State v Bradley Cooper - 3/25/11

[SleuthSayer]

I haven't been here in about 3 years and was a bit surprised that my ID still works. But, I've been reading some of the articles about the case this week and decided to come here and see what the discussion was like. I had a couple of thoughts that I'll offer.

Reading how the media has presented the technical aspects of this and I suppose the way the prosecution has presented it left me with the same kind of eye-rolling feeling that a MD probably has when watching a medical drama on TV.

First of all, portraying Brad as some kind of world-class VoIP guru is laughable. He was somewhere between a tech support guy and a tester. He would know how to set up and use VoIP, but his level of knowledge would be no better than that of 1000's of other people in the area.

Secondly, whether he is or is not a VoIP expert really means little. There seems to be a mystical image of what one can do with VoIP that could otherwise not be done. That is just not the case. If the whole point of this is his ability to spoof a scheduled phone call, I can think of many ways to do that. Many of them could be done with an early 1990's era 9600 BAUD modem and a PC running Windows 3. Actually, doing in a non-VoIP phone system would probably be easier and result in less tracking info being left behind.

The only way that I see VoIP making a significant technical difference is that typically the VoIP providers (Time Warner, Vonage, Ooma, etc) bundle a lot of features as part of their base service that you often don't get "for free" with a Plain Old Telephone System like Bellsouth. However, those features aren't necessarily offered because of unique technical abilities that VoIP gives you. It is more a case of there being a lot of competition in the VoIP market so the providers have to try to distinguish themselves with lots of fancy features. Some of those features (like call-forwarding, simulring, fallback numbers, etc) could help with spoofing a call, but they also make the fact that you did a lot easier to track. The level of expertise to use those features would be no greater than that of a cellphone savvy high school kid.

Note, I'm not trying to make a guilt or innocence argument here. I'm just saying that both Brad's technical expertise and the importance of that expertise are being oversold.

 

[SleuthinNC]

Ohhhh Myyy We sure do have some really "Geeky" (said with :heartbeat folks here!!

Now since I tend to simplify things abit..I really want to know what Def. said in their opening regarding the Cooper's internet services?? Was it Kurtz who claimed someone hacked their computer??..Hummmming until we get the computer forensics testified to in court..and of course look to you Geeky ones to 'splain :woohoo:

Yes I am way geeky, one of the reasons I am so interested in this trial. I didn't hear the opening statements but it seems they alleged hacking into the network, tampering with the computers directly, and maybe something else. i guess I should go back and listen.

 

[SleuthinNC]

I haven't been here in about 3 years and was a bit surprised that my ID still works. But, I've been reading some of the articles about the case this week and decided to come here and see what the discussion was like. I had a couple of thoughts that I'll offer.

Reading how the media has presented the technical aspects of this and I suppose the way the prosecution has presented it left me with the same kind of eye-rolling feeling that a MD probably has when watching a medical drama on TV.

First of all, portraying Brad as some kind of world-class VoIP guru is laughable. He was somewhere between a tech support guy and a tester. He would know how to set up and use VoIP, but his level of knowledge would be no better than that of 1000's of other people in the area.

Secondly, whether he is or is not a VoIP expert really means little. There seems to be a mystical image of what one can do with VoIP that could otherwise not be done. That is just not the case. If the whole point of this is his ability to spoof a scheduled phone call, I can think of many ways to do that. Many of them could be done with an early 1990's era 9600 BAUD modem and a PC running Windows 3. Actually, doing in a non-VoIP phone system would probably be easier and result in less tracking info being left behind.

The only way that I see VoIP making a significant technical difference is that typically the VoIP providers (Time Warner, Vonage, Ooma, etc) bundle a lot of features as part of their base service that you often don't get "for free" with a Plain Old Telephone System like Bellsouth. However, those features aren't necessarily offered because of unique technical abilities that VoIP gives you. It is more a case of there being a lot of competition in the VoIP market so the providers have to try to distinguish themselves with lots of fancy features. Some of those features (like call-forwarding, simulring, fallback numbers, etc) could help with spoofing a call, but they also make the fact that you did a lot easier to track. The level of expertise to use those features would be no greater than that of a cellphone savvy high school kid.

Note, I'm not trying to make a guilt or innocence argument here. I'm just saying that both Brad's technical expertise and the importance of that expertise are being oversold.

Thank you!

 

[sunshine05]

If you listen to the defense opening arguments beginning at 13:14, he talks about the computer related stuff and then a little later discusses all of the phone stuff. It's a good idea to listen to this before the computer and phone testimony is brought up in court. I like how he laid it all out. He is a smart guy and very organized, imo.

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9252108/#/vid9252108

 

[NCEast]

I do not wish to get into arguments..It is my opinion at this point since we do not have all the facts at this time..I am not on the jury, so can opine utilizing my own lifes experiences..and await the computer forensics that will prove or disprove some further Brad's claims...at this point, it is a puzzle with pieces scattered all over...and my particular puzzle arrangments so far dont quite add up to Brad's portrayal..at least what I have read about or heard on video...So, guess us two dont have anything to discuss, opine about, or speculate about since in your particular eyes I dont know the facts..:seeya:

What strikes me the hardest in viewing this video for the second time (thanks for the link!) is the condition of Nancy's bed. It's as if everything in the world had been piled upon it, almost as though Brad knew she wasn't coming home and would never sleep in it again. The condition of that bed bothers me tremendously.
And yes, I think he is guilty... and as others have pointed out--it may be all of the non-regular things that add up to my feeling this way. However, if the prosecution can't come up with some mighty powerful stuff in the next week or so I'm thinking Brad will be able to high-tail it back to Canada just as soon as this trial is over.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Silly question///fact Brad meets Nancy at Cisco Workplace during the late '90's....They move to Cary NC as Brad got transfer with Cisco to a job there..
Do will actually know what his Job Title and description would be..?? Now we are getting into Puter evidence, and abilities to manipulate said expertise and by whom..I would really like to know..now:waitasec:

If he had good puter skills, but nothing extraordinary to do that job....Amazing that his skill set would fit right in with any Best Buy Salesperson...sooo now Inquiring Minds want to know:waitasec:

 

[SleuthinNC]

If you listen to the defense opening arguments beginning at 13:14, he talks about the computer related stuff and then a little later discusses all of the phone stuff. It's a good idea to listen to this before the computer and phone testimony is brought up in court. I like how he laid it all out. He is a smart guy and very organized, imo.

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9252108/#/vid9252108

Thank you! I was dreading having to weed through the whole thing.

 

[BrownRice]

First of all, portraying Brad as some kind of world-class VoIP guru is laughable. He was somewhere between a tech support guy and a tester. He would know how to set up and use VoIP, but his level of knowledge would be no better than that of 1000's of other people in the area.

(snipped by me for clarity)...........

Note, I'm not trying to make a guilt or innocence argument here. I'm just saying that both Brad's technical expertise and the importance of that expertise are being oversold.

Welcome back! I am not by any means a tech person or even close. I need things spelled out very basically so I can understand. I wouldn't even pretend to understand the basics of Brad's job at Cisco. However, with that said, he was certainly paid a lot more than a tester or a support guy. With bonus it was $135 annual. Plus, he had his CISCO certification (can't remember the letters - maybe CCIE or something) and some of the posters on here (with experience or having spouses w/ this experience) say this certification is very desirable in this field. Additionally, BC was recruited 2x from CISCCO from Canada. I doubt they'd pay for the immigration and everything required to move a non-resident to the states if he was just a simple IT guy.

 

[johnfear]

So, has anyone else found the undlsclosed location SW?

Somebody that might or might not have some fairly decent information said it's for a fertility doc's office in Cary and they were looking for something in reference to a paternity test.

I remember seeing an odd warrant, but it's not anywhere I can find.

If someone could throw a link up, I'd appreciate it.

 

[Just the Fax]

I haven't been here in about 3 years and was a bit surprised that my ID still works. But, I've been reading some of the articles about the case this week and decided to come here and see what the discussion was like. I had a couple of thoughts that I'll offer.

Reading how the media has presented the technical aspects of this and I suppose the way the prosecution has presented it left me with the same kind of eye-rolling feeling that a MD probably has when watching a medical drama on TV.

First of all, portraying Brad as some kind of world-class VoIP guru is laughable. He was somewhere between a tech support guy and a tester. He would know how to set up and use VoIP, but his level of knowledge would be no better than that of 1000's of other people in the area.

Secondly, whether he is or is not a VoIP expert really means little. There seems to be a mystical image of what one can do with VoIP that could otherwise not be done. That is just not the case. If the whole point of this is his ability to spoof a scheduled phone call, I can think of many ways to do that. Many of them could be done with an early 1990's era 9600 BAUD modem and a PC running Windows 3. Actually, doing in a non-VoIP phone system would probably be easier and result in less tracking info being left behind.

The only way that I see VoIP making a significant technical difference is that typically the VoIP providers (Time Warner, Vonage, Ooma, etc) bundle a lot of features as part of their base service that you often don't get "for free" with a Plain Old Telephone System like Bellsouth. However, those features aren't necessarily offered because of unique technical abilities that VoIP gives you. It is more a case of there being a lot of competition in the VoIP market so the providers have to try to distinguish themselves with lots of fancy features. Some of those features (like call-forwarding, simulring, fallback numbers, etc) could help with spoofing a call, but they also make the fact that you did a lot easier to track. The level of expertise to use those features would be no greater than that of a cellphone savvy high school kid.

Note, I'm not trying to make a guilt or innocence argument here. I'm just saying that both Brad's technical expertise and the importance of that expertise are being oversold.

Who cares? Even if this was basic 101 networking or very complicated.
To say a $130K+/yr telecom engineer w/ an MBA was a "tech support" guy is silly. The point is he said under oath he knew how to place a remote call using VOIP. I want to wait on the real experts when the state brings them in to tell us how Brad did it. In the mean time, I sure wish some of you would stop trying to show you are smarter with technology than the next guy.:twocents:

 

[sunshine05]

What strikes me the hardest in viewing this video for the second time (thanks for the link!) is the condition of Nancy's bed. It's as if everything in the world had been piled upon it, almost as though Brad knew she wasn't coming home and would never sleep in it again.

That was taken on the 16th so he did know she wasn't coming home.

 

[sunshine05]

Silly question///fact Brad meets Nancy at Cisco Workplace during the late '90's....They move to Cary NC as Brad got transfer with Cisco to a job there..
Do will actually know what his Job Title and description would be..?? Now we are getting into Puter evidence, and abilities to manipulate said expertise and by whom..I would really like to know..now:waitasec:

If he had good puter skills, but nothing extraordinary to do that job....Amazing that his skill set would fit right in with any Best Buy Salesperson...sooo now Inquiring Minds want to know:waitasec:

They met while both working at IBM in Calgary. He got hired by Cisco and they quickly got married before moving to Cary so that they wouldn't have to deal with the immigration issues of a non-citizen with no work visa.

He had his CCIE certification in VOIP but I'm not sure exactly what his position was. He was probably a mid-level engineer, pretty technically competent I imagine.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Welcome back! I am not by any means a tech person or even close. I need things spelled out very basically so I can understand. I wouldn't even pretend to understand the basics of Brad's job at Cisco. However, with that said, he was certainly paid a lot more than a tester or a support guy. With bonus it was $135 annual. Plus, he had his CISCO certification (can't remember the letters - maybe CCIE or something) and some of the posters on here (with experience or having spouses w/ this experience) say this certification is very desirable in this field. Additionally, BC was recruited 2x from CISCCO from Canada. I doubt they'd pay for the immigration and everything required to move a non-resident to the states if he was just a simple IT guy.

Whoa..I feel so techie..LOL..I found out just what CCIE actually means in the credentialling world of Computer works...

http://computer.yourdictionary.com/cisco-certification

It appears their definitions are covered by Copyright..so will just type out the 3 levels

CCNA - Cisco Certified Network Associate
CCNP - Cisco Certified Network Professional
CCIE - Cisco Certified Internetwork Expert

these are all programs of certification of competency in Cisco networking products..so to see the descriptions and definitions you have to go to the link...sorry 'bout that :maddening:

ETA~~ It appears this level of computer knowledge is far far above regular IT people..

http://articlescollections.com/understanding-ccie/
Cisco Certified Internetwork Expert (CCIE) certification. Just the title is daunting, so is actually trying to achieve this coveted certification. They put the word expert in for a reason, Cisco offers other levels of certification, and having one like CCNA under your belt first will only build on your knowledge to help you succeed when attempting the Cisco CCIE course. Before tackling any learning though, decide which track you are interested in. You can get Cisco CCIE training for five CCIE certifications:
Routing and Switching
Security PLEASE NOTE!!!
Service Provider
Storage Networking
Voice

The Routing and Switching track focuses on different routing and switching configurations. With this being the most popular track of Cisco CCIE training, it shouldn't be surprising that IP interior gateway and border gateway protocols are covered as well as multicast routing, quality of service, security and IP and IOS features. Of course, this means there is Cisco CCIE training required before you get to the last grunt. As always the need for Cisco CCIE written boot camp comes before the Cisco CCIE lab training because you need to clear the written exam first....interesting

 

[sunshine05]

So, has anyone else found the undlsclosed location SW?

Somebody that might or might not have some fairly decent information said it's for a fertility doc's office in Cary and they were looking for something in reference to a paternity test.

I remember seeing an odd warrant, but it's not anywhere I can find.

If someone could throw a link up, I'd appreciate it.

Can you be more specific? What is SW and what undisclosed location are you referring to? Thanks.

 

[NCEast]

That was taken on the 16th so he did know she wasn't coming home.

I know, but instead of my feeling that he didn't know 'if' she wasn't coming home--he just flat out knew she wasn't coming home. That's my take on the condition of the bed.

 

[SleuthSayer]

Who cares? Even if this was basic 101 networking or very complicated.
To say a $130K+/yr telecom engineer w/ an MBA was a "tech support" guy is silly.

I said somewhere between a tech support guy (aka IT Engineer or IT Analyst) and a tester. Here are some salary numbers for those positions:

IT Engineer

Test Engineer

Keep in mind that these salary numbers are averages of samples of 70 or so employees. So, it would include everything from college kids right out of school to people with many years of experience. Brad had 8 years of experience so of course he'd be above the average.

 

[LyndyLoo]

They met while both working at IBM in Calgary. He got hired by Cisco and they quickly got married before moving to Cary so that they wouldn't have to deal with the immigration issues of a non-citizen with no work visa.

He had his CCIE certification in VOIP but I'm not sure exactly what his position was. He was probably a mid-level engineer, pretty technically competent I imagine.

Whoopsey//You are correct//IBM it was...was recruited (Brad only) by Cisco
I posted CCIE info for your interest..

 

[Just the Fax]

I said somewhere between a tech support guy (aka IT Engineer or IT Analyst) and a tester. Here are some salary numbers for those positions:

IT Engineer

Test Engineer

Keep in mind that these salary numbers are averages of samples of 70 or so employees. So, it would include everything from college kids right out of school to people with many years of experience. Brad had 8 years of experience so of course he'd be above the average.

He said under oath he knew how to place a remote call using VOIP.

 

[SleuthinNC]

I said somewhere between a tech support guy (aka IT Engineer or IT Analyst) and a tester. Here are some salary numbers for those positions:

IT Engineer

Test Engineer

Keep in mind that these salary numbers are averages of samples of 70 or so employees. So, it would include everything from college kids right out of school to people with many years of experience. Brad had 8 years of experience so of course he'd be above the average.

He was actually a VoIP Architect which I would say is a higher level of knowledge than a support engineer. You can't really compare his position apples to apples with a test engineer. There are some test engineers that would have much deeper and broader technical knowledge and some that would have much less.

 

[LivinginNC]

Trying to catch up with testimony, and better yet the great discussions and updates here on websleuths. One question that keeps popping up for me, and I apologize if this has been discussed, is if someone did hack the computer as the defense implies, wouldn't that show as to when (the date) it was hacked? If there was something incriminating on the computer on a date prior to NC going missing, then something that was added or searched after the fact (as in when the alleged hacking may have taken place) wouldn't that be a non issue since it was after the disappearance? I am technologically disadvantaged but this just doesn't make sense to me. Anyone who can clarify?