State v Bradley Cooper 4-13-11

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
ncsu95 said:
Let me say this. I have been on here since day 1 arguing about the evidence in this case. I said up front that I thought he was guilty but believed in innocent until proven guilty. I remain squarely on that fence for over 4 weeks of testimony waiting for something/anything that didn't have a reasonable explanation...and saw witness after witness testify to basically nothing. There were many times I was on the edge of my seat with a witness just knowing this was going to finally be the evidence linking him to the crime. And each time, it was a bunch of nothing. And when the Cisco guy showed what he was doing last Saturday morning with the "work calls", it was finally something that not only couldn't be explained, but didn't make sense for a murderer. So that got me off the fence and I really did believe he was not guilty. I was wrong.

I only wish I could have watched this testimony. It's what I have been waiting for for 2.5 years. I have never been a Brad supporter. I am not a friend of Brad. I am not part of the defense team. I'm simply a person in a similar line of work with 2 daughters that also lives in Wake County and was simply fascinated by this case. I'm extremely disappointed (still) in how the prosecution has tried this case. I certainly hope they go back and review what they have done in this case and don't follow the same pattern in the Jason Young trial.
Click to expand...

It's ok. We have been challenged by your posts. Everyone has an opinion and they are entitled to it. I was really not seeing any evidence of guilt until today either. We only just hope that LE has it right and would not charge someone and take them away from their family, make them sit in jail for 2 1/2 years for nothing. I think they got it right, just took them an amazingly long time to get to it.

Don't go away.
 
This is quite interesting information. I'm interested in hearing defense cross. I am, however, still on the fence because although it does look incriminating it really doesn't exclude my potential SODDI theory.
 
Palomine said:
what day IN TRIAL did thirsty co worker testify about having lunch with Brad I want to re watch that testimony
Click to expand...

THIRSTY was an MBA classmate that went on the France trip. The lunch co-worker was a different guy.
 
ncsu95 said:
Let me say this. I have been on here since day 1 arguing about the evidence in this case. I said up front that I thought he was guilty but believed in innocent until proven guilty. I remain squarely on that fence for over 4 weeks of testimony waiting for something/anything that didn't have a reasonable explanation...and saw witness after witness testify to basically nothing. There were many times I was on the edge of my seat with a witness just knowing this was going to finally be the evidence linking him to the crime. And each time, it was a bunch of nothing. And when the Cisco guy showed what he was doing last Saturday morning with the "work calls", it was finally something that not only couldn't be explained, but didn't make sense for a murderer. So that got me off the fence and I really did believe he was not guilty. I was wrong.

I only wish I could have watched this testimony. It's what I have been waiting for for 2.5 years. I have never been a Brad supporter. I am not a friend of Brad. I am not part of the defense team. I'm simply a person in a similar line of work with 2 daughters that also lives in Wake County and was simply fascinated by this case. I'm extremely disappointed (still) in how the prosecution has tried this case. I certainly hope they go back and review what they have done in this case and don't follow the same pattern in the Jason Young trial.
Click to expand...

I've said on here previously that I feel the guys/people with the engineering background have a greater need for hard evidence, 'just the facts please'. Those others of us just go by gut feelings a lot of the time--plus the overwhelming majority of circumstantial evidence, coupled with the major coincidental issues just seem too much to be ignored.
The jury has not handed down a guilty verdict yet so I am not ready to feel totally confident until I heard a big, loud 'guilty' from the jury foreperson.
 
Palomine said:
what day IN TRIAL did thirsty co worker testify about having lunch with Brad I want to re watch that testimony
Click to expand...


I posted the direct link to the testimony, watched it and summarized earlier in this thread.
 
wral WRAL NEWS in NC
As a results of GOLO comments on WRAL.com, the judge has banned all electronics (cell phones, laptops) from the trial.
 
snowshuze said:
Oh yea, it was a whole bunch of somethings....all it needed was glue to stick them all together, IMO.
Click to expand...

Someone earlier made a comment about a bunch of bricks without the mortar. I think they just supplied the mortar.
 
Palomine said:
what day IN TRIAL did thirsty co worker testify about having lunch with Brad I want to re watch that testimony
Click to expand...

I think the co-worker was GM on Day 21. I thought the thirsty witness was the NC State MBA student? Could be wrong.......
 
Judge's ban on cellphones & laptops in the courtroom is for people in the audience, including members of the media.
 
wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Judge's ban on cellphones & laptops in the courtroom is for people in the audience, including members of the media. #coopertrial
 
Happy Birthday JMFLU!

This is a very good present for you.

Justice for Nancy!
 
RaleighNC said:
I also find it very interesting that there was a groundswell of support on another website - all being whipped into a frenzy to show up on 4/13/2011 to show support for Brad and his innocence. And - this is also the day that the jury feels like they are being started at and want to maintain their anonymity. Coincidence this bombshell gets dropped today? I think not. They knew it was coming and have been waging a campaign to muddy the waters (at best) and at worst, to intimidate the jury.

I think that there is a bunch of manipulation going on here - and while it's probably not against the law to try the case in the social media and on the internet, and use websites like this, etc - it's pretty darn shady, IMO. (and takes away from any real evidence of him being not guilty, too...)
Click to expand...

I think you are absolutely correct.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Members online

... and 72 more.
Total: 2,135 (members: 73, guests: 2,062)

Online statistics

Members online
73
Guests online
2,062
Total visitors
2,135
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
615,716
Messages
18,340,195
Members
236,823
Latest member
AcroyearOfSpartak
Back
Top