State v Bradley Cooper 4-27-2011

[NCEast]

I can't agree with no evidence but do agree with the poor job done by the prosecution. Today's outrageous display by Cummings was the worst I've seen in a court of law by either side. MOO

The evidence is flimsy. I am wondering what other shoe may fall tomorrow, or Friday, or next week if it goes into next week. After the duck fiasco, I'm not feeling very secure with the State's case whatsoever.

 

[Cheyenne130]

The evidence is flimsy. I am wondering what other shoe may fall tomorrow, or Friday, or next week if it goes into next week. After the duck fiasco, I'm not feeling very secure with the State's case whatsoever.

I believe the evidence is still strong. I do agree with the duck fiasco. I think HC should be fired. If the other two agreed with what he did, they should be fired too. That was ridiculous! MOO

 

[sunshine05]

With everything that's come out in court the past few days, now I really want to know what else was on NC's cell phone. And why CPD felt they needed to erase everything.

 

[ncsu95]

So which blunder today was the worst for Coomings?

1. Asking a defense witness to read an alternate theory of the crime that pointed to someone other than BC (with no followup to show that couldn't have happened)?
2. Saying in front of the jury that since the ducks have appeared, it blows the prosecutions theory that there was a struggle in the foyer that destroyed the ducks?
3. Saying in front of the jury that since the ducks have appeared, it makes his witnesses look like liars?

I really hope this guy isn't part of the prosecution team for Jason Young.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

I know. She said 9 on the call, but somehow along the way it got shifted to 8. The state's opening, for example stated 8AM.

It's so interesting too that their opening was all about the painting plans, the "friends" stories, the lack of money, that BC didn't attend the memorial, etc. That's when I pretty much knew they didn't have anything of substance in this case. I had no idea they planned to spend 6 weeks presenting absolutely nothing.

Do you think JA will be called back to the stand? I truly hope so. I would love to hear her explanations for misinformation.

 

[calgary123]

With everything that's come out in court the past few days, now I really want to know what else was on NC's cell phone. And why CPD felt they needed to erase everything.

Here's one example of outrageous, since I was asked to provide examples, and this one is quick and easy.

You have suggested a salaried officer with the CPD reviewed the cell phone contents near the time of the murder, saw something that showed Brad didn't kill her , or someone else did, and then decided to erase the phone, because they "needed" that. Not just the cellphone, but they now erased "everything".

But like I said, I can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.

 

[sunshine05]

Do you think JA will be called back to the stand? I truly hope so. I would love to hear her explanations for misinformation.

No, I don't. I don't really think they would be able to get any more info from her, to be honest. But I guess we'll see.

 

[NCEast]

I believe the evidence is still strong. I do agree with the duck fiasco. I think HC should be fired. If the other two agreed with what he did, they should be fired too. That was ridiculous! MOO

I guess I have been hoping since day one that there would be some sort of evidence that would be entirely unquestionable and solid. And there hasn't been. That's why I am worried about the CE evidence that's left. There is a lot of it, and the coincidences, but if the jury doesn't understand it or the State doesn't connect the dots for them, I don't see a guilty verdict. I think Cummings should be put into retirement. He has been a thorn in my side since the first week. His entire demeanor today was adversarial to the extent it was embarrassing. Worse, in some ways, than Boz was with the witnesses of last week.

 

[sunshine05]

Here's one example of outrageous, since I was asked to provide examples, and this one is quick and easy.

You have suggested a salaried officer with the CPD reviewed the cell phone contents near the time of the murder, saw something that showed Brad didn't kill her , or someone else did, and then decided to erase the phone, because they "needed" that. Not just the cellphone, but they now erased "everything".

But like I said, I can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.

Well, it's been clearly shown that he intentionally wiped it. So why did he do it?

ETA: There were also lies surrounding this evidence since he said he wiped it in Aug, but clearly it didn't occur until a month later. Plus he didn't get a search warrant until after it was already erased. So, yeah. I believe a "salaried" police officer purposely destroyed evidence in a criminal investigation.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

With everything that's come out in court the past few days, now I really want to know what else was on NC's cell phone. And why CPD felt they needed to erase everything.

I got berated last night for saying that ever since the defense began presenting their case things have gotten very interesting. (I admit that I did not use the correct verbage in my post). But, I must admit that a lot of the prosecutions case was long-winded and not pertinent in proving that BC murdered NC.
I, now, stand by my original post that this case has gotten A LOT more interesting ever since the defense began presenting their case. While others feel that Kurtz, etc are not good defense attorneys, I disagree and would take them any day over the awful display that Cummings has put on the past few days.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I guess I have been hoping since day one that there would be some sort of evidence that would be entirely unquestionable and solid. And there hasn't been. That's why I am worried about the CE evidence that's left. There is a lot of it, and the coincidences, but if the jury doesn't understand it or the State doesn't connect the dots for them, I don't see a guilty verdict. I think Cummings should be put into retirement. He has been a thorn in my side since the first week. His entire demeanor today was adversarial to the extent it was embarrassing. Worse, in some ways, than Boz was with the witnesses of last week.

The technical side of the evidence is strong. The problem is that it is too easy to confuse the jury with things they don't understand to make it appear to be not strong or not real. I'm not sure it will hold up because of the ability to confuse the whole issue to the point that the jury just dismisses it all. Then they are left with either Brad did it or a stranger with a 3 hour or so window catching, undressing, killing and dumping this woman all without anyone seeing a thing in broad daylight on a Saturday when lots of people were out and about. Or the mysterious "angry woman" who also only had the same small window of opportunity.

 

[phillygirl]

I hope it is Cummings that continues on with the rest of the case. He seems a bit frazzled and frustrated. He could actually be helping the defense more than he'd care to admit

Cummings did not have a good day. His outbursts with both MH and BC's mom, then asking MH about the tennis racquet grip was ridiculous and I'm sure the jury noticed. Finally asking MH about DD reason for her divorce without any apparent reason? Seemed completely unprepared for work today. Should have stayed home.

 

[johnfear]

So which blunder today was the worst for Coomings?

1. Asking a defense witness to read an alternate theory of the crime that pointed to someone other than BC (with no followup to show that couldn't have happened)?
2. Saying in front of the jury that since the ducks have appeared, it blows the prosecutions theory that there was a struggle in the foyer that destroyed the ducks?
3. Saying in front of the jury that since the ducks have appeared, it makes his witnesses look like liars?

I really hope this guy isn't part of the prosecution team for Jason Young.

Umm, to answer this question. Yes. (To all of them)

I don't think he expected MH to sound quite that intelligent (and in some manner, sensitive and BELIEVABLE) saying it out loud. I think his game was done from then on.

 

[johnfear]

Do you think JA will be called back to the stand? I truly hope so. I would love to hear her explanations for misinformation.

She be stalking jurors on safari this week anyways. NO TIME!

 

[WolfpackWoman]

Umm, to answer this question. Yes. (To all of them)

I don't think he expected MH to sound quite that intelligent (and in some manner, sensitive and BELIEVABLE) saying it out loud. I think his game was done from then on.

I think it was that MH put on his reading glasses and had a plausible reason for each conclusion he had made. I liked him.

 

[Madeleine74]

I would like to hear Brad's explanations for why he lied dozens upon dozens of times.

 

[johnfear]

I would like to hear Brad's explanations for why he lied dozens upon dozens of times.

Because it is easier for him than telling the truth about what he thinks of himself, his life and the situation he has created. (Possible homicide not included, but not necessarily excluded)

 

[WolfpackWoman]

I would like to hear Brad's explanations for why he lied dozens upon dozens of times.

I am sure this is just a baiting post. But if you'd like to post what you think are Brad's lies, I will do my honest best to give you a response based on others' testimony, or common sense.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I am sure this is just a baiting post. But if you'd like to post what you think are Brad's lies, I will do my honest best to give you a response based on others' testimony, or common sense.

For me, off the top of my head, why did he lie about her spilling wine on her dress?

 

[WolfpackWoman]

For me, off the top of my head, why did he lie about her spilling wine on her dress?

According to the testimony of the SBI, there was a stain on the dress that they did not test. No way of knowing if it was ribs, or wine. Not sure that counts as a lie.