State v Bradley Cooper 4-13-11

[LaLaw2000]

Looking on the net 12 hours before to dump the body tells me this was a very quick decision...he had it with Nancy.

Yes, but that 12 hours makes it premeditated murder.

JMO

 

[LyndyLoo]

Perhaps someone could clearify it for me...I didnt think exculpetory evidence NOT being disclosed only becomes an issue IF it does not get brought out in trial..and Kurtz already said it was brought out in the trial and the jury heard it..so I have no clue how prosecution hid this or the witness lied about it!!

I think Kurtz is upset because he doesnt know what procedures FBI used to get this info??..See..he is just saying it is the "Tool" of investigation that is his problem??...Kurtz is not going to win this one IMO:banghead:

 

[PolkSaladAnnie]

this must tick off Brad..not being in control

BIG time!

 

[Lori59]

The problem with this is outside of tampering (which if proven would be an extreme scandal), there is no comeback for this. There is no excuse that explains why he was looking up the specific dump site on July 11th. If it was done in January, there might be an argument there, but it was done the day before she disappeared. I could see an argument if they only found, say a visit to a Toll Brothers website. But that's not the case here.

The guy was given the benefit of a doubt by alot of fencers on here, probably a lot more than BC deserves. But you can't with this one. This is one where you can't say 'well maybe he was just goofing off or maybe he was looking up driving directions' They got him zoomed in on piece of the map that was barely populated, a piece of the map that he himself said he never knew about.

If the defense puts an expert on there that makes it really compelling(and it would have to be seriously lock down compelling), then I may change my thoughts on this but until that time, it is what it is. We now know what caused them to arrest him in Oct.

You make a great point...he said he never knew about the area yet they have him zooming in on that area the day before his wife goes missing. How can the defense explain him lying about something so important as where Nancy's body was found?

 

[Palomine]

If I killed Nancy I would have yelled UNCLE years ago! I get nervous just watching these procedures

 

[BrownRice]

That's exactly what I thought. Keep remembering Nancy glancing out the window looking towards her house numerous times, commenting to others 'it looks like all the lights are out', 'everybody must be in bed, asleep by now', etc. A number of the witnesses make similar comments/remarks. She was afraid, she called the realtor saying 'she needed to get away ASAP.'

< feel like crying >

But Gracie, she never once said she was in fear for her life or felt any threat of violence? It makes no sense.

 

[RobT]

Perhaps someone could clearify it for me...I didnt think exculpetory evidence NOT being disclosed only becomes an issue IF it does not get brought out in trial..and Kurtz already said it was brought out in the trial and the jury heard it..so I have no clue how prosecution hid this or the witness lied about it!!

I think Kurtz is upset because he doesnt know what procedures FBI used to get this info??..See..he is just saying it is the "Tool" of investigation that is his problem??...Kurtz is not going to win this one IMO:banghead:

I can see his point... kinda. But I can also see the prosecution. If the report that is generated by the FBI tool reveals anything that might lead to being able to reverse engineer how it is created (which IMO it does) then it cannot be given in detail. But... if another tool that may or may not do as good a job or whatever is used by the defence it may produce different results. This is one reason I mentioned the whole old version vs. new version thing for MFT.

Very, VERY unfortunately Microsoft does not disclose the format of MFT, nor for that matter NTFS (the format of the bits on the hard drive) to anyone... so from a public's standpoint everything has to be reverse engineered. However, I am quite positive that Federal forensic agencies from around the world have been made privy through non-disclosure agreements to the details of how these bits are ordered and thus the FBI can reconstruct this data with significantly more accuracy.

 

[Palomine]

pros accuse defense of grandstanding saying these motions were argued and ruled on months ago

 

[diphi]

This all goes to a post I made last night. The Pros case, the state, is supposed to be out for justice, but they are often in it for their own ego's and their office and don't look beyond anything that may exclude what makes their case which is wrong. That is not how our justice system was set up, we should not be putting people to death or in prison for life based on less than adequate investigations. I am still upset that we never got to see what was on her phone. The slow discovery to Defense, and many other actions by the police and the Pros in this case. I don't like gov't being given so much power, they still work for us, and they should be doing a through investigation.

I understand what you're saying and generally agree. Bear in mind, though, the state has its computer investigators and the defense has its computer investigators. Each spins it their own way - if they can...

IMO

 

[Palomine]

why is the defense so desperate to delay this trial?

 

[TigerBalm]

Not surprised by this are you TigerBalm ?

Bad bad Brad, his Canadian goose is cooked.

:floorlaugh:

Nope, not surprised at all, just sharing the link with everyone. I know we had heard a little about it this morning, but it is so much better to watch it.

Oh but to hear the ... 5th, 6th and 14th mentioned again :crazy:

 

[Skittles]

Yup... I think we meant the same thing... north side of the road... at least, I think that's right. right? Could only tell by the laser pointer.

Hmm, I'd call it the south, east, or southeast side of Brittabby depending on where you stand on the street. Here are the pictures my DH took when a group of us from WS went there. The first photo in the group, a stitched panorama photo, shows the entire left side of the cul-de-sac.

http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f201/SkittlesView/Cooper%20site/

 

[Palomine]

after listening to this argument I understand why there is a blackout of these FBI witnesses

 

[RobT]

Hmm, I'd call it the south or southeast side of Brittabby. Here are the pictures my DH took when a group of us from WS went there. The first photo in the group, a stitched panorama photo, shows the entire left side of the cul-de-sac.

http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f201/SkittlesView/Cooper%20site/

You're likely correct then... I was working off of a shaky laser pointer whilst trying to work in the background so this recollection is likely much more accurate.

 

[TigerBalm]

But Gracie, she never once said she was in fear for her life or felt any threat of violence? It makes no sense.

One does not to have to speak it to feel it.

 

[LyndyLoo]

why is the defense so desperate to delay this trial?

Are you really asking that??:waitasec: I think its obvious..They are despirate to delay delay the inevidable...I think in his motion today he let it slip that his expert agreed with some of the findings..yet in hi next breath says he doesnt have the information??..Kurtz denieds ist not the tool nor the methods, but how they did it?..I am still scratching my head re-hearing his pleading to the judge :waitasec::waitasec:

As an aside, It is too bad the defense didnt hire the FBI before the Pros. did then could have suppresed their findings that way?/ pleading the same only reversed for airing the findings ...but Pros. did give them all the findings..and Def. dont like them :floorlaugh:

 

[5bigfish5]

Defense asks to strike FBI testimony

Defense attorney Howard Kurtz, on April 13, 2011, asks the judge to strike testimony from FBI agents.

Today - 6:13pm

(23:31 mins)

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9436521/

Thank You! That's another 23:31 I will never get back in this lifetime. Brad is in control of the "JoyStick".

Beside that, this Defense is SO Brad driven..we might see him on the stand yet.

 

[momof7]

I haven't had time in the last few days to really read what is going on until today. I definitely fell off the fence today.

IMHO, 7/11 he and Nancy had a fight about the allowance and other things again. She probably not only wanted her allowance but wanted money to move and wanted it ASAP. He went to Lowes for the dropcloth and then did not make it to work until almost 11. IMHO, he was probably driving around looking and remembered that area from looking for their new home. My guess is he did the first drive by to that area in that time frame and then went to work. He googled the area later to find the best area to leave her body. He had a plan he just needed to get it together.

Brad is guilty and finally the pros has put the pieces together for me. I do think he was at the site between Lowes and work and took the opportunity later to google it just to make sure he wasn't missing anything. An aerial map (from 2008) probably would have given him a sense of security if the area he chose had one way in and one way out. He would be able to know if he was alone there, how close anyone would be etc.

So many things seemed so irrelevant so far, hodgepodge and rumor. I am finally satisfied that there will continue to be pieces of the puzzle put together for the jury to be able to convict with zero doubt.

Kelly

 

[Tipstaff]

Not surprised by this are you TigerBalm ?

Bad bad Brad, his Canadian goose is cooked.

And then the next step is to ask for a mistrial!

Kurtz is throwing out everything in his lawyers bag of tricks!

 

[NCEast]

Oh gosh ... it's so hard tearing myself away from this site! Yes, interesting to say the least. I feel there will be more to come; how powerful - I have no clue. Whether more info will topple today's landslide is yet to be seen - but IMO today was a bit of a blockbuster.

Been following your posts along the way ... you've been a great member to debate with thus far! Don't stay up too late! Bad for your eyes, lol

'night

Oh my gosh, you are so right about the eyes. Monday night when I finally got off of here, and off of the other site, I tried to watch my big screen tv ( I mention big screen only because I couldn't see it). Everything was so blurry I was going crazy. I had been at this computer the entire, whole, complete day and half the night reading.....and it told on my vision.