State v Bradley Cooper 4-25-11

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have both testified in court, and been involved in observing a couple court cases myself. In one case, when the jury was out, the opposing counsel said to me, 'hey don't look so sad, get mommy & daddy to pay', in a civil case in which I was involved. He was a sarcastic SOB in his court room demeanor.

I've lost my audio, anyone else?

Yes, I thought it was me...thanks!
 
I have both testified in court, and been involved in observing a couple court cases myself. In one case, when the jury was out, the opposing counsel said to me, 'hey don't look so sad, get mommy & daddy to pay', in a civil case in which I was involved. He was a sarcastic SOB in his court room demeanor.

I've lost my audio, anyone else?

Are you on wral or abc? I'm on abc and have no sound either. It looks pretty theatrical though. The witness is shaking his head, moving a lot, and looking quite annoyed.
 
Again he stated Det Young was not an expert in cell phones.

Again he gave the PD an out for mishandling the phone.

Wonder how the def feels about that?

Just wonderin'
fran

Just curious, how does saying that the police allowed an unqualified, "non expert" to handle a VITAL piece of evidence in a missing person/murder case, give them an out? Wouldn't that make them look WORSE?

FTR, I do not believe they INTENTIONALLY erased the phone.
 
No audio....go figure.......just when I would be listening........duh wonder how that happens
all the time when things look bad for the state????? IMMHO
 
I also remember how Barry Sheck spoke to States forensic witnesses too..LOL..How about THAT Mr. Soooo in Sooo..!!!! Yikes got emblazened into my memory bank!!

Yes! 'HOW ABOUT THAT, MR. FUNG!' :great: And David Rudolph in the Rae Carruth trial. and that female Durham prosecutor, what was her name, in the Michael Peterson trial.
 
I have both testified in court, and been involved in observing a couple court cases myself. In one case, when the jury was out, the opposing counsel said to me, 'hey don't look so sad, get mommy & daddy to pay', in a civil case in which I was involved. He was a sarcastic SOB in his court room demeanor.

I've lost my audio, anyone else?

Mine is still working, unfortunately. I am growing very weary of this witness.
 
Well, if anything, the pro is proving that this guy criticizes everybody else's work but he can't keep up with his own work. It looks like he missed several things in his "report" and some things are not accurate.
 
June 2009 assessment isnt documented...hummmmm Not to good..Wonder why he didnt bring it to court that ??? His report however reflects what Kurtz told him tho.... I think Boz is showing this investigation as not fully documented for his testimony today...Those pictures showing his manipulations of that phone were done Sept. 2010....

It could be suggested by Boz that the sim card got wiped or deleted by his testings//but we have no proof either way?? hummmmm

We do have proof it was deleted before he had it by the FBI agent.
 
I half-expect Levitan to call Boz a young whippersnapper any minute, and tell him to keep his pants on! Boz has him ruffled!
 
Kurtz has his work cut out for him on this break to get this guy focused.
 
Are you on wral or abc? I'm on abc and have no sound either. It looks pretty theatrical though. The witness is shaking his head, moving a lot, and looking quite annoyed.


Im on WRAL and heard every fiesty word..?? so have no idea why your audio isnt transmitting..We are on 15 minute breaky now..maybe take the time to clear your caches..It may help??
 
Just curious, how does saying that the police allowed an unqualified, "non expert" to handle a VITAL piece of evidence in a missing person/murder case, give them an out? Wouldn't that make them look WORSE?

FTR, I do not believe they INTENTIONALLY erased the phone.

The def has been trying to imply it was intentional to delete the info on the phone. In other words, anything that doesn't look right to the def, it's a conspiracy.

Well, this guy already said he teaches LE how to handle the phones after taken into custody. But he also said, ALL LE handles it improperly.

It gives this LE REASON to have improperly handled the phone.

Does that make sense?

JMHO
fran

PS>...hopefully, this will teach other LE agencies, just as the OJ trial did, that forensic's evidence is very fragile and needs to be handled with strict control and procedures! fran
 
Kurtz has his work cut out for him on this break to get this guy focused.

He does. This witness seems easily addled and rattled at times. I am ready for the next witness already.
 
Im on WRAL and heard every fiesty word..?? so have no idea why your audio isnt transmitting..We are on 15 minute breaky now..maybe take the time to clear your caches..It may help??

Yeah, I'm on wral now and it's fine. I lost my sound on abc.
 
Witness is basically lecturing BZ on the proper procedure, handling, and requests for cell phone forensic evidence (most of which the CPD failed to do). Why? because this line of questioning is inducing these narrative answers.

The net effect is to highlight the CPD and State's inept handling, and failure to effectively request, relevent cell phone forensic evidence.

The witness has not been rattled, and BZ is quickly hopping from one thing to another in an effort to mask the fact that he can't produce a coherent line of questioning for cross.
 
At this point, I am not even listening to what is being said.........I can't believe that the
judge has let it come to this......

JMO La La La

As I asked earlier, is this the first criminal trial you are witnessing? Really curious?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
184
Guests online
1,150
Total visitors
1,334

Forum statistics

Threads
602,126
Messages
18,135,155
Members
231,244
Latest member
HollyMcKee
Back
Top