State v Bradley Cooper 4/14/11

[NCEast]

Good Morning!

I am just now getting caught up here this morning. Remember when the trial first started and the two young women were sitting at the defense table with Kurtz and Trenkle? Judge Gessner made them move to the front row behind them. I am not sure where I heard it, but one of the young women was supposedly from the Innocence Project, and Kurtz said the other one was assisting him with looking up information. The judge made them move anyway.

I could certainly be wrong, but I think Kurtz is behind some kind of blogging campaign. I don't know why he would be, though. Kurtz had wanted his own person to film the trial in tandem with the videographer from WRAL. Maybe it was to watch later and critique his performance. IDK, but the judge denied that request as well.

There is something going on with this trial that I haven't seen in other trials. I am not even sure what it is, but I feel Kurtz has a hand in it. He wants to win at all costs, IMO.

Does anyone else have a really bad feeling that something is going on that we do not know about where the defense is concerned?

MOO's

Thanks for sharing the comments about the two young women. I remember them.
Until yesterday, I didn't have a bad feel. After yesterday's tally of strange events, I do have a feel that something is going on that we have not been made aware of. Kurtz is normally a drug defense attorney, when I found out about that I immediately disliked him and felt he would stoop to the very lowest point to accomplish whatever need he has. If he is doing anything behind the scenes, or anything underhanded to effect the outcome of this trial--or even tiny, daily bits of it, I would not be surprised. I am still wondering how it was that Brad sought out Kurtz initially since his area of expertise is drug related and not homicide. Maybe the sleaze factor plays into it.

 

[dramamama]

Good Morning!

I am just now getting caught up here this morning. Remember when the trial first started and the two young women were sitting at the defense table with Kurtz and Trenkle? Judge Gessner made them move to the front row behind them. I am not sure where I heard it, but one of the young women was supposedly from the Innocence Project, and Kurtz said the other one was assisting him with looking up information. The judge made them move anyway.

I could certainly be wrong, but I think Kurtz is behind some kind of blogging campaign. I don't know why he would be, though. Kurtz had wanted his own person to film the trial in tandem with the videographer from WRAL. Maybe it was to watch later and critique his performance. IDK, but the judge denied that request as well.

There is something going on with this trial that I haven't seen in other trials. I am not even sure what it is, but I feel Kurtz has a hand in it. He wants to win at all costs, IMO.

Does anyone else have a really bad feeling that something is going on that we do not know about where the defense is concerned?

MOO's

I absolutely do. When the trial first started, I didn't know about this website, and was reading the GOLO comments, and was horrified. There didn't seem to be any discussion, but a constant stream of comments geared towards smearing NC. I know that there are always going to be people on both sides, but to attack the victim's character in the most disgusting of ways was shocking to me. I actually wrote an am email of comlaint to wral's news director, and in it, suggested that I wouldn't be surprised if the defense was somehow behind these comments as part of their tactic. I asked that they monitor more closely for defaming statements, because they are likely getting the most viewers due to the livestream. I received a reply the next day that basically said they monitor statements as they come, and if i had complaints, i needed to do it comment by comment on GOLO. When I went to GOLO shortly after, someone posted a snide comment about this site, and said to find it, google w/s cooper. So I did and the rest is history.

I must say, I am so happy I was able to be find this site, and so thankful for the posts that are helping to explain and clear up so much complicated evidence!

 

[johnfear]

Couple of comments on North Carolina grand jury procedures. NC is one of only two remaining states that don't record (in any form) grand jury procedures. The prosecution gets to choose who testifies and the defendant has no rights. There is no doubt in my mind that PD lied to the grand jury in the Duke Lacrosse case. But, it's secret and not recorded so there is little (but not none) proof. One of the police officers slipped up and testified at Nifong's Bar hearing what he told the GJ and there is proof that what he said is a lie. ANYWAY... there are very good reasons that they say in North Carolina that a Grand Jury could convict a ham sandwich of murdering a pig... (or something like that). I give no weight to the fact that someone is indicted by a grand jury...

And Wake County is one of the only counties that uses it to bypass a probable cause/preliminary hearing.

 

[Palomine]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Chappell: “I don’t want you 2 draw some incorrect conclusion if test done now doesn’t have same results as it did 3 years ago.” #coopertrial
2 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply
»
WRAL NEWS in NC
wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Det. Chappell: The zip code Brad searched now incorporates more land & population. Center of the zip code is not the same now. #coopertrial

 

[Palomine]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Det. Chappell: "There were magnifications of two (areas), including the area where Nancy Cooper's body was found." #coopertrial

 

[Palomine]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Defense: "Is it your theory that on July 11 Brad was searching for a place to put his wife's body?" #coopertrial

 

[bloghooligan]

I listened to the clip this morning. We both need to re-listen. Kurtz did NOT argue that there are different versions of the MFT. He argued that the report generated by varying methods of inquiry will vary, as my analogy disclosed, and asked for the REPORT. He did not ask how google crawled the web, he merely asked for the results of the search.

Let's you and I agree, while there is nothing forthcoming, to re-listen to the arguments and come to an agreement. I'm off to hear it again.

I agree in fact I think he specifically said he has the MFT what he doesn't have is the "report" on the data (or extract or whatever you want to call it) that the FBI analyzed and testified to.

 

[gracielee]

The issue as I see it is that Kurtz wants to try to demonstrate that the information is incorrect. His experts can not recreate a scenario in which the information is incorrect because they don't have the means. They can only rely on the information as presented by the agent. MOO

I could be wrong, but somewhere in that jumble of whining I listened to last night, I thought I heard Kurtz, at one point, make some sort of statement about certain of his computer expert/s, come up with the same result and tell him so? It was just a minor thingie, sort of almost under his breath, but I really thought I heard some sort of concession sneak out of his lips?

 

[cody100]

Just to be clear, I don't wholly disagree with your point but I've also no idea if the report that any MS-blessed tools generate might also be considered under non-disclosure as well. *shrug*

Thanks both of you for your input. Great input. I realize the judge did not know what Kurtz was talking about, and he was honest about it. I was expecting him to bring FBI guy in and ask him some questions before ruling on it until going on with the trial became a priority, for good reason.

 

[Palomine]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Det. Chappell: That's consistent with what I found on his computer. The fact remains, it was at a high level of magnification. #coopertrial

 

[LaLaw2000]

Yes, and those people slam their community and the police. I'm like - why do you live there??!!!!

These same people need to remember that the next time they call LE for an emergency of their own, IMO. They may slam LE all they want, but if they call them for any reason, LE will respond. It really chaps me when people down LE. We are sitting here looking at all of this in hindsight. Could any of those who are so critical have done it perfectly? Detective Young made a mistake. It wasn't for malicious reasons. He wasn't trying to make a mistake.

The most dangerous call LE goes on is a domestic violence call. You know what you are dealing with in a robbery, for instance, but never in a domestic violence call. I am just using this as an example. The general public simply does not realize what some LE deals with on a daily basis.

less0305, this tirade wasn't directed at you or anyone else really. I just needed to get this off my chest.

MOO

 

[Palomine]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Defense asks Chappell about cookies on computers & how they're created when someone visits a website. #coopertrial

 

[bloghooligan]

And Wake County is one of the only counties that uses it to bypass a probably cause/preliminary hearing.

Unfortunately that happens across the state. Due to the fact that there is no record of what goes on behind those closed doors the process is ripe for the prosecutors to abuse. How hard would it be to put a recorder in the room and why shouldn't a defendant have a record of the hearing? Almost all other states and the federal government agree....

 

[Palomine]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Det. Chappell: I found 92 hits on Google on Brad's computer. No cookie for Fielding Drive view on Google though. #coopertrial

 

[Danielle59]

I understood it more like -- the prosecution witness used specific software to produce a very detailed 'report' of the data (non techy terms used). The defense has the data but it makes it difficult to question the witness about the data without having the same very detailed "report" that he is testifying from. I think I understand what he is saying. How did the judge ultimately rule -- was the Pros going to turn over the very detailed "report"?

The Judge said no to the Defense. Think of it this way. Remember the old man FBI guy that talked about the cell phones? Pros objected that Defense wanted to ask about an email that explained some software. Pros said that the witness didn't have that email so Defense should not be able to question him (this was before we foundout witness did have it, but that doesn't hurt my initial example). Anyhow, the Pros said because the witness hadn't seen that exact email and had discussion on it then he would not be able to comment on it. Now the Pros is saying, you can run your own, yes, it will be different data output, but you can question the witness on that. The Pros wants both sides of the fence, and then muddies it up more by bringing in National Security as to why the Defense could not look at what the Pros is saying is evidence against him.

Do you see the disconnect? How can Defense question the witness on something that has a different data output if they run their own when he needs to ask witness about the data that the witness found when he ran his report? It makes no sense.

Defense did not want the process or procedure, he jsut wanted the final output so he could see what was being used as evidence so he could question it.

 

[ncsu95]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Chappell: “I don’t want you 2 draw some incorrect conclusion if test done now doesn’t have same results as it did 3 years ago.” #coopertrial
2 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply
»
WRAL NEWS in NC
wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Det. Chappell: The zip code Brad searched now incorporates more land & population. Center of the zip code is not the same now. #coopertrial

The only problem with this is that Fielding was never in the zip code. It's always been a Raleigh address with zip 27606. It was 27606 3 years ago.

 

[Palomine]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Chappell: If file's deleted/overwritten, can't be recovered. Defense: You think Brad deleted cookie? Chappell: Possibly. #coopertrial

 

[less0305]

OOOOHHHH, we got some tweets!!

 

[NCEast]

I could be wrong, but somewhere in that jumble of whining I listened to last night, I thought I heard Kurtz, at one point, make some sort of statement about certain of his computer expert/s, come up with the same result and tell him so? It was just a minor thingie, sort of almost under his breath, but I really thought I heard some sort of concession sneak out of his lips?

I know what you are referring to....I caught it as well. But then he went off onto something else and let it drop. I think it may have been a slip. My take is that Zell and the judge are satisfied that the Kurtz team has the output or data and Kurtz was wanting the tool/method--his excuse was so that he could cross examine the witness using the same method, etc. I guess none of it matters today since Judge Gessner ruled against the defense but I am certain we will hear about it again during the appeals process.

 

[snowshuze]

These same people need to remember that the next time they call LE for an emergency of their own, IMO. They may slam LE all they want, but if they call them for any reason, LE will respond. It really chaps me when people down LE. We are sitting here looking at all of this in hindsight. Could any of those who are so critical have done it perfectly? Detective Young made a mistake. It wasn't for malicious reasons. He wasn't trying to make a mistake.

The most dangerous call LE goes on is a domestic violence call. You know what you are dealing with in a robbery, for instance, but never in a domestic violence call. I am just using this as an example. The general public simply does not realize what some LE deals with on a daily basis.

less0305, this tirade wasn't directed at you or anyone else really. I just needed to get this off my chest.

MOO

Another search warrant was secured for a deeper investigation into that device. In the grand scheme of things, not that big of a deal, IMO.

ETA: LE investigations are an ever evolving updating upgrading process, learn from mistakes, move on.