State v Bradley Cooper 04-19-2011

[jrb0124]

I made a different connection. During the state side of the case, the judge overruled most of the defense objections and sustained most of the few objections made by the prosecution. Now that the defense is up, he seems to be overruling the majority of the prosecution objections. We'll see if the same pattern continues when the prosecution gets up to cross. I think the judge errs on the side of the presenting team. MOO

You are correct, but the biggest decision was denial of admission of JW as an expert witness for the purpose of computer forensics (only let him in as a networking expert).

The problem with this, is that JW as it turns out was actually more experienced than the pros witness, just didn't have the same paper crdentials.

The pros objections today which were sustained occurred when Kurtz drifted towards files with the witness.

 

[Madeleine74]

So who is the killer and who planted the evidence? Wonder if the same person who planted evidence is also the killer.

 

[sunshine05]

Not really. If the CPD and DA have decided who did this. The fact that a jury decides that there wasn't enough evidence to convict him doesn't mean that they are going to change their opinion. They would look pretty silly a couple of years from now dragging someone else up on the stand and telling a jury "this time, we are sure we got the right guy".

So in order to "save face" they would let the real killer get away with it. I don't believe even CPD thinks he did it, otherwise the detectives would not have been so evasive/forgetful in questioning. They certainly do not seem confident they got the right guy (to me, anyhow).

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

I am denying that....please don't call me a liar.
I have been in court 2 days, including the undisclosed FBI testimony.
The other days I have either watched live stream or seen the full video.

Sorry - I work full time so I was not able to sit in court. But, I have been able to see the live streams at times as well as the videos. So - to answer your previous questions - NO - I do not get all of my news from WRAL. Satisfied??

 

[Just the Fax]

Well - you can do your "research" and check it out if you would like. But, since I personally know of these people (friends of friends), I know it is not gossip.

You seem to know everything. I am amazed. Are you in the Lochmere "circle of friends". You are constantly casting doubt on anyone's comments if they do not fall in line with your own.

No NJ, I don't pretend to know these people...they are not "friends of friends":biggrin:

I cast doubt on your comments because....sorry.

 

[less0305]

do you mean this?

i had heard about cd and dd, but not a great and sudden rash of divorces.

Isn't the rate of divorce over 50% nationwide. That would just seem normal then, wouldn't it? Well, to *most* people it would seem normal. But, of course, that neighborhood is held to a different standard than the rest of the country.

 

[sunshine05]

So who is the killer and who planted the evidence? Wonder if the same person who planted evidence is also the killer.

I don't even know yet that anyone "planted" evidence. It could still be a time stamp error and maybe BC himself did the Fielding Drive search but the time was inaccurate. I don't know yet but there are definitely "friends" who are very suspicious and they were not true friends of NC if some of the alternate theories are true.

 

[jrb0124]

It is obvious he personally dislikes Kurtz...who wouldn't?
However, I have not seen any bias in his rulings.
IMO, he has been very fair.

You can start with the testimony from pros he has allowed and work your way towards the testimony/or cross from the defense (thus far) that he has disallowed.

Setting the playing field in a courtroom can have significant impact on the proceedings.

 

[unc70]

You don't know him, yet are certain he would never lie on the stand for $ or perhaps fame:waitasec:

Don't think for a second that is true. Look no further than the "highly respected" Henry Lee. In his case, it is both fame and $$$

Lie, never. Be proven incorrect, possibly but not likely. Certainly not at this stage in his career and in his own backyard. Too much riding on it.

BTW my own track record is rather good in these matters. Quite willing to put it up against yours or that of the prosecution. Forty plus years in this mess.

Without completely decloaking, check out my postings at wral, salon, democraticunderground, theregister.co.uk and similar sites. I am not the unc70 posting in Chatham County, nor posting at other sites not mentioned.

I have posted occassionally in error. For example, it took me over six months to realize that Obama lived most of his first year in Seattle while his mother was enrolled at UWash.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Ex-husband. Soon after NC was murdered most couple in that neighborhood and circle of friends suddenly got divorced. Very coincidental

Indeed Cary from NJ..and I happen to thinklike most communities couples end up in divorce court and thankfully not in a Murder trial..But Be that as it may..I have to wonder just how anyone could equate hatred or dislike of Brad to tampering and hacking his computer to indicate culpability in Nancy;s murder??..I ask that because it is Brad not these neighbours or friends who happen to have that expertise..and not so sure traces to their IP addresses wouldnt have been found out..

Anyway..I really wish to point out items that the jury will be considering and that is the AT&T phone logs and associations to whom..May be helpful to write them down ( as I did)
Phone# ending in~~~

House Landline ~~ # 1511
Brad's Cell~~ #1196
Cisco ~~#2723
V/M (voice mail) #1236

These numbers are going to be most important when the jury gets into deliberations..and I rather doubt neighbours or friends would even know these numbers..JMO in case some believe for some reason nosey neighbours or friend spoofed computer activities...

I am really looking foreward to cross and listening to this witness,,He really does know alot of computers however never never thought of getting prepared for voir dire...and being accepted as forensic expert..Dont blame him so much as Kurtz and Co..THEY should have known..IMO

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

No NJ, I don't pretend to know these people...they are not "friends of friends":biggrin:

I cast doubt on your comments because....sorry.

Because.........???????You didn't finish. Keep going. You clearly have not had a problem keeping your opinions to yourself with everyone else in the past. Why start now???

 

[SleuthSayer]

Me too. Calculus was my favorite, even as a chemistry major. And I have always questioned things that don't "fit" and so many things about this case do not.

To me, it's not really a matter of the pieces not fitting. It's more like the pieces are made of jello, so you can make them fit pretty much any way you like. There is no right fit because there really isn't a wrong one.

It's kind of like a game of Mad Libs. We know:

1. she was alive when she left the party the night of 7/11
2. she had not been alive for quite a bit of time when she was found on 7/14
3. there is a ton of circumstantial evidence that BC killed her
4. there is physical evidence that it was premeditated murder by BC

Given those 4 pieces of info, you can make up pretty much any story that you like and it could be right (when he killed her, where he killed her, surprise attach or fight, when he dumped the body, how he got the body there, if/how he spoofed the call, etc).

 

[Danielle59]

And he picked a great place. Took only moments to get to yet provided a reasonable amount of time for discovery which certainly diminished the evidence.

Not surprising, he had been riding the local roads for years by foot, certainly planning routes for that etc. He picked the nearest best place. Perhaps only a bit of nervousness caused him to have a last look that day. Lilly atkins though somewhat secluded is a cut through so is subject to traffic at any time and people do live on it. Holly springs a no go too much chance of being spotted while your car is stopped. Regency park back behind the pond had potential but it would have extended the trip.

If BC went Cary parkway to holly springs, he could cut right to fielding if the cost was clear or turn left to tryon if the situation seemed sketchy (car coming or whatever).

You don't even know that BC rode on Holly Springs Rd.

 

[Cheyenne130]

You are correct, but the biggest decision was denial of admission of JW as an expert witness for the purpose of computer forensics (only let him in as a networking expert).

The problem with this, is that JW as it turns out was actually more experienced than the pros witness, just didn't have the same paper crdentials.

The pros objections today which were sustained occurred when Kurtz drifted towards files with the witness.

I disagree that JW is more experienced than the pros witness. JW didn't have the tools or the set up to properly do a forensic exam on a harddrive. The pros witness had a lot more backing him up in terms of doing a proper exam. I think the ruling was accurate. JW is an expert in network security and that includes detecting intrusions on a computer. That is not the same as a total forensic exam on a computer. MOO

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

Indeed Cary from NJ..and I happen to thinklike most communities couples end up in divorce court and thankfully not in a Murder trial..But Be that as it may..I have to wonder just how anyone could equate hatred or dislike of Brad to tampering and hacking his computer to indicate culpability in Nancy;s murder??..I ask that because it is Brad not these neighbours or friends who happen to have that expertise..and not so sure traces to their IP addresses wouldnt have been found out..

Anyway..I really wish to point out items that the jury will be considering and that is the AT&T phone logs and associations to whom..May be helpful to write them down ( as I did)
Phone# ending in~~~

House Landline ~~ # 1511
Brad's Cell~~ #1196
Cisco ~~#2723
V/M (voice mail) #1236

These numbers are going to be most important when the jury gets into deliberations..and I rather doubt neighbours or friends would even know these numbers..JMO in case some believe for some reason nosey neighbours or friend spoofed computer activities...

I am really looking foreward to cross and listening to this witness,,He really does know alot of computers however never never thought of getting prepared for voir dire...and being accepted as forensic expert..Dont blame him so much as Kurtz and Co..THEY should have known..IMO

I have never suggested that someone planted anything to place BC in the position he is in now. I do not think anyone in that neighborhood nor in their cirlce of friends has anything at all to do with NC's murder. I truly believe they were just great friends who looked out for one another. We should all be so lucky to have friends like that. But I also know there is a tendency to exaggerate whem amongs friends. I think things were bad between BC and NC, but maybe not as bad as her friends claimed them to be.

That being said, I don't know who killed NC. I still don't know if it was BC or someone else? I am curious to hear the remainder of the trial before I make up my mind

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

Ok, so now you know CD personally:woohoo:

As a matter of fact - YES - our children used to play together up until last year when he still lived in Lochmere.

Let me guess - do you want proof? You seem to be big on that.

 

[WolfpackWoman]

I disagree that JW is more experienced than the pros witness. JW didn't have the tools or the set up to properly do a forensic exam on a harddrive. The pros witness had a lot more backing him up in terms of doing a proper exam. I think the ruling was accurate. JW is an expert in network security and that includes detecting intrusions on a computer. That is not the same as a total forensic exam on a computer. MOO

I think my concern is that there's no real line drawn in the sand as to what this means. I agree that Mr. Ward is not a "forensic expert" and I think he stated that. But I don't think you have to know forensics to detect intrusion on a computer and tampering. And if the court is not going to allow him to testify as to obvious signs of intrusion (which is something Mr. Ward testified he has been doing for 18 years), then I have a problem with that. If they're simply not allowing him to testify as to the proper procedures for a forensic exam, then that's fine.

I think it's telling that his results matched up with the FBI--so, apparently the tools and methods he used didn't really matter that much.

But if he wants to say "this file should never be modified without manual use" then I don't see how one would specifically need to be forensically qualified as a computer expert, when that's just plain intrusion detection.

 

[cody100]

It is obvious he personally dislikes Kurtz...who wouldn't?
However, I have not seen any bias in his rulings.
IMO, he has been very fair.

I like Kurtz. Granted his voice is strange and grating at first, but it doesn't bother me. And, he fights hard for his client. So, I have to disagree with you on who wouldn't. But you are correct that Judge G doesn't hide his total dislike for him. As for rulings, you are entitled as always to your opinion.

 

[SleuthSayer]

So in order to "save face" they would let the real killer get away with it. I don't believe even CPD thinks he did it, otherwise the detectives would not have been so evasive/forgetful in questioning. They certainly do not seem confident they got the right guy (to me, anyhow).

I'm not talking about saving face. I'm saying that I think it is going to be awful hard to convince a jury that the prosecution knows what they are doing and that there is not reasonable doubt that someone else did it when in 2011, they tried to convince a jury that they were sure that BC did it.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

You don't even know that BC rode on Holly Springs Rd.

If he drove down Lochmere to Lily Atkins, he would have only been on Holly Springs for about a mile or so before turning on Fielding Drive