hacking for such a chancy set up?

2. Neighbor killed her, stole her socks, then bet everthing on hacking Brad's computer and putting in the retro dated search but nothing more clearly linking him to the crime on that PC?

I don't buy those!

There are quite a few alt theories which make sense - none of which you descibe above. Are you truly interested in hearing them?

 

[Just the Fax]

What did the witness (JW) lie about today?

Are you suggesting that if there was (hypothetically) a computer forensics expert testifying for the defense that the timestamps were off that person would be lying?

What if 5 got up there and said it? would they all be lying - just because they are defense witnesses?

There have been cases (specifically in NC) where the state has has been wrong about evidence. I can provide you with some links if you are interested.

Where are those witnesses?
Kurtz had 2 years to find a suitable one to say just that.
The fact that he is left with a unqualified, self-taught hack is his fault.

Perhaps Cooper can win a new trial on appeal based on incompetent counsel?

 

[SleuthinNC]

The tool that Ward guy showed runs on Unix. How many casual computer users use Unix as their O.S. of choice? I personally don't know any. The ones I know who use Unix are the serious gearheads.

So just a random listing off the top of my head of people who know BC and know Unix...

CD, DD, BA, SH and probably more

 

[Madeleine74]

Did any of the computers in question at the Cooper home run unix?

His work computer, the IBM ThinkPad, that all this attention is focused on as that's where the incriminating search was found, ran Windows. Don't know which version of Win it was--whatever was the Cisco standard at the time.

The Mac computer ran Mac OS. But that's not the computer that the defense is claiming someone hacked into.

 

[Just the Fax]

His work computer, the IBM ThinkPad, that all this attention is focused on as that's where the incriminating search was found, ran Windows. Don't know which version of Win it was--whatever was the Cisco standard at the time.

The Mac computer ran Mac OS. But that's not the computer that the defense is claiming someone hacked into.

I think it was Windows Vista

 

[Madeleine74]

So just a random listing off the top of my head of people who know BC and know Unix...

CD, DD, BA, SH and probably more

Where is the proof of their knowledge of Unix?

 

[Just the Fax]

ncsu95, please address posters by their correct nic.

 

[gritguy]

There are quite a few alt theories which make sense - none of which you descibe above. Are you truly interested in hearing them?

Actually yes. I read the alternate theory thread but in doing it I came away more convinced the state has the correct theory.

I appreciate the intellectual exercise of developing the possibilities. Once those are in mind, I filtered them through the known evidence and find only one, IMO, that has substantial evidence behind it. That is the states theory. To me it by far has the most evidence making it by far the most likely to be correct.

What mostly matters is the alternate theory if any the defense chooses to present. Clearly tampering or poor control of the computer is one. Eyewitness jogging witness is a likely other. Im not close minded to what kurtz brings now that he has the case, I just am convinced currently that BC killed his wife.

eta: for example i spent some time considering the possibility that a secret lover or a jealous spouse or jealous lover of BC killed NC. But while theoretically possible, I did not see them supported by evidence, the deleted phone notwithstanding.

 

[Just the Fax]

So just a random listing off the top of my head of people who know BC and know Unix...

CD, DD, BA, SH and probably more

And you know this how?

 

[calgary123]

Who would want to frame Brad Cooper and why? And how would that person have known on 7-16-08 that there wouldn't already be incriminating physical evidence tying Cooper to his wife's murder, or better yet physical evidence tying someone else to her murder?

And then, how would that person have known how to hack into both the network and Cooper's work laptop, get past his security software and password protection, create a google search and then change the timestamp?

And why would anyone go to this much trouble to frame an innocent man? But they only put some obscure file change timestamp? They don't bother really tying him to the dump site? They don't do anything else? Just change a file's time?

And you all seriously believe this?

These are excellent points. I think the defense's best chance is to argue a random killer did it (Chandra Levy anyone? I'll bet most of you thought Condit was involved at first).

But the defense is in a position they have to counter some damning evidence, both on the computer and otherwise. So now they have to make the jury believe at least one of two things:

1. The authorities, be it CPD or FBI, might have planted evidence to make a circumstantial case stronger
2. Someone who hates Brad might have planted evidence because they hate him and think he did it, and think by planting evidence they were helping the prosecution.

I suppose there is a third alternative, but it will never fly. That is, the actual killer pre-planned this and planted the info to frame Brad. This is so far from possibly true when you look at all of the circumstantial evidence, I don't really think the defense will even try. If they do, they will help the prosecution.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

The guy that applauded when BC was arrested, I can't think of his name. His last name started with a D. He had hit on NC and grossed her out.

It was CD, who showed up to court in a t-shirt and threw the "f-bomb" so many times I was beyond embarassed. I think the defense will be calling him back. This guy is not credible.

 

[jrb0124]

Perhaps Cooper can win a new trial on appeal based on incompetent counsel?

If he's convicted, he'll get an appeal - and probably a new trial without a problem. It will have nothing to do with ineffective counsel though. There are a few other ways to win an appeal/new trail and there are piling up.

But you didn't answer my question: if BC had sufficient $$$ to bring in a top shelf computer forensics expert, and that expert claimed the timestamps were off, would you dismiss the expert as lying simply because he/she was testifying for the defense and doing it only for the $$$? That's the way your comment comes across - go reread it.

 

[ncsu95]

Huh?
I have no idea about such a thing.
Unlike you and others, I wear a white hat and side with the victim and her family....all of which BTW, believe Brad Cooper murdered their loved one.

I don't side with anybody. I have watched this trial trying to look at the evidence with an open mind. At this point, I believe he is guilty. My opinion could change before it is over. It has changed at least once already.