State v Bradley Cooper 04-19-2011

[hotpinkstef]

here we go

 

[kljohnson0458]

They're baaaaaaaaaaaack. I think it is our non-expert.

 

[cody100]

Defense witness this morning had several things going for him and several things not going for him:
First, he probably knows more about tampering and penetration into computers than any of the prosecution's witness. And he probably could have interpreted the information just fine. However, he was blessed and accepted by a number of courtroom testimony or by an organization such as the FBI, SBI, etc. Secondly, he did himself no favors by not knowing exactly what he had done and what programs he used (forgetful mind syndrome). Perhaps he just was completely shaken by the courtroom situation. It can be very tough for the first time. All of the FBI and SBI agents have had mock trials and many hours spent on preparing for such events.

I can not speak to the particular law here, but the recent case law seemed to be in the prosecution's favor imo. I am not defending Judge G today or any other day. He will probably be having to defend much if not all of his actions sometime imo.

 

[cityslick]

Live or replay?

 

[gracielee]

I never met an attorney that could get their feelings hurt, just saying

I've been gone for an hour and 15 minutes. What did I miss? Anybody with a quick recap? It was dark and a special agent was testifying when I left.

You missed nothing. Nothing has happened except Kurtz asked for a mistrial again, said the judge is biased.

 

[Just the Fax]

Any attorney here who wants to be recognized as such can become verified by contacting Tricia.

Bumped for Moderator.

 

[BrownRice]

I wonder if Kurtz is going to try to get something in with Ward that he shouldn't, just so the jury can hear it.

 

[FullDisclosure]

Live or replay?

It ain't memorex!

 

[ncsu95]

the judge said this morning that he was going to give the jury thursday afternoon off and work on Friday

That is next week, the 28th.

 

[otto]

I'm with you on that.
I hate to keep sounding confused but I am....but IIRC the testing done on this case was by the FBI, not the SBI?

Yep ... FBI tested the computer.

Since the 41 second search supposedly went straight to the zoomed area, it seems obvious that the spot was chosen at some earlier time. 41 seconds isn't exactly long enough to debate which body dump location is best.

There should be additional testimony to support this search ... some other electronic trace showing that the area map was researched, and then the 41 second decision or search to verify the location. If FBI could find information of an earlier search, we would know about it ... so the question is ... were they asked to look for maps on the machine that would correspond to that specific area and after finding the one zip code search, did they then assume that work was done? That is, did they only have to argue that it was zoomed, without really demonstrating how that was determined, and that would be good enough to verify the prosecution's theory? Were the FBI experts gathering all the information, or only information supporting the prosecutor's theory.

With the medical examiner, we had complete testimony without an agenda. Not everything he said favored the prosecution theory ... and his testimony is viewed as weak. It's considered weak because it was inclusive of all findings, not just finding that supported the "Brad did it" theory.

I would like to hear that type of unbiased testimony from all experts ... and especially from investigators.

 

[cody100]

I haven't followed the SBI case closely, but I think it had to do with the forensic examination of evidence (like DNA). Evidence was withheld because it favored the accused or contradicted investigator's theories. If investigators had a long standing relationship with related experts such that the experts manipulated information to support police theories, then investigators may still be operating with the assumption that because they have a theory and belief, it will be believed and supported by the experts they choose. I'm probably not explaining this clearly, but given the history of investigators and the SBI, it is not entirely unbelievable that police are still manipulating information to agree with their preferred outcome.

Otto, the SBI situation involved cases from the 1990 to 2002 or 2003 and was specific to blood evidence. The wording of the reports was not inaccurate but did not contain the results of all of the tests run on the blood. The ASCLAD or accredidation board actually said these reports were alright because of the nature of the tests. WIthout getting technical, this does not affect the DNA analysis that was ever done since the old testing is obsolete. And, now the SBI has everything on computer and is available to the DA's office. So, they can see every test and everything done on the sample.

Again, this did not affect any other SBI analysis and is only applicable to the reports written during the 1990s and eary 2000's. However, there has been a growing skepticism of law enforcement in general and that is reflected in to the distrust of the CPD by many.

 

[hotpinkstef]

That is next week, the 28th.

thanks i was only 1/2 watching

 

[cityslick]

That is next week, the 28th.

It must be a slow day because I've never seen as many posts trying to figure out what days the trial is getting off.

 

[kljohnson0458]

I wonder if Kurtz is going to try to get something in with Ward that he shouldn't, just so the jury can hear it.

I have little doubt it will happen.

 

[NCEast]

Script Kittys? lol!

 

[LyndyLoo]

Did I just hear Mr. Ward say that you could run a program on said computer and find out exactly what Malware is on that computer and figure out what they were doing or could do?..I wonder since he had the hard-drive of Brad's computer test it to see just What Malware was on it???... That is his expertise isnt it?

 

[WolfpackWoman]

Did I just hear Mr. Ward say that you could run a program on said computer and find out exactly what Malware is on that computer and figure out what they were doing or could do?..I wonder since he had the hard-drive of Brad's computer test it to see just What Malware was on it???... That is his expertise isnt it?

That is his expertise I think, but I think it falls outside of the judge's ruling earlier??? :waitasec:

 

[Palomine]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Cooper trial livestream is back up. #coopertrial

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
#coopertrial - If you're having issues with the video livestream, you should contact our webmaster http://tinyurl.com/29c33h

 

[ncsu95]

Did I just hear Mr. Ward say that you could run a program on said computer and find out exactly what Malware is on that computer and figure out what they were doing or could do?..I wonder since he had the hard-drive of Brad's computer test it to see just What Malware was on it???... That is his expertise isnt it?

I don't think the defense will claim the tampering was done via malware.

 

[sunshine05]

I wonder if Kurtz is going to try to get something in with Ward that he shouldn't, just so the jury can hear it.

You mean like that part of the deposition they weren't supposed to hear?