State v Bradley Cooper 4-27-2011

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Does the prosecution know their whispers can be discerned on the WRAL video? I thought I heard something like "This is our ducks" right at the end of the day in reference to the Cisco router issue. Other whispering has been clearly audible, which seems rather problematic.
 
Personally, I don't want to hear from them anymore. They play dirty, not allowing defense to question the most (only) incriminating evidence in this case. Having 3 years to work on this and now this last minute thing, probably from reading posts here. I'll be surprised if the judge doesn't allow it but IMO he should not. They don't deserve it. And if he does allow it, I want JW back to interpret ALL of the FBI logs. (but I know that won't happen). It will more of the same. Top secret, you can't see it.

Also, I think if it was something big, Cummings wouldn't have thrown that temper tantrum over the ducks.

I want to know the truth, but I somewhat agree with you. They had three years to build this case. Defense asked for a delay and the State fought it, the Judge, this same Judge said no delay. If they were not prepared for the case that is their fault, they rested their case last week. The Prosecution is not supposed to keep getting bites from the apple.
 
What was the point of Cummings bringing up the DD lesbian stuff? Seemed pretty gossipy and completely irrelevant. And a low blow (why ruin yet another person in this trial).
 
Not much difference today from what we heard yesterday. Today, Cary couples playing "mixed doubles" in the tennis court. Yesterday, outside the tennis court :D
 
During direct. Keep in mind this was the defense case (first five minutes), so it was Kurtz's questioning. Then Kurtz passed out the actual cursor file printed out to each juror. Had him verify each time was identical to the nanosecond.

Was it the same as the .bmp files that we discussed here last night?
 
What was the point of Cummings bringing up the DD lesbian stuff? Seemed pretty gossipy and completely irrelevant. And a low blow (why ruin yet another person in this trial).

I thought Trenkle brought that up? (It's Wednesday so I had my usual distractions.)
 
LyndyLoo,

For what's it's worth I choose to believe that BC washed the foyer because it was not the murder scene. It was done for the benefit of the CPD as a red herring X marks the spot thingee.

Clean the foyer, put the ducks away in a box, and the LEO's will move heaven and earth investigating that spot, to the exclusion of other locations.

I also believe his clean trunk was also another Red herring. NC was not transported in BC's car. But the CPD tried to find that he did, to the exclusion of NC's vehicle. After all finding NC's hair in her BMW, would not be unusual. Finding her hair in his trunk would be....

Just IMHO

So now he also had time to create a 'diversion' crime scene? I'm sorry, even if he did do it, well, this is just too unbelievable to think he had the time for all of this, in addition to doing laundry and getting milk and dumping a body and disposing of routers and checking NC's emails then tending to the children and taking the license plate off the car and put it back on and and and...
 
Was it the same as the .bmp files that we discussed here last night?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "was it the same". Are you asking if it was a bmp file? Or are you asking if it had the same time stamp results as the ones displayed by another user here? (I know it was a username with sleuth in it, but I can't remember exactly).

If it's the first--he wasn't sure if a cursor file would download as a .bmp or a .cur, but when he did the test on a vista system, in 2008, it was a .cur.

If it's the second--the time stamps are equivalent down to the nanosecond. We have no way of knowing all 8 MACE values of the test conducted by the other user, and it would frankly be way to complicated to pull that, so I have no idea if it's the same. He did say he couldn't think of a situation where they would ALL be exactly the same. That's not the nature of the file.
 
I thought Trenkle brought that up? (It's Wednesday so I had my usual distractions.)

No, it was Cummings on cross. No context, didn't even weave it into anything else, just asked the witness if he had told someone that DD is divorcing to become a lesbian.

Witness answered in the affirmative and said he told CPD (as asked) everything he had heard about everyone close to NC.
 
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "was it the same". Are you asking if it was a bmp file? Or are you asking if it had the same time stamp results as the ones displayed by another user here? (I know it was a username with sleuth in it, but I can't remember exactly).

If it's the first--he wasn't sure if a cursor file would download as a .bmp or a .cur, but when he did the test on a vista system, in 2008, it was a .cur.

If it's the second--the time stamps are equivalent down to the nanosecond. We have no way of knowing all 8 MACE values of the test conducted by the other user, and it would frankly be way to complicated to pull that, so I have no idea if it's the same. He did say he couldn't think of a situation where they would ALL be exactly the same. That's not the nature of the file.

That would be understandable because most people don't clear their cache after every search. If it is the .bmp file, it would not have the same values unless the cache was cleared. If the work computer was set to clear cache at log off, that would make sense if the search he did that day was the only search he did that day.
 
So now he also had time to create a 'diversion' crime scene? I'm sorry, even if he did do it, well, this is just too unbelievable to think he had the time for all of this, in addition to doing laundry and getting milk and dumping a body and disposing of routers and checking NC's emails then tending to the children and taking the license plate off the car and put it back on and and and...

If Brad did it, in the foyer, and transported her body in his trunk, then he had reason and time to clean them, and did an outstanding job because he left no traces.

If he murdered her in the front yard, and carried her body to the dump site, in her car, then why clean the foyer and create a forensically pristine trunk? My thesis is so that's where the CPD looked first and no other places. They would find nothing, and he using the police to provide reasonable doubt.

If that's not it, then he is innocent......take your choice.
 
As I sit here up on my lofty :fence: I have pretty confidently nailed it down to two very possible potential scenarios with a couple of odd ball wild card scenarios to add a little extra reasonable doubt.

Top 2 contenders:

#1 BC there is still one tiny detail that nags me

#2 involves a woman, a cell phone, and a run in the park
 
I'm just catching up, and you guys are cracking me up! Do you think I could claim the mani/pedi and the waxing as business expenses?

Absolutely and you may want to consider the outfit you wear to court after all - all eyes will be on you. Expert witnesses don't come cheap.:woohoo:
 
As I sit here up on my lofty :fence: I have pretty confidently nailed it down to two very possible potential scenarios with a couple of odd ball wild card scenarios to add a little extra reasonable doubt.

Top 2 contenders:

#1 BC there is still one tiny detail that nags me

#2 involves a woman, a cell phone, and a run in the park

I'm intrigued. Does #2 involve an angry woman?
 
BUT the elephant in the room is that Nancy is DEAD and not Bradley..:twocents:

S0- what does that have to do with BOTH of their extra marital affairs. Just because he cheated (as did she) it doesn't make him a murderer.
 
Can we discuss how much of an impact JA has had on this case?

1) The call:
She made that phone call to police (hysterical) that BC may have harmed her friend. Most people would not jump immediately to: My friend must be dead because she left the house 5 hours ago and is not back yet. Then she goes to the Cooper's and is screaming and swearing at MH. "He @#&*#ing killed her!!!" When MH said he had tennis plans with BC, she got an attitude about that and said "Don't talk to the police".

2) The laundry detergent:
She told police she believed the Cooper's only used ALL detergent so it was suspicious that BC bought Tide.
We know from court that the Cooper's purchased 30 bottles of Tide, 1 bottle of All in the past several years.

3)Ducks and Sticks:
She said she was at the Cooper's on Friday and seemed to recall (although not positive) that ducks and sticks were present in the foyer and now they are not. CPD RAN with that as "a sign of struggle". Never even considered that just maybe NC had packed them away in anticipation of her move. This has been a HUGE part of this case. They never even looked for them because they were positive BC had to have disposed of them somewhere.

4) Painting plans - She called police and told them NC was due to arrive by 9AM to help her paint (for no money) and we now know that NC told several people she was sick of painting. CC never told police about NC's painting plans the day she went missing, not until a month later. HP called the Cooper house and spoke to BC Sat AM and never mentioned anything about NC being at JA's to paint. She only called to firm up pool plans for later that day. So if HP knew about the paint plans, why didn't she call NC on her cell? Now we have a witness who claims NC told her she was going jogging the next day. And no one else at the party was told about painting plans the next day.

NC also told CC she went jogging at Lake Johnson on Thursday, but no one knows who she was with. (JP?)

5) Both JA and BA made it a point to write about the fact that BC was a VOIP engineer. They had to steer police toward the "alleged" spoofed call.

6) JA called the pros about the jury member speaking about the case.

7) JA told CD to write a negative affidavit so BC would lose custody of the girls,and then cut off contact with her when she wouldn't.

8) JA went to NC's to help her organize and unpack, yet NC called the RE agent the previous day and told him she needed to find a new place ASAP. So why would NC still organize and unpack?

So what does this mean? I don't know, but to me it indicates she probably knows something. She worked very hard to steer the police in the investigation, beginning with the initial phone call.

Like I had mentioned previously, something about her and JP just strikes me as odd. I feel they are both hiding something important. Wondering if the defense will bring JA back up on the stand? I hope so, because I think we will hear things that will give us more insight as to why she lied / gave misinformation throughout from the very begining
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
150
Guests online
1,743
Total visitors
1,893

Forum statistics

Threads
602,112
Messages
18,134,846
Members
231,235
Latest member
craig21876
Back
Top