State v Bradley Cooper 4/14/11

[Madeleine74]

I watched Gessner's tantrum on video.

That rant was idiotic as is he, when it comes to anything tech. He doesn't understand that once something is said in open court, it is there for public dissemination. If a reporter heard something in court testimony then left the courtroom, called their editor, and transcribed a blurb for publication that would be okay. That's how it used to be done before all this technology. Now everyone can be a 'publisher' of info. If there's something that should not be repeated publicly then he should only talk about it in chambers and not have it said in the courtroom where everybody there can hear it.

If there's some other issue such as info about jurors getting out or some kind of call to action to create a mob scene at the courthouse, then that he should address, but that's not the same thing as information being published from an open courtroom. He simply doesn't understand anything about technology, computers, the Internet and electronic media. You'd think he never heard of the Internet before!

 

[Palomine]

Friday is a full day, right?

all day

 

[cityslick]

The jurors are not laughing in the courtroom during the trial (unless a witness says something funny). They are laughing when on break or after lunch in their jury room. They are not discussing the case in there. They are celebrating Bdays, a juror got married, and whatever other little life things they have going on.

Why are they so uptight about getting stared at or noise that not even the judge can hear?

 

[Just the Fax]

The jurors are not laughing in the courtroom during the trial (unless a witness says something funny). They are laughing when on break or after lunch in their jury room. They are not discussing the case in there. They are celebrating Bdays, a juror got married, and whatever other little life things they have going on.

Remember the sudden outburst of laughter we heard Monday from the jury room?

 

[gritguy]

The jurors are not laughing in the courtroom during the trial (unless a witness says something funny). They are laughing when on break or after lunch in their jury room. They are not discussing the case in there. They are celebrating Bdays, a juror got married, and whatever other little life things they have going on.

Well if they are bonding that could lead to a quick verdict one way or the other, though there could be a loner. Anyone who has been on a jury knows that instructions aside you take your life experiences in there with you and your BS detector and you try to fathom what is the truth. You base it on testimony, on who you think attorney-wise is being straight up with you, on how people behave in court when they are not on the stand, and your own common sense. But many times, maybe most, after it is all over, if you hear the jurors say what was critical to them you will often be surprised at how something that was never planned to be important turned out to be important.

 

[less0305]

No matter how you try and spin it, and I admit Cooper is getting Ph.D. level worthy spin and support from people he would never care about, the facts of the case aren't going to change. Cooper plotted, planned, and murdered his estranged wife in the early morning hours of July 12, 2008. He sat in his office at work, on a secure laptop computer, and searched Google maps the day before. He focused in closer and dragged the map over, where the spot he ultimately dumped his wife's body, was in plain view.

No amount of spin and wild speculative theories is going to change those facts. Not that there won't be many trying to spin a tall tale of crazy theories. Maybe the spaceship with the aliens did it.

A little virtual trip, much like Scott Peterson's trip to the bay area. Ahhhh, killers make mistakes. If they didn't, none of them would ever be caught. The prisons would be empty.

 

[cityslick]

Well if they are bonding that could lead to a quick verdict one way or the other, though there could be a loner. Anyone who has been on a jury knows that instructions aside you take your life experiences in there with you and your BS detector and you try to fathom what is the truth. You base it on testimony, on who you think attorney-wise is being straight up with you, on how people behave in court when they are not on the stand, and your own common sense. But many times, maybe most, after it is all over, if you hear the jurors say what was critical to them you will often be surprised at how something that was never planned to be important turned out to be important.

I thought I heard mention that the 4 alternates are all women, so it's basically 2 guys and 14 women in the same room. I bet deliberations will be interesting in that room.

 

[gbay]

Everybody sees the world differently, but it is amazing to me that someone, anyone, could look at the photographs of the house and believe that someone had spent hours cleaning that day, or that given the general state of the house someone had chosen to clean the floors in one area with a cleaning solution.

Reminds me of when my boys were teenagers and we would go to the cottage. They would have parties when they shouldn't have...then they would clean the evidence. They didn't have a clue. It was always obvious when we came home what had gone on. It does amaze me that Brad at 35 still didn't have a clue!!

 

[Just the Fax]

A little virtual trip, much like Scott Peterson's trip to the bay area. Ahhhh, killers make mistakes. If they didn't, none of them would ever be caught. The prisons would be empty.

Don't forget checking the tides in the bay on the internet.
Scott Peterson is on death row.
Brad Cooper should consider himself a lucky man.

 

[cityslick]

Don't forget checking the tides in the bay on the internet.
Scott Peterson is on death row.
Brad Cooper should consider himself a lucky man.

True, but he's in CA, which usually death row=life in prison. They don't do a whole lot of executions.

 

[less0305]

I might have missed discussion of this earlier because I have been away for quite a while today, but did anybody else catch Daniels say that Brad told him that the girls and Nancy had been sick that week and had been taking some medicine? Did anyone else testify to this? I thought about the speculation that Brad had given the girls something that would make them sleep ala Jason Young fashion. When I heard that it made me wonder if that could have been true.

 

[TigerBalm]

Another CPD mistake that helps Brad Cooper.
How many is that now?

:gasp:

They be human beings...

 

[gbay]

I might have missed discussion of this earlier because I have been away for quite a while today, but did anybody else catch Daniels say that Brad told him that the girls and Nancy had been sick that week and had been taking some medicine? Did anyone else testify to this? I thought about the speculation that Brad had given the girls something that would make them sleep ala Jason Young fashion. When I heard that it made me wonder if that could have been true.

I just heard him say there was medicine in Nancy's car...nothing about them being sick. I was interrupted a lot today so may have missed it.

 

[FullDisclosure]

Okay, I think I'm caught up with reading today's posts. Here's what I have to say:

In a nutshell--
Yesterday began with admonition not to "stare at the jurors." I worried that it was me he was talking about, because I had looked the day before to see general demographic make-up, reactions from time to time, and to see if they were falling asleep during some of the tedious computer testimony. Since it happened at the start of the day yesterday, I do NOT think it was in response to any big golo group showing up (which I didn't pick out yesterday if there was one.)

The lecture about electronic devices (Gessner was MAD!!) came after the afternoon break IIRC. Anyway, what happened is that news of the Fielding Dr. search hit twitter/the blogeshpere 6 minutes BEFORE WRAL broke the story on their website. Gessner found that highly inappropriate for some reason, so he banned all electronic devices except for council. Today there were signs posted to that effect, and warnings that they would be confiscated.

This afternoon after the break was when talking in the gallery was addressed. Gessner said he hadn't noticed it, but that some jurors had complained to the bailiff about it so it must have been distracting to them. I only noticed occasional whispering.

 

[Albert]

So, about the shoes and what is reported that BC never wore shoes in the house...

When KL was testifying there was a photo introduced as evidence. This photo shows KL and NC standing in front of the christmas tree. Cummings made a comment about which one was taller and he said, something like, "It is hard to tell which one is taller as I don't what type of shoes each of you is wearing" Anyway, the jist of what was implied is that both were wearing shoes inside the house. So.... is it that only BC takes his shoes off when entering the house? Or, is the shoe thing, taking them off at the door, being used as to only explain why different shoes are worn to HT?

 

[Amster]

I predict a guilty verdict. Jury won't need much time. Justice for Nancy. Prison cell for Brad.

 

[gbay]

Okay, I think I'm caught up with reading today's posts. Here's what I have to say:

In a nutshell--
Yesterday began with admonition not to "stare at the jurors." I worried that it was me he was talking about, because I had looked the day before to see general demographic make-up, reactions from time to time, and to see if they were falling asleep during some of the tedious computer testimony. Since it happened at the start of the day yesterday, I do NOT think it was in response to any big golo group showing up (which I didn't pick out yesterday if there was one.)

The lecture about electronic devices (Gessner was MAD!!) came after the afternoon break IIRC. Anyway, what happened is that news of the Fielding Dr. search hit twitter/the blogeshpere 6 minutes BEFORE WRAL broke the story on their website. Gessner found that highly inappropriate for some reason, so he banned all electronic devices except for council. Today there were signs posted to that effect, and warnings that they would be confiscated.

This afternoon after the break was when talking in the gallery was addressed. Gessner said he hadn't noticed it, but that some jurors had complained to the bailiff about it so it must have been distracting to them. I only noticed occasional whispering.

Are Brad's parents still there?? I didn't see them but again wasn't paying close attention.

 

[FullDisclosure]

The jurors are not laughing in the courtroom during the trial (unless a witness says something funny). They are laughing when on break or after lunch in their jury room. They are not discussing the case in there. They are celebrating Bdays, a juror got married, and whatever other little life things they have going on.

Exactly. I don't think they should be frowned upon for laughing in the jury room. They are not allowed to discuss the case. And think about it, this is ALL they are living from 9:30 until 5:00 every day. They are probably dreaming about it. They NEED to be able to let off some steam, to laugh, to have some joy in their days. They deserve that.

 

[Madeleine74]

Remember the sudden outburst of laughter we heard Monday from the jury room?

Yes I do. The other time I was in the courtroom I also heard laughing from the jury room.

 

[CrimeAddict]

Well if they are bonding that could lead to a quick verdict one way or the other, though there could be a loner. Anyone who has been on a jury knows that instructions aside you take your life experiences in there with you and your BS detector and you try to fathom what is the truth. You base it on testimony, on who you think attorney-wise is being straight up with you, on how people behave in court when they are not on the stand, and your own common sense. But many times, maybe most, after it is all over, if you hear the jurors say what was critical to them you will often be surprised at how something that was never planned to be important turned out to be important.

I agree.. as with Scott Peterson trial I watched the jurors when they were questioned after the fact and I do recall some of the things they brought up as being important none of us thought were! Should be VERY interesting.. we may not hear what they have to say though for a while.. They may need a break. I don't even remember what week we are on now!