State v Bradley Cooper 4/14/11

[cody100]

One other thing I took away from from the MFT argument by Kurtz. The judge has essentially ruled that whatever the defense has is the same or equal to what the prosecution has. If the defense brings forth an expert that can show according to our data these files were tampered with and this is how we know, there is no room for the prosecution to turn around and say, well we don't see that in our data.

Yes, Sleuth. I agree that is correct. And, it is possible that is where they were going with this all along. That would be interesting, wouldn't it?

 

[momof7]

CAREFUL....

that is a loaded question. The FBI Technical guy should probably not have a theory. He analyzes data and presents findings. Interpretation is not up to him, nor are theories about why the data exists...

Exactly. We all theorize but isn't the witness obligated to only state facts? Was Katz hoping for a yes answer, something that could be used for a mistrail?

Just wondering!

Kelly

 

[Danielle59]

Zell and the judge are convinced that Kurtz already has the printout/data/exact same information. Kurtz began with wanting the data and then changed up in his argument that he wanted the method used to extract the data.

The Judge didn't understand any of it, and Zell knew that Kurtz did not have it and was purposely obfuscating the issue based on the Judge's not understanding.

 

[Albert]

Now that is interesting. So he didn't just clear the cookies on IE.

Would cookies be present if private browsing was enabled?

 

[RobT]

One other thing I took away from from the MFT argument by Kurtz. The judge has essentially ruled that whatever the defense has is the same or equal to what the prosecution has. If the defense brings forth an expert that can show according to our data these files were tampered with and this is how we know, there is no room for the prosecution to turn around and say, well we don't see that in our data.

I would think that the prosecution could simply ask something along the lines of (if they know the answers are all no):
"are you aware of what tools the FBI uses?"
"did you use those tools?"

and then a yes question:
"would you expect the tools used by our Federal Gov't to be more accurate than yours?"

 

[JiminWilton]

CAREFUL....

that is a loaded question. The FBI Technical guy should probably not have a theory. He analyzes data and presents findings. Interpretation is not up to him, nor are theories about why the data exists...

While I don't know if he were tendered as an expert (and I imagine he was), then theories and opinions are allowed.

 

[momof7]

One other thing I took away from from the MFT argument by Kurtz. The judge has essentially ruled that whatever the defense has is the same or equal to what the prosecution has. If the defense brings forth an expert that can show according to our data these files were tampered with and this is how we know, there is no room for the prosecution to turn around and say, well we don't see that in our data.

Then this would effectively alleviate any appeals process on this as this would mean both def/pros are on even and level playing fields. One expert for the def with the ability to show tampering or any other would then change the whole thing for the prosecution. They would essentially not be able to recover from that information.

Just my thoughts.
Kelly

 

[Danielle59]

That was what I was thinnking, this shows BC did attempt to clear out cookies. I am hoping Pros can show other sites that no cookies appear on the PC.

Kelly

We don't know that, his broswer could be set to clear all cookies automatically each time he signs off. Then we would need to know how long it has had that setting to make it relevant.

 

[SleuthinNC]

Would cookies be present if private browsing was enabled?

No cookies but also no TIF

 

[Danielle59]

If the actual printout, then entered in to public record, allows someone to reverse engineer how this information is obtained then yes... it most certainly should be protected. MFT and the filesystem that uses it NTFS are very protected trade secrets by Microsoft and any third-party software that is able to access that filesystem is either blessed by Microsoft and a ton of non-disclosure agreements or reverse engineered. Simple as that.

But Kurtz offered to review it 'in camera" in the Judge's chambers in which case he would be able to review to base his cross, but he would not have a copy and that was denied also.

 

[sunshine05]

CAREFUL....

that is a loaded question. The FBI Technical guy should probably not have a theory. He analyzes data and presents findings. Interpretation is not up to him, nor are theories about why the data exists...

Well, he did voluntarily offer his opinion that searches for museums could have been part of an alibi.

 

[Maja]

No cookies but also no TIF

"C is for cookie, that's good enough for me!" ... sorry, had to say it

 

[Palomine]

we should be live after this witness

 

[SleuthinNC]

So what they are saying if the tweets are correct is that BC cleared a single cookie but did not clear history nor clear cache nor manually delete the Temporary Internet Files. This makes not much sense.

 

[Danielle59]

It seems reasonable to me the judge could have seen it as you lay out. Probably from what I heard I would have. But, on the other hand, I don't see it as very prejudicial that he was denied. As I understood it, and I could be wrong, it was something he wanted mostly to go off on this tangent that the computer was tampered with.

If the PD wanted to frame BC (I realize that's not what you're saying I'm on a tangent now), IMO, they easily could have done it by moving actual dirt and straw from the crime scene to the house and saying look what we found. I can't see altering computer files as their master plan, especially when to be fair they have not demonstrated themselves to be masters of technology.

He wanted it so he could prepare his cross examination. They are basing their testimony on what they have, the Defense should be able to see it.

They are using this information to be their coup d'gras regardless of how masterful they have been on technology otherwise.

 

[gracielee]

we should be live after this witness

I'm guessing this witness will at least go until lunch.

 

[cody100]

The Judge didn't understand any of it, and Zell knew that Kurtz did not have it and was purposely obfuscating the issue based on the Judge's not understanding.

That was my take on it. Well stated Danielle. The judge admitted he didn't know what Kurtz was talking about. IMO this may become an issue unless showing their data/report is part of the FBI security issue. What this does is deprives the defendant to examine the final report and the actual work product imo. I am glad to see so many ideas and comments on this question.

 

[johnfear]

He wanted it so he could prepare his cross examination. They are basing their testimony on what they have, the Defense should be able to see it.

They are using this information to be their coup d'gras regardless of how masterful they have been on technology otherwise.

I think he wanted the "experts" to verify there was no tampering because he has contradictory evidence that will negate them. If no tampering is said ten times, then the pros can't say: You're DEFENSE expert tampered with the search.

 

[cityslick]

CAREFUL....

that is a loaded question. The FBI Technical guy should probably not have a theory. He analyzes data and presents findings. Interpretation is not up to him, nor are theories about why the data exists...

This was his answer:

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

So he didn't give him a yes or no answer, just a safe 'that's what it looks like' answer.

Basically though, isn't this evidence 'prints on the gun'? There is no reasonable explanation why he would have a high level of magnification of the dump site a day before she went missing. Even if you play devils advocate and think this was done purposely by CPD, what kind of expertise and coordination do you thing that would take? And what would be the motive behind it? Because they didn't like BC? Because they want to preserve Cary as a place where no murder can take place?

It's just really a stretch that you would have some cops buy into framing this guy by putting high magnification images of Fielding on his work computer. Why wouldn't they had done that on his home computer and change the date to the morning of July 12th, where it would make a ton more sense?

 

[Danielle59]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Det. Chappell says he'd be happy to replicate it, but you can't compare the search Brad did in 2008 with a search now. #coopertrial

That doesn't make sense, only the image should be different because time has evolved and houses and businesses have been built, but it should be comparable.