State v Bradley Cooper 4-27-2011

[gracielee]

How do you know this was a lie? It might explain why he washed it (or if she washed it since he said she also did laundry...even though m.e. didn't think it had been washed). If she came home from the party and sprayed it with something (like spray-n-wash), it would need to be washed pretty quickly.

Have you ever tried to get red wine out of something?

 

[unc70]

Yes it does.

Pretty soon I will be considering the Orient Express scenario.

 

[Danielle59]

BC "forgot" his fiancé's name, the one who when they did find her reported he was a stalking creep. :-D

And I think she was getting revenge on him. That was MOO and I got it after reading her affadavit. I forget people's names too, even ones that make an impression on me. Give me numbers and I am good, names, forget it.

 

[johnfear]

So we are agreed that BC lied about:

1. Fielding drive knowledge, having searched it on his work laptop;
2. His monitoring of NC's e-mail, including that between her attorney and her and her and her friends;
3. Not knowing his fiancé's name;
4. Having knowledge of what NC would have on when he didn't see her dress for running.

OR do we just say no he gets a pass on these because we believe several LEO's from different agencies conspired to place obscure evidence on his laptop that even if found would barely get the case maybe over the goalpost to guilty?

I'm sticking with it is obvious he's a liar. That doesn't make him a murderer. The things he chose to lie about though, suggest to me he is.

Wasn't her body found off Brittaby?

 

[less0305]

on 4-20-2011 mid-JW testimony, I had warned you guys he might post.

He posts under a pseudonym on another site (non-trial/crime) that I visit.

I also suspected either SH or MH were on here.

Guess what? I think there's a third!

I think HM posts. I really do. Will be interesting to see if she is called as a witness - or did I already miss that since I've missed a bunch in the last couple days.

 

[cassius]

The last I saw was a bench conference; I think the idea was Cisco was still providing data even at that point.

This is going to be a really interesting situation. I don't recall what voip/router evidence came out in the D's case. If it's new evidence though, and not rebuttal evidence, then the court is going to have to give the D time to analyze it and find their own rebuttal witness and presumable an expert at that. One of the main reasons for excluding the D experts was not enough time for P to prepare, you'd have to think an equally compelling argument can be made here. Maybe he should amend his earlier ruling and let it all in so we can have a real battle of the experts!

 

[gritguy]

Objection, evidence is still in question with Boz having a cow any time the defense tries to bring someone in to talk about it.

Ok, but we are having to rationalize all the lies away to suggest he's not a liar. However, I think you have said you can concede he's a liar without conceding that means he's guilty. I agree.

It's interesting to me that there are some BDI's who will simply see the case as black and white, and ANYTHING to the defense side is bogus and anything on the state side can be believed w/ or w/o evidence. On the other hand, there are obviously some BII's who feel BC must look lily white and a paragon of honesty, the 100% innocent victim of an LEO super-conspiracy. I find neither approach credible.

 

[ncsu95]

I don't think it's the only search. Didn't he search for the attorney's office on the 15th? Wouldn't that have updated the cursor file? Or downloaded a new one? Or is it just the one cursor file on the whole machine?

I believe that was on the home PC downstairs.

 

[Madeleine74]

I have a completely different opinion of the MH testimony. I thought he did a good job for the defense. Believable, forthcoming, assured. Yes, it was clear he shut down on Cummings but that was obviously Cummings mistake. A mechanical engineer who was trying to recreate the murder based on the autopsy facts? Brilliant! Thanks to the prosecution, here was a guy who did more investigating than the CPD! He was anything but gossipy and clearly wasn't interested in going along with the group (i.e. why are we throwing NC a going away party if she's not leaving) As an outsider, I thought he was believable and you could empathize with his nervousness on the stand. He's been considered an outcast, imagine how he must feel. Oh, except if you already know him because then you are the biased one and your comments will be taken as such.

Never met him, have never seen him before. Heard of him from reading the published affidavits and his was one of them. Ditto his wife as well. My impressions were based on today's testimony. I didn't have the same reaction to his wife during her testimony, in case you were wondering. Personally I think this guy got bulldozed by BC on 7/12. Not sure he ever realized it though. I think Brad left a lot of collateral damage in his wake; more than any of us realize.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

WOW that is quite an indictment just because he may think BC is not guilty of the crime. You mean he is biased because he does not think like you think he should think. The witnesses for the State were also biased. Talk about gossip and clucking housewives, we heard many of them. Why are so many of you so afraid of a defendant being defended? I truly hope that if anyone of you is ever on trial, or if anyone you know is that you find people that will listen to the case before they pass judgement, but I fear karma may out you all.

For those that believe BDI, I completely respect your opinions, etc. I truly do. But for those of us that don't agree with you, you seem to make every excuse in the book for the prosecution, NC, her friends, etc. Now, we finally hear from a friend of the original clique that wasn't directly in line with JA, HP, etc you find him not credible. What credibility did JA or HP exude that MH did not?
How can you believe everything that NC's friends said but find fault with everything the defense brings into this trial? Talk about bias!!! How about having an open mind? Where did that go?

 

[ncsu95]

There is not another person at that party that saw wine on her dress. He left the party at 8. I can't believe she walked around all night with a red wine stain on her dress and not one person noticed.

It was night time and it might not have been a very large stain. Obviously there was something on her dress that wasn't bodily fluids since the ME confirmed it.

 

[gritguy]

Wasn't her body found off Brittaby?

Yes; that's just off Fielding if you go all the way to the end of Fielding. It's a dead-end, so to speak, down there w/ a few cul de sacs.

 

[Danielle59]

BC "forgot" about knowing about Fielding Dr., despite having searched it on his laptop.

Where is the evidence he searched Fielding Dr? I thought he searched his zip code? Oh, you mean the questionable evidence that can't be cross examined under the guise of National Security.

 

[lilypearl]

I think the defense team should show up tomorrow wearing duck ties.

 

[LAWsy_ME]

I still am wondering about that small straight line bruise noted on autopsy on Nancy's neck. Is it perfectly straight? I'm really curious about that finding.

 

[johnfear]

This is going to be a really interesting situation. I don't recall what voip/router evidence came out in the D's case. If it's new evidence though, and not rebuttal evidence, then the court is going to have to give the D time to analyze it and find their own rebuttal witness and presumable an expert at that. One of the main reasons for excluding the D experts was not enough time for P to prepare, you'd have to think an equally compelling argument can be made here. Maybe he should amend his earlier ruling and let it all in so we can have a real battle of the experts!

Technically, JW counted. I don't think the pros will go lightly into this though. This could really open the can of worms for the defense in regards to it's order in the proceedings. The judge doesn't seem to be so far out in pro-pros land right now.

He might go back and rule a little differently based on what K and B get into tomorrow.

 

[gritguy]

For those that believe BDI, I completely respect your opinions, etc. I truly do. But for those of us that don't agree with you, you seem to make every excuse in the book for the prosecution, NC, her friends, etc. Now, we finally hear from a friend of the original clique that wasn't directly in line with JA, HP, etc you find him not credible. What credibility did JA or HP exude that MH did not?
How can you believe everything that NC's friends said but find fault with everything the defense brings into this trial? Talk about bias!!! How about having an open mind? Where did that go?

I watched some at least of the defense witnesses today and found them basically people forced to testify in a situation they would have hoped never happened and doing the best they could, various personalities aside. And I'm BDI.

I find there is a single-minded adherence at work with some on both sides of the debate, and people in the middle liable to be run over from both directions! :crazy:

 

[cassius]

Where is the evidence he searched Fielding Dr? I thought he searched his zip code? Oh, you mean the questionable evidence that can't be cross examined under the guise of National Security.

If BC goes free, the terrorists win!!!

 

[johnfear]

I think HM posts. I really do. Will be interesting to see if she is called as a witness - or did I already miss that since I've missed a bunch in the last couple days.

Not yet. When I registered, I thought about putting JohnPear and rolling with the flack I got.

 

[otto]

Have you ever tried to get red wine out of something?

Salt, or soda water right when it happens usually does the trick.