State v Bradley Cooper 4-26-11

[ohiogirl]

DNA would disprove that in a minute. Anyone done a test? That is a red herring in my mind. Until someone says JP is the father, which the defense should do if it is true, it is confusing the case.

BC had the most to gain, no one else did.

 

[bloghooligan]

Good for you! (That is sincere....)

However, when you return from, just an example, Texas, do you get a guitar and start singing "The Yellow Rose of Texas"? Practice your Southern dialect? Suggest to your spouse you relocate to the great state? Do you carry on an email/phone correspondence (personal) with the women you meet, without your spouses knowledge? I think what happens after the trip is even more important....

Uh oh, I've come home from at least one business trip and discussed moving to that location with my spouse. I don't cheat, period. But other non-murders.

 

[Madeleine74]

Statements are evidence too.

On the very first day (July 12) police learned that Nancy spent a lot of money. Brad made sure they knew that. (ding: BC focused on money spent by missing wife)

They also learned from Brad that Nancy did not go running alone and she had a running partner she was training with. (ding: maybe running partner can help)

Brad told them the marriage had issues but all was fine and they were working on it (ding: lie discovered).

Brad tells police he spent 6 hrs cleaning that morning and doing multiple loads of laundry, since he got up at 4am (ding: house is a cluttered mess)

This is all evidence.

 

[unc70]

Those green juicy ones

Best in garlic butter.

 

[ohiogirl]

JP. He was very concerned about his children and reputation along with his livelihood. He was upset with Nancy for spreading something negative about him. He had questioned paternity. He had just as much opportunity as BC. Lied about being in contact with NC. His behavior when talking to police was extremely suspicious, inconsistent, and he attempted to twist what he said in those interviews today on the stand.

But,he has alibi. If someone wants to prove he wasn't where he said he was, have at it.

 

[zenreaper]

Just watching JP's testimony now. Seeing his body language during the first interview is very telling, especially when talking about NC being dead. Other thing I noticed so far, he said on the next morning he went around asking all of the usual people he sees on his (their) route whether they saw NC and says he explained to the "We lost our friend." Odd thing to say that you lost a 34 year old woman, unless of course you're talking about lost as in death. Back to the tapes....

Sorry, "odd" statements are only incriminating when applied to BC...LOL

 

[ohiogirl]

Best in garlic butter.

Did you see Top Chef Master last week? They had to cook them. Gross

 

[zenreaper]

But,he has alibi. If someone wants to prove he wasn't where he said he was, have at it.

BC has an alibi, she CALLED him at 6:40 while he was on his way to, or AT the store. No one has proved she DIDN'T.

 

[ohiogirl]

BC has an alibi, she CALLED him at 6:40 while he was on his way to, or AT the store. No one has proved she DIDN'T.

That is in question

 

[Cheyenne130]

BC has an alibi, she CALLED him at 6:40 while he was on his way to, or AT the store. No one has proved she DIDN'T.

No one has proved she DID.

 

[Madeleine74]

BC has an alibi, she CALLED him at 6:40 while he was on his way to, or AT the store. No one has proved she DIDN'T.

The only thing proven is that BC's cell phone received a 32 second call from 'home.' There is no proof a human picked up the phone and dialed that number at 6:40am from BC's house.

 

[Danielle59]

Not evidence of murder, but it certainly goes to "state of mind"...

I don't think we even know when he quit talking to her, it could have been a year before. What "state of mind" does it go to? That he liked to talk to other women? Guilty as charged.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

this is exactly what my post was meant to address:

posted earlier:

I am finding the defense's case so far a lot more interesting than the prosecutions' case. The prosecutions' seemed to drag on forever. The defenses' seems to be moving along quite faster and is a lot more entertaining. Can't wait til the Cary Clique is brought back on the stand. It will be like watching a real episode of Real Housewives.

=========

This isn't entertainment, it isn't an episode of a TV program. Nor is it a sporting event. It's about the terrible murder of a young mother. The circumstantial evidence has been listed and relisted numerous tiimes. I see no reason to repost it yet again. Somehow Nancy cooper has been reduced to a sordid cliche in all this IMO.

I apologize if you misunderstood what I had posted. I may have worded it the wrong way and for that I apologize. Again, my heart goes out to NC and her friends and family.

What I meant was that I felt that the prosecutions case dragged and dragged and dragged. I feel that the defense's case is moving along a lot faster. I don't think the jury can stand to hear another 6 weeks of testimony. I think this case needs to wrap up sooner rather than later. I find it much more appealing to listen to Kurtz (as crazy as that may be) than Cummings. (I must admit - they are both equally annoying in their vocal tones)

As far as my interests? I am not a technical person and I find it hard to follow all of the exact technical information in this case. I find it much more intriguing for me to hear from witnesses of events, occurrences etc. I personally know of some of NC's friends that had previously testified and will be testifying again. So, yes, I am curious to hear what comes up.

We will have to agree to disagree on all of the circumstantial evidence. You feel there is enough and I will politely disagree. Let's leave that at that.

 

[ohiogirl]

Are all of the reasonable doubt posters really thinking that he could have gotten this lucky? or are you just saying that it can't be proven? Come on, tell the truth or shun the devil.

 

[SleuthinNC]

But,he has alibi. If someone wants to prove he wasn't where he said he was, have at it.

So does BC. JP hasn't said where he was. He said he had his kids, not what he did with them or where he was with them. He doesn't remember. It wasn't a normal Saturday for him either. It was not the normal time his ex-wife went to work. The document has also not been authenticated. Not a very clear alibi if you ask me.

 

[SleuthSayer]

OOPS! Sorry. Question still stands, I just need to attach it to the correct poster.

OK, I did it one more time repeating approximately the same search he would have done. I'm sure the next response from Brad's team will be that he dragged first and then zoomed so it's totally different.

I did this with Win7 and IE8. I have a laptop with Vista, but it isn't healthy right now. I'm sure that folks on Brad's team will be convinced that the behavior is entirely different in Vista (it won't be). The tool I used does not show milliseconds. Feel free to find your own tool that does show ms and prove the experiment wrong with that. I'm done with it.

Here are the details on what I did:

First, you must understand that Windows Explorer does not show you the actual contents of the TIF. Instead it shows you something that is a blending of the source file on the Internet (the .cur in this case) and the temporary version on the local disk (the .bmp). The actual temporary files are treated as hidden files.

So, you need something other than Windows Explorer to see the raw file in TIF (unless you can find some combination of options that will cause Windows Explorer to show them, I couldn't).

I downloaded and installed a free program called FileLocator Lite. After installation, I ran that. It comes up with a main widow that is a search window. In the "File Name" field, I put "*hand*.bmp" and then clicked the arrow to start searching.

Once I found the two files, I clicked right and selected "Delete", but it wouldn't' let me delete them because IE was running. So, I closed IE and then deleted the files.

Then, I restarted IE. In IE, I went to www.google.com. I then clicked the left mouse button on "Maps" at the top. When I got to the Maps page, I put in "27518" and clicked "Search Maps" with the left mouse button. The hybrid satellite/roads map came up. Because I didn't have a prayer of finding Fielding Drive without zooming, I clicked the left mouse button on the "+" at the top of the slider at the left. I clicked a total of 4 times on the "+".

Once zoomed in at that level, I clicked and held the left mouse button and dragged the map to the left looking for Fielding Dr. I was panning mostly due east and thought I had gone too far without finding it. So, I released the mouse button for a couple of seconds to take a look and get my bearings. Then realized that I needed to go south. So, I again clicked the left mouse button and held it and started dragging the map upward (to go south) until I saw Lily Atkins. Then I knew where I was, so I started dragging some combination of left and up until Fielding Dr was in the middle of the map.

I then went back to FileLocator Lite and repeated the search for "*hand*.bmp". Once the two files were found, I adjusted the columns to get all of the fields viewable.

I then screen captured the information. I copied that image and pasted it into a blank Powerpoint document. Because my username is in the directory path, I put a square over that part of both paths. I changed the color of the outline and the fill of the square to black. I then grouped the picture and the square. I then clicked right on the object and selected "Save as Picture". I picked JPEG for the format. I named the file "hands2.jpg".

I had to then mail the .jpg file from one e-mail account to the other to get it to the laptop that I wanted to post from. I attached the results below.

Enjoy.

 

[bloghooligan]

The only thing proven is that BC's cell phone received a 32 second call from 'home.' There is no proof a human picked up the phone and dialed that number at 6:40am from BC's house.

There is proof that a call was made. The prosecution CLAIMS a machine made the call THEY need to prove that.

JP's alibi is weaker -- says he was alone, with his children. No proof.

 

[RR0004]

So all of the reasonable doubt posters think that there is someone out there that did it? .
Really, you think that BC was that lucky?
I understand there is a faction that hates the "look closest to home" theory, but, Le couldn't rule him out Where else would they look?
If there is no one else, you have to look at who woud gain. It doesn't matter if there is someone else beyond a reasonable doubt, there is always the man in the moon, you have to go with what is the most logical answer.
there it is, the most logical, did he get so lucky to have his dear wife offed by someone totally uninvolved in this peyton place drama?

Brilliant post, Ohiogirl!

 

[SleuthinNC]

Are all of the reasonable doubt posters really thinking that he could have gotten this lucky? or are you just saying that it can't be proven? Come on, tell the truth or shun the devil.

I'm not sure what you mean by lucky. That somebody may have killed his wife and he is charged with the crime and loses his children with no evidence that clearly points to him?

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

I don't think we even know when he quit talking to her, it could have been a year before. What "state of mind" does it go to? That he liked to talk to other women? Guilty as charged.

What about the state of mind NC had with JP. They had phone calls, etc. Again, not trying to bash NC, but why is it okay for her to do it and not BC. I don't get it why he is deemed so awful at his indiscretions (and this one NOT being one of them, because noone has said anything happened with this woman), but NC is not. Very odd