State v Bradley Cooper 4-28-2011

[sunshine05]

Do any techies on the board understand the watermark issue? In this context, is watermark another word for cookie?

If not, which type of file was supposed to have a watermark? Were the watermarks missing or invalid? Was it for just one or two files, or for hundreds of files of the same type? In this context, how are watermarks computed and verified?

If so, we heard in the original prosecution testimony that the cookie files were missing. In today's testimony, we heard that lots and lots of cookie files were missing, not just of the Fielding Drive zoom.

I was just listening to the cookie testimony from today. For the google map search there were no cookies found. There was a deleted version of a cookie and a deleted watermark stamp. The watermark stamp also had an invalid timestamp. In fact, 100% of the files related to this google map search (500+) had invalid timestamps. The overall invalid timestamps in the life of the computer is 2%. Invalid timestamps from 11/10-11/12 was 83%.

The expert said the altered watermark is a good indication that the file has been tampered with.

Then Kurtz asked about the traceability of cookies and the witness said that you can subpoena the records and find out who did the search that generated that cookie. (in other words, not which computer it is from but if it was placed, you can tell where it originated from).

Interestingly, none of the deleted cookies were from 7/11 and again that raises red flags.

More on this later. I'm still listening to the rest of it.

 

[jrb0124]

You can't say that. Unless you are Nancy's OB/GYN, you have no idea when K was conceived.

But you can back-date to the approximate window based on K's birthday.

I am not arguing what the definite date of conception was, just pointing out that the couch episode date maps exactly to K's birthday based on that calculator.

 

[sunshine05]

That makes total sense. I'm not sure how it relates to the file he was discussing. I would have to look at his testimony again and last I checked, it's not being supplied by WRAL.

It's up now.

 

[NCEast]

This is my first case on WS, but I have been here since the beginning of it.

I hope to avoid getting interested in another one as much as I have this one. It is time consuming!

I don't know about the JY case. I saw the evidence they had collected on that one before the arrest, and that looks like it should plead to me. They pretty much have him cold on that one. IMHO, MOO and other such things, of course.

The main reason I am interested in the JY trial is much like the SP trial....I will never live long enough to understand why a man would kill his wife and unborn child. If I think BC is the devil, JY is the father of the devil and all things evil. Especially the way she was murdered--just slaughtered. I think he should plead too but I don't know much about the evidence--just the big things like his propping the motel door, the gas receipt from King, NC on the morning she was murdered. I absolutely cannot allow myself to become addicted to that one too!

 

[Cheyenne130]

It's up now.

Thank you. I'll have to listen tomorrow. It's close to fftobed: for me.

 

[sunshine05]

I forgot to add, invalid timestamps can occur if something isn't recognized by the computer so it doesn't issue the file a valid time stamp.

 

[skaylie693]

I'll disagree here. A woman cannot get pregnant at any point in her cycle. A woman cannot actually get pregnant until after she ovulates. The egg cannot be fertilized unless there is something there to fertilize it. Peak fertility window is normally 24-36 hours, with good fertility preceding that by an additional 48 hrs...normally/median/avg whatever - every woman is different and most do not have an exact 30 day cycle.

Its unusual (but not impossible) to get pregnant from intercourse more than 4/5 days out from ovulation, sperm doesn't live that long.

okay, enough from me on this - I don't want to sidetrack the thread, and I am not at all intending to sound like I am lecturing (sorry if it comes across that way) just imparting experience. Also keep in mind many if not most fertility doctors/OBGYN are men, so gender has nothing to do with knowledge about this. In fact many women have no idea about any of this.

Well we can agree to disagree on this if you like but my second born was conceived during menstruation, on the 2nd day. Sorry guys...don't want to gross you out but I can state this as fact unless of course, she was the result of an immaculate conception. My nurse was shocked and insisted I had the date wrong but the doctor shrugged and said, yep, it happens more than you think.

I'm not trying to side track you but don't go insisting that child has to be JP's just because you think there was only a few days she could have been conceived. Do I think it's possible? I sure do but I don't think anything but straight up DNA could show the truth.

 

[Tink56]

K was born 7/23/06

K was conceived around 10/31/05

The actual date of conception can occur a day or 2 (or 3, 4) after intercourse, which is why it is so hard to pinpoint that day and why OBs will use the date of your last missed period as the "official" start of pregnancy.

Perhaps she wasn't full gestation. Perhaps she was born at 37, not 40 weeks.

Perhaps she was born at 34 weeks gestation. A chart does not factor in differences in the length of pregnancy, IMO. Just another point of view...

 

[Danielle59]

I beg to differ. The determining factor as to the location that has jurisdiction over a custody issue is residency. Most places have residency requirements of 6 months to a year. I am not EXACTLY sure of Canada's residency requirements, but I am sure it is less than three years (which is when this will hit a custody court when he is found not guilty). Canada and the province they live in will be deemed to have jurisdiction.

That is likely, but the children are US citizens.

 

[lilypearl]

I am new here, and have most of the abbreviations figure out. However I can't figure out MOO - the only thing I can think of is My Opinion Only - but really not sure if that is what it is. Thanks!

 

[NCEast]

It's up now.

Thank you. I just checked not too long ago and it wasn't up. I just posted about WRAL not using anything that wasn't exact trial testimony, glad this is up. It's important.

 

[SleuthinNC]

That makes total sense. I'm not sure how it relates to the file he was discussing. I would have to look at his testimony again and last I checked, it's not being supplied by WRAL.

I think the watermark is another way or another name for digitally signing the cookie. I know anti-virus software will often block a web page for example if it can't validate the signature for the cookie, I think the watermark acts the same way.

 

[3doglady]

The main reason I am interested in the JY trial is much like the SP trial....I will never live long enough to understand why a man would kill his wife and unborn child. If I think BC is the devil, JY is the father of the devil and all things evil. Especially the way she was murdered--just slaughtered. I think he should plead too but I don't know much about the evidence--just the big things like his propping the motel door, the gas receipt from King, NC on the morning she was murdered. I absolutely cannot allow myself to become addicted to that one too!

I want to see the JY trial. My brother worked for PE also. Problem is the Casey Anthony trial will probably overlap it and I've been glued to that case for 3 yrs. Maybe I can watch the Anthony one on TV and JY on my computer.

 

[lilypearl]

Brad loves Katie, so I am hoping if/when he is found NG that he will in no way want to know if he isn't her bio father. It won't erase the time he spent with her, loved her, played with her, feed her, etc. I just wish he was allowed to stand up in court and say "leave my kids out of this" but I not sure if he would be held in contempt or some other unfavorable charge.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Brad loves Katie, so I am hoping if/when he is found NG that he will in no way want to know if he isn't her bio father. It won't erase the time he spent with her, loved her, played with her, feed her, etc. I just wish he was allowed to stand up in court and say "leave my kids out of this" but I not sure if he would be held in contempt or some other unfavorable charge.

It's his defense team that did it. MOO

 

[gracielee]

I thought I heard JA say (or somebody said she said) that NC had told her that she "never takes her diamonds off" and that was meant, as odd as it sounds to me, to include earrings. Not sure though.

I think most women who wear stud earrings, don't take them out daily. One of my daughters has double pierced ears, and she wears gold studs in one piercing and diamond studs in the second piercing. She never takes them out except to clean them and put them back in again. I usually wear dangle earrings, but if I put studs in, I leave them in until I decide to wear something else. I have small dangles in now, just a leverback with a dangling pearl. I always keep something in my ears because if I forget to put earrings on a couple days in a row, my holes tend to close up. It's just easier to keep earrings in. So if I wear very big, long dangles, I will take them out at night and stick the little dangles in or put in diamond studs again. My ears always have earrings in them.

 

[NCEast]

I think most women who wear stud earrings, don't take them out daily. One of my daughters has double pierced ears, and she wears gold studs in one piercing and diamond studs in the second piercing. She never takes them out except to clean them and put them back in again. I usually wear dangle earrings, but if I put studs in, I leave them in until I decide to wear something else. I have small dangles in now, just a leverback with a dangling pearl. I always keep something in my ears because if I forget to put earrings on a couple days in a row, my holes tend to close up. It's just easier to keep earrings in. So if I wear very big, long dangles, I will take them out at night and stick the little dangles in or put in diamond studs again. My ears always have earrings in them.

I had my ears pierced when I was in the 7th grade....a long time ago. Last year I was really quite sick and rarely left home and didn't wear any jewelry at all. My holes grew up. I cannot get a pair of earrings in either ear, hurts badly when I try. Received a gorgeous pair of 1.50 kt diamond studs (total) for my anniversary last year and have never worn them.

 

[macd]

I think the watermark is another way or another name for digitally signing the cookie. I know anti-virus software will often block a web page for example if it can't validate the signature for the cookie, I think the watermark acts the same way.

Ah-ha. Watermark must mean a signed cookie.
The values for input to create a signed cookie are: value, key, and timestamp.
If you have an invalid timestamp, you necessarily have an invalid watermark.

 

[jrb0124]

Well we can agree to disagree on this if you like but my second born was conceived during menstruation, on the 2nd day.

That's very unusual - you probably ovulated a few days into your next cycle.

This discussion is sort of an analogy to all the CE discussion here in that there are some explanations which have a higher probability of being true than others. In this case, and without any further knowledge of NC cycles/history, the higher probability is that she had a normal cycle.

 

[sunshine05]

Well we can agree to disagree on this if you like but my second born was conceived during menstruation, on the 2nd day. Sorry guys...don't want to gross you out but I can state this as fact unless of course, she was the result of an immaculate conception. My nurse was shocked and insisted I had the date wrong but the doctor shrugged and said, yep, it happens more than you think.

I'm not trying to side track you but don't go insisting that child has to be JP's just because you think there was only a few days she could have been conceived. Do I think it's possible? I sure do but I don't think anything but straight up DNA could show the truth.

It doesn't matter at what point in your cycle you conceive, the average gestation time is the same. You take the conception date and then add to figure out the est. birth date and I have not heard that the baby was born early or late.