State v Bradley Cooper 04-20-2011

[Star12]

i am no computer expert but i think i am seeing a lot of smoke and mirrors and obfuscation

 

[Star12]

and i just got overruled, thanks to mr. cummings

 

[gracielee]

Sure. But there has been no testimony about the mft or using the copies to generate it, etc. They won't be able to talk about that during cross. That was the stuff that Boz ripped him on yesterday.

I think Boz also ripped him on his methods, his *lab*, what tools he uses and is trained on, etc. I don't think all of that had to do with forensic examination of computers. I could be wrong, but I think his other expertise wasn't steller when it comes to normal courtroom expert testimony.

 

[Just the Fax]

Unbelievable Kurtz!!!!
What a moron
Using a demo that was not even available in 2008

 

[AnotherSleuth]

Jurors stepped out. Good. hopefully they will put a stop on this. It's not adding anything.

 

[less0305]

Is anybody else as bored as I am with this testimony? :waiting:

Oh, a-b-s-o-l-u-t-e-l-y !!!! Good thing I got stuff at work to do this a.m.

 

[kljohnson0458]

Does anyone know what the black out witness yesterday afternoon had to offer for the defense?

 

[less0305]

Is anybody else as bored as I am with this testimony? :waiting:

I'm so bored, I'm answering you twice.

Imagine the glazed look of the jury!!!

 

[sunshine05]

Judge is having a hard time understanding how this is relevant. But the carpet "non-evidence" WAS relevant.

 

[ncsu95]

I think Boz also ripped him on his methods, his *lab*, what tools he uses and is trained on, etc. I don't think all of that had to do with forensic examination of computers. I could be wrong, but I think his other expertise wasn't steller when it comes to normal courtroom expert testimony.

Does a security log look different in a lab building versus his home?

 

[otto]

Interesting ... the software he's demo-ing wasn't available in 2008, but the same tools were available with a different software ... what next?

 

[LyndyLoo]

i am no computer expert but i think i am seeing a lot of smoke and mirrors and obfuscation

Interesting what this guy is showing, however to what he is doing means Brads computer had to have been one turned on (not necessarily logged onto) 2) connected to network to be manipulated.... infact wasnt even connected to a network since July 16th..and FBI did not connect it to a network and cloned the hard Drive and forensically looked into it...THUS No Google files had been scrubbed or altered..and FBI guy says he did look at the timestamps and noted updates were done in the hardrive prior to being shutdown... Sure hope I havent confused people more..Not my intention

 

[JBean]

Rules Etiquette & Information - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community



Take a minute to read.
Thank this post when you are done so we know that everyone is aware of the rules. Anyone posting on this thread needs to thank this post.

This post lands randomly in the thread.

 

[Danielle59]

When did CPD take the Cisco laptop? I thought it was quite a bit later than 7/16?

They secured his house, and thus his computer on 7/15 in the late afternoon.

 

[ncsu95]

Interesting ... the software he's demo-ing wasn't available in 2008, but the same tools were available with a different software ... what next?

If there was an intrusion (and I'm not claiming there was), they don't necessarily know what tool was used to do the intrusion. Just like the tool to crack the wep key. I'm sure that wasn't a 2008 version of it. The truth is that this exact capability existed in 2008, so the fact that this is an updated tool doesn't really matter.

 

[ncsu95]

Interesting what this guy is showing, however to what he is doing means Brads computer had to have been one turned on (not necessarily logged onto) 2) connected to network to be manipulated.... infact wasnt even connected to a network since July 16th..and FBI did not connect it to a network and cloned the hard Drive and forensically looked into it...THUS No Google files had been scrubbed or altered..and FBI guy says he did look at the timestamps and noted updates were done in the hardrive prior to being shutdown... Sure I havent confused people more..Not my intention

They are claiming this happened during the 27 hours from the time it was seized until the time it was shut down. It was connected to a network during that time and out of Brad's control.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I'm so bored, I'm answering you twice.

Imagine the glazed look of the jury!!!

This is where excluding technology minded people from the jury is a double-edged sword. I think the tech folks are interested in this testimony. I think the non-tech people are probably mentally knitting sweaters.

 

[ncsu95]

I get why Kurtz is using this guy instead of a forensic investigator. He is showing how it could be done. Now he made a mistake in that it doesn't look like he will get to show the evidence that it was done. Maybe he can bring the FBI guy back up and get the files that were modified shown and then tie the 2 together.

 

[less0305]

This is where excluding technology minded people from the jury is a double-edged sword. I think the tech folks are interested in this testimony. I think the non-tech people are probably mentally knitting sweaters.

My guess is the defense didn't want any tech people on the jury. They wouldn't want anyone to know how much of a smoke and mirror the Wizard of Oz is creating here. No one to sit back and say, "What??!! This dude is schwaaazzzeeee!" I bet the jury is made up of people much like myself - they hear "blah blah blah blah blah blah blah."

 

[borndem]

He is qualified. The standard is more knowledgeable than the jury, but the judge can't understand technology enough to see that a Network security architect understands ALL aspects of the system. And he's not offering an opinion. As Kurtz stated, he's just wanting to read from the FBI data. That's it. There's proof in there, and the prosecution is terrified of the jury seeing that proof, so they're dredging up facebook pictures to try and impeach his credibility. If this guy weren't that good, do you think banks would be entrusting billions and billions of dollars to him?



Yes I do. And I have to say, even when I have disagreed with you in the past, I've never used derogatory emoticons to get a point across. It comes across as childish, and detracts from your point. I truly believe that if they could not prove those files were planted, then they would not be afraid of Mr. Ward testifying. They have the ability to put on a rebuttal case, and if Mr. Ward were really a "hack" then the FBI can point that out in rebuttal (or cross).

WWoman - Please be assured that the bank did in no way entrust billions of dollars to this man. Very respectfully, I must say that on this,
you are mistaken.

His arena was small, monitored by others, and mostly on the development -- not the production -- stage.