State v Bradley Cooper 4-28-2011
- Thread starter otto
- Start date
- Status
Danielle59
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2011
- Messages
- 878
- Reaction score
- 0
he told Kurtz that the motion was premature (to enter this witness under his discretion and reconsideration) because they may have other fish to fry.
(The witness made it extremely clear that the examination was continuing i.e. get to the bottom of it whether he went on the stand or not and seemed to be more on the lines of getting to some manner of truth, as opposed to Boz who is taking FULL ADVANTAGE of the newness of the technology)
Basically, Boz was talking out of both sides of his mouth.
One side says: I need to get this last piece in or it will prejudice the state.
The other says: He can't get a new guy in, my guys were on the list. Not my fault this technology is new and we've had three years to do this.[/QUOTE]
It really bothers me they jsut requested this in Feb 2011
Madeleine74
Knower of Things
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2011
- Messages
- 11,556
- Reaction score
- 20,084
Cisco apparently has evidence that BC had a 3825 router in his possession (at home) and access to the cisco network via that router appeared on a log file within cisco. BC accessed Cisco network on 7/11/08 around 10 or 10:30pm using that router. He had an FXO capable router. Betcha that router was never found.
Unless you lived with BC, you don't know what his "normal" behavior is with regards to things such as laundry, cleaning, or anything else done on a day to day basis in that house. Yet that hasn't stopped people in here or in the trial from talking about his actions being things he doesn't really do. You have no idea. The only person that would know is dead.
RR0004
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2008
- Messages
- 19,987
- Reaction score
- -22
Gosh...it's so spooky to see pics...and so sad.
I know Cummings, AF and Boz didn't see it either. If they had they would have disputed the video. How 'bout I go by what they say?:rocker:
No offense intended, but we were watching an angled video of a video projected onto a screen over the internet. This is not new evidence to the prosecution. I'm sure they have analyzed every single frame of these videos trying to find a hint of the necklace. It's isn't there.
Danielle59
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2011
- Messages
- 878
- Reaction score
- 0
LE left it on for 27 hours connected to the network after they secured the house. Their reasoning was they didn't want to corrupt the data, but they can't tell us why the 27th hour was the magic hour.
NCEast
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 4,217
- Reaction score
- 7
I've looked at that picture until I'm cross-eyed. I don't know how long the chain is so I don't know exactly where the drop would be. I am not disputing the other poster's claim that she is seeing it but I honestly don't think the defense would have used that video until they had checked it many, many times by various methods to make sure it wasn't there. I may be wrong though.
3doglady
Certified Coffeeaholic
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2008
- Messages
- 3,724
- Reaction score
- 0
You mean like the ducks weren't there? Sorry I had to say that.
Madeleine74
Knower of Things
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2011
- Messages
- 11,556
- Reaction score
- 20,084
BBM.
They posted a grainy picture on their own website from 2008 - early 2011, purportedly showing NC not wearing her necklace. Except she was. You just couldn't see it in their crappy picture. Someone else who was at the same party also took pics and theirs were better quality and taken from a closer distance. And NC's necklace was plainly visible, as were her earrings. This was in testimony, btw.
Danielle59
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2011
- Messages
- 878
- Reaction score
- 0
I have IE6 on my work computer because of the tools I need to use and it doesn't have private browsing.
The ducks were there...just not in the foyer.
There's only one place a necklace can be if you "wear it all the time".
Why wouldn't have been hanging in place? What woman goes around with a necklace tucked under a shouler strap? She bent over the cart several times....it should have been hanging freely if she was wearing it.
There is nothing there except compression artifacts.
LyndyLoo
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2010
- Messages
- 3,993
- Reaction score
- 3
I do have to head out shortly, so will just say regarding Brad's guilt or innocense..that the triers of fact (jurors) are just like us guys..some maybe use the KISS (keep it simple stupid) thought processes then others who need something hard to hang on to and yet others who look at the whole picture...
I am not trying to be argumentative..but really in truly, just because I believe Brad did this, and do feel evidence has been shown no one else could have done this..or had motive to do this..Nothings really shows that she actually went jogging that morning...(those pesky shoes could be the linch pin for some jurors)....
Banging chests of lying neighbours, friends then claiming rush to judgement, then claiming poor investigations....Put it aside then and look at the evidence..shoes (2 left shoes missing)...known computer/voip gear missing/ cleaning frenzy, lack of report of her missing and so on..will likely be enough for some..not necessarily all...
I keep saying, it is always up to the jury to decide..not myself nor any of you as to whats really important..as we (the royal we) run on emotion, and instincts..Facts can be spun, or restated and interpreted by us..Fact is ..It will the Jurors who decide..
With that I off like a dirty shirt...Catch ya all later :seeya:
I am not trying to be argumentative..but really in truly, just because I believe Brad did this, and do feel evidence has been shown no one else could have done this..or had motive to do this..Nothings really shows that she actually went jogging that morning...(those pesky shoes could be the linch pin for some jurors)....
Banging chests of lying neighbours, friends then claiming rush to judgement, then claiming poor investigations....Put it aside then and look at the evidence..shoes (2 left shoes missing)...known computer/voip gear missing/ cleaning frenzy, lack of report of her missing and so on..will likely be enough for some..not necessarily all...
I keep saying, it is always up to the jury to decide..not myself nor any of you as to whats really important..as we (the royal we) run on emotion, and instincts..Facts can be spun, or restated and interpreted by us..Fact is ..It will the Jurors who decide..
With that I off like a dirty shirt...Catch ya all later :seeya:
We don't have dueling experts. The states own witness admitted their were files with invalid timestamps. He also admitted he had no idea how the ones associated with the google search came to be that way. So this isn't contradictory testimony...it's testimony explaining those files. And the "FBI" witness wasn't able to explain them.
3doglady
Certified Coffeeaholic
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2008
- Messages
- 3,724
- Reaction score
- 0
The ducks were there...just not in the foyer.
There's only one place a necklace can be if you "wear it all the time".
Did you see the line across her chest in the picture I posted #715? I'm not saying that's a necklace but what would cause a straight line like that with a shadow behind it?
As an athlete with about 12 different pairs of shoes for different sports (soccer, running, biking, etc) I have lost more than a few individual shoes from my pairs. As a hopeful person I have often kept these incase I later found the matching shoe to restore the set. This has happened to me more than once because rarely play sports or run from home and normally immediately change into comfy sandals after the activity.
Barely below (maybe an inch) the indentation in her neckline. They show a close up photo before showing the video.
- Status