State v Bradley Cooper 4-27-2011

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Gorealtor, looking forward to your thoughts about today's testimony and also a little about what happened at he end of the day.
 
That, imo, was a seminar on exactly the wrong way to do a cross. just surrender the fact that the ducks were ok and not damaged in the struggle. the fact you put yourself on a limb about them, ADA, is not this lady's fault.

I told you guys this was a mess. See now?

Gessner's thinking...can I just use this same trial but white out BC's name and put someone else in there? We could just make it work.
 
The thing someone needs to remind Cummings of is when defense showed JA the picture of the duck from the fridge, she said "no, that's not it". So had she *already* lied about it then?

No. The two on the foyer table were the red and white ducks. She didn't lie. They were not there on that Saturday when she was brought in to look through the house. (Or whatever day it was that she was brought in.)
 
Hey gritguy,
Doesn't discovery go both ways regarding evidence for trial?
 
meh. sorry, but after seeing her testimony I am reminded of cindy anthony. jmo.

No kidding. I'm wondering if there will be this much support and warnings concerning Cindy Anthony when Casey's trial begins?
 
So where are the ducks right now? Do we get to see said ducks? Geez my head is spinning.

Yes, they were placed in a line on the witness stand with the beaks pointing to the jury box. They said quack.
 
I told you guys this was a mess. See now?

Gessner's thinking...can I just use this same trial but white out BC's name and put someone else in there? We could just make it work.

He may very well be wanting to white out his own name before this trial is over.
 
Please know that I am not putting Mrs. Cooper down, but I do think she would protect Bradley as much as she could, even if that includes being elusive about the ducks. She is not unlike other Mothers of the accused.

MOO
 
Am I missing it, or did the police not have access to the home to look at anything they wanted before the ducks were tendered as part of a bartering payment?

Sorry, fellow BDI camp, but the ADA looked foolish IMO.

And you know what, that comes from too much speculation about stuff not necessary to directly support your narrative.
 
THO I cant link to proof of this, but I dont think that option was even available before Nancy moved everything down to US..and unfortunately no one else thought of it on her behalf...no need to be testy..I recall from testimony felt she couldnt get any bank account in USA..It comes down to her belief and she cant testify as to what she knew back then...:maddening:

If you live in Canada and open a bank account, you have the option of opening a US account which you can then access in the US. I have not believed that there was any good reason for Nancy to claim that she could not have a bank account.
 
Defense says they may end their case this week. Depends on new evidence coming from DA's office from Cisco on logs etc.
 
Ah, finally a true statement from the prosecution. The fact that they paraded all sorts of witnesses in front of the jury to suggest that the ducks were part of a struggle, when all along the ducks were in a box, makes the state witnesses look like a bunch of liars.

Honestly, my mouth dropped open at that point. I could not believe he was actually pointing that out for the jury. WOW. What a moronic moment in this trial (and that has nothing at all to do with NC, BC, JA, DD, HM, or any other initials right now).
 
Update on juror: Employer asked her to submit resignation. She did not. Judge orders sheriff's office to talk with employer.
 
No. The two on the foyer table were the red and white ducks. She didn't lie. They were not there on that Saturday when she was brought in to look through the house. (Or whatever day it was that she was brought in.)

So you're saying the black duck was never in the foyer? Just the other two? Because she didn't say anything about the color, just that it wasn't THE same ducks.

ETA: I said early on in this, that I'll bet they were packed away, along with the sticks since NC was packing up the house to move and it turns out that is exactly what it was. Isn't it funny that JA - ONE PERSON stating that there were ducks there on the Friday before resulted in *proof* of a struggle in the foyer. In fact, I think even JA said she wasn't positive they were there on Friday, just that she noticed they weren't there when she went on Saturday.
 
It was pertinent evidence, discovery matter, and she didn't tell anybody where they were when she knew all along? Of course that matters. Did you not catch all the references to the blow poke in the Michael Peterson case?

She told the defense attorney. It wasn't her job to tell the prosecution.
 
No kidding. I'm wondering if there will be this much support and warnings concerning Cindy Anthony when Casey's trial begins?

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

oh sorry, i should be nice and take back one of those back :crazy:
 
DA = jerk.

She has proof that the state's theory of the ducks was total bunk, and they're mad she didn't tell them before she took the stand?

That was a pretty sorry episode, IMO.

I respectfully disagree with you here, gg. If she knew where those pieces of evidence were, and she agreed she was present for JA's testimony, she had a legal responsiblity to tell the defense lawyers where they were. I think that is the law, isn't it? Those items would have been consider evidence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
152
Guests online
1,122
Total visitors
1,274

Forum statistics

Threads
602,128
Messages
18,135,229
Members
231,244
Latest member
HollyMcKee
Back
Top