State v Bradley Cooper 04-20-2011

[WolfpackWoman]

And Judge Gessner instructed every single witness NOT to address the jury? I hate I missed that.

No, I'm sorry if I misunderstood what you're saying. The other witnesses speak to the jury all the time, as in, turn their heads and talk to them, instead of to the question asker. Is that not what you're referring to?

 

[gracielee]

Considering he isn't testifying about the mft he generated, I doubt he melts. He is only talking about stuff that he is an expert in and knows very well. He obviously knows it better than the prosecution. But I'm sure Zellinger will talk to him like he is an idiot like he did yesterday.

IIRC, the defense took him through his many qualifications as a witness. Therefore, the prosecution is also allowed to cross examine him on this topic also. Anything the defense goes into on his direct is fodder for cross.

 

[Just the Fax]

Considering he isn't testifying about the mft he generated, I doubt he melts. He is only talking about stuff that he is an expert in and knows very well. He obviously knows it better than the prosecution. But I'm sure Zellinger will talk to him like he is an idiot like he did yesterday.

It will be interesting to see how he handles the pressure.
Kurtz's questions are making it very easy for him, as he is very prepared for an exact response. I'm quite sure they have rehearsed this testimony for many days, as it is absolutely critical to their case.

 

[snowshuze]

No, I'm sorry if I misunderstood what you're saying. The other witnesses speak to the jury all the time, as in, turn their heads and talk to them, instead of to the question asker. Is that not what you're referring to?

This witness asked DIRECT questions of the jury.....can you see this, etc.... DIRECT interaction. A no no in court.

 

[ncsu95]

No, I'm sorry if I misunderstood what you're saying. The other witnesses speak to the jury all the time, as in, turn their heads and talk to them, instead of to the question asker. Is that not what you're referring to?

He asked the jury a question. He's not allowed to. He just asked if they could see the print on the screen, so it wasn't nefarious. But he isn't supposed to do it.

 

[jrb0124]

This witness asked DIRECT questions of the jury.....can you see this, etc.... DIRECT interaction. A no no in court.

Why are you making a big deal out of this? this will not have any effect on the trial or the value of his testimony. Let it go...

 

[ncsu95]

IIRC, the defense took him through his many qualifications as a witness. Therefore, the prosecution is also allowed to cross examine him on this topic also. Anything the defense goes into on his direct is fodder for cross.

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.

 

[RaleighNC]

Incorrect. laptop was seized from the home prior to the office search.

SW link

yup - sorry - 7/16/2008

thanks for the research.

 

[gracielee]

No, I'm sorry if I misunderstood what you're saying. The other witnesses speak to the jury all the time, as in, turn their heads and talk to them, instead of to the question asker. Is that not what you're referring to?

That isn't what's being referred to here. This witness turned to the jury and spoke to them *directly*, asking 'if they could see the screen.....etc.' That is ALWAYS forbidden in a trial, both during the trial and during recesses, etc. Just as it is against the law for a judge to speak directly to a witness or juror outside the realm of the court room. A judge may direct a question to the juror/s while court is in session, but he can't say 'hey, how they hanging' outside the courtroom setting. This witness is not supposed to directly speak to/question the jury, ever.

 

[Danielle59]

His ego took a bit hit when 1/2 the country found out yesterday he was not a qualified expert. You are right, big change in his demeanor.

He was not found out to not be a qualified expert, he was found to be a qualified expert in Computer Security, but not in Forensics.

 

[cody100]

It will be interesting to see how he handles the pressure.
Kurtz's questions are making it very easy for him, as he is very prepared for an exact response. I'm quite sure they have rehearsed this testimony for many days, as it is absolutely critical to their case.

Often this is standard on the prosecution side as well.

 

[Just the Fax]

He was not found out to not be a qualified expert, he was found to be a qualified expert in Computer Security, but not in Forensics.

Yes, I am quite aware of that.

 

[Just the Fax]

Often this is standard on the prosecution side as well.

Yes it is.
Doesn't make cross for either side any easier though.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Well, it appears that cross of this witness is going tohappen after lunch break..or near lunch break..I am sure Mr. C. (FBI guy) will give Boz all sorts of questions to get to...as I am sure he knows exactly what Mr. Ward is suggesting here. So guess we will see just impressive it will be for the jury.

 

[AnotherSleuth]

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

 

[kljohnson0458]

I hate to say this but this guy can testify till the cows come home and BC searched Fielding Drive on his work computer on 7/11 at or around 1:00 p.m. prior to leaving for lunch. This testimony is never going to change that for me and I hope the jurors really discuss this witness and what he's offered.

 

[less0305]

Likely because they believe the witness, and its easier just to follow his explanation and conclusions (in the absence of any objections).

Really? Okay. Stick with that one.

 

[gracielee]

He asked the jury a question. He's not allowed to. He just asked if they could see the print on the screen, so it wasn't nefarious. But he isn't supposed to do it.

It isn't simply the 'asking' of a question, per se. It can tend to give the jury a false sense of 'friendship' if you will, between themselves and the witness. It is a general matter of protocol. I"ll say this, had it been Detective Daniels who attempted to do something like this, or one of the other prosecution witnesses, such as nancy's mother/father/sister, etc., the defense would be once again leaping up to call for another mistrial.

 

[snowshuze]

Why are you making a big deal out of this? this will not have any effect on the trial or the value of his testimony. Let it go...

I was answering a question from another poster. Carry on.

 

[jrb0124]

..I am sure Mr. C. (FBI guy) will give Boz all sorts of questions to get to...as I am sure he knows exactly what Mr. Ward is suggesting here.

Better be careful....Boz could open some doors he doesn't want to if Mr. C. is scripting the questions.