State v Bradley Cooper 4-5-2011

[Albert]

This isn't a building block. It's more nonsense added by the prosecution. Now if they turn around and show that a disc was wiped from July 12th -> July 15th, then it would make sense. That would show when/where he requested software with this capability. But you act like wiping a hard drive is some uncommon event.

Why not just allow the drives to be reformatted if the sole intent is to rebuild a pc?

 

[SleuthinNC]

you won't be disappointed when he is found guilty?

If he were found guilty based upon current evidence I would be disappointed. I like many others am still waiting for some key things to be hashed out.

 

[Albert]

why would Brad have to ask this guy about it then?

Perhaps he might have thought that this was to best way to not leave a google search trail on his computer?

 

[Palomine]

It's not difficult at all, and I think anyone that wanted to do it could ... even with a work computer.

anyone can format a computer, there has to be some sort of safety device on work computers that would not allow employees to format...because every disgruntled employee would be erasing their computers..it would be very costly

 

[otto]

anyone can format a computer, there has to be some sort of safety device on work computers that would not allow employees to format...because every disgruntled employee would be erasing their computers..it would be very costly

Maybe there should be some sort of safety device in place on work computers, but as soon as someone has admin rights on a machine, the sky is the limit.

 

[grommet]

Now, I spent many years working for the DoD and unless you have administor rights on a computer, you couldn't load software, updates, delete file histories, nuttin'...

It would seem cisco would have same rules. BC should not have had the credentials to wipe a hard drive.

Cisco has no such restrictions on their standard IT laptops. The employees have full privs to load whatever software they want.

 

[Palomine]

Maybe there should be some sort of safety device in place on work computers, but as soon as someone has admin rights on a machine, the sky is the limit.

no administrative rights only gets you in so far, thats why if someone uses pirated software they have to get a crack to access it...
There is NO WAY Brad would have the rights to format his work computer...if he did... Cisco would not have needed to take off sensitive material from his work phone and computer before handing it over to the Police

 

[NCEast]

no administrative rights only gets you in so far, thats why if someone uses pirated software they have to get a crack to access it...
There is NO WAY Brad would have the rights to format his work computer...if he did... Cisco would not have needed to take off sensitive material from his work phone and computer before handing it over to the Police

I understand this. But with having said that, what does this drill down to? His personal laptop could have been involved?

 

[222NCMom]

I believe it points towards pre-planning a murder.

JANUARY 2008 - The New Year starts with Nancy finally finding out the truth of Brad's affair. After months of denials he finally admits it and claims he is in love with H.M. Nancy is 'done' with the marriage and done with trying to work on the marriage.

FEBRUARY 2008 - Brad removes Nancy from all accounts.

MARCH 2008 - Nancy gets Alice Stubbs, Attorney and first draft of separation agreement starts.

APRIL 2008 - Brad realizes he's going to have to pay beaucoup bucks to Nancy. Brad abruptly cancels NC's move back to Canada when previously he couldn't wait for the 3 of them to leave. NC was supposed to leave April 25.

APRIL 2008 - Brad has all of NC's emails forwarded to his own account. From April 2008 through July 11 2008.

APRIL 2008 - Brad is laying some foundation of his own. Finding out how to completely wipe a hard drive (why he had to ask someone else I don't know, but he did).

This is the start of his planning, or, at least where I think it really started to gel in his mind. The 'when' was not set yet, but the thought to kill Nancy was formed, IMHO.

Not thinking he did or didn't do it, but just thinking.....why would he ask someone? Because if he is suspected later people may look at that and think he wouldn't be that stupid to bring attention to himself asking about it, just like the necklace, he is too smart to keep it, maybe some things are meant to look obviously dumb so he couldn't have done it?

 

[SleuthyGal]

Not thinking he did or didn't do it, but just thinking.....why would he ask someone? Because if he is suspected later people may look at that and think he wouldn't be that stupid to bring attention to himself asking about it, just like the necklace, he is too smart to keep it, maybe some things are meant to look obviously dumb so he couldn't have done it?

I can't pretend to know the mind of a scheming sociopath. Maybe he did it to look stupid. Saying that BC was 'too smart' to commit a murder and get caught is really not a valid argument. Prisons are filled with really really smart people who also did (and said) dumb things.

 

[222NCMom]

I can't pretend to know the mind of a scheming sociopath. Maybe he did it to look stupid. Saying that BC was 'too smart' to commit a murder and get caught is really not a valid argument. Prisons are filled with really really smart people who also did (and said) dumb things.

True.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Cisco has no such restrictions on their standard IT laptops. The employees have full privs to load whatever software they want.

I also heard Mr. Fry, the Cisco Witness testify there were NO RESTRICTION to taking equipment home either..He could walk outa there with whatever he desired or needed and not even have to log out these items..therefore NO record :crazy:

 

[raisincharlie]

His office phone would not have been connected to the Alpha network. What could have been connected to the Alpha network are the Cisco wireless IP Phones he had installed in the house earlier in 2008. (I think that is the time frame)

I still question why LE took into evidence a Cisco prototype phone from Brad's office and just why Cisco has not gotten their legal team after LE to return it. Prototypes of anything are typically proprietary. I have a lot of questions about that phone, it could be nothing, or it could be something. Can't believe if it is nothing Cisco has not made the effort to have it returned.

 

[Albert]

no administrative rights only gets you in so far, thats why if someone uses pirated software they have to get a crack to access it...
There is NO WAY Brad would have the rights to format his work computer...if he did... Cisco would not have needed to take off sensitive material from his work phone and computer before handing it over to the Police

Is that an assumption or a fact as it relates to BC not knowing the admin pw of the Cisco laptop? I am more inclined to believe it is only an assumption.

 

[Albert]

I also heard Mr. Fry, the Cisco Witness testify there were NO RESTRICTION to taking equipment home either..He could walk outa there with whatever he desired or needed and not even have to log out these items..therefore NO record :crazy:

This was related to his Cisco issued laptop only, correct?

 

[LyndyLoo]

This was related to his Cisco issued laptop only, correct?

No not correct..He was talking about anything equipment wise Brad had..DID you see the video and pics of his office?? There was so many items there not laptops either..Phones, Skimmers, scanners, prototype items...So no..way beyond a laptop..IIRC

 

[Albert]

No not correct..He was talking about anything equipment wise Brad had..DID you see the video and pics of his office?? There was so many items there not laptops either..Phones, Skimmers, scanners, prototype items...So no..way beyond a laptop..IIRC

I am sure his office is no different than any other test engineer within the voice group at Cisco. I am sure his office is no different than any of the TAC engineers within the voice group at Cisco. This does not mean that you are free to take whatever you want to your house as I am sure that Cisco has some type of asset control.

 

[Just the Fax]

Is it possible, that the DA's office, with limited staff and someone said over 18k pages of discovery in this trial, was not fully prepared when the trial started? Remember the poster who said they "picked" certain judges for certain trials, because they had the rotation schedules? Maybe this judge came up, they were almost ready to go, but not quite, but they wanted Gessner for sure. The Cisco witness contacted in February? And this trial started a couple of weeks later? Maybe what he had to offer was not really know/understood when they started, along with several other witnesses who have seemingly been introduced out of order.

My take - opening statement brief, cause they truely didn't know what all they had. Smoking gun? They're still hoping to find one. Neighbors, et al? A stall technique, to give the staff more time to interview, review statements. Blanket subpoenas to CTA.

Judge Gessner was assigned this trial by Resident Chief Judge Stephens.
Like or not, the state or defense had no say in this decision.

 

[grommet]

I wouldn't think that just anyone could do any sort of wiping/erasing of work computers, I think that would be for security reasons and also internal investigations...the first thing employers do is grab the computer when someone is fired

Not true! Laptop computers, regardless if they are used for work or not, are generally very easy to format/wipe clean. This is especially true for technical geeks like BC. Heck - you can physically remove those drives from the laptop and format them using another computer. Not hard to do!

 

[LyndyLoo]

I am sure his office is no different than any other test engineer within the voice group at Cisco. I am sure his office is no different than any of the TAC engineers within the voice group at Cisco. This does not mean that you are free to take whatever you want to your house as I am sure that Cisco has some type of asset control.

Apparantly not according to Mr. Fry...I have to assume whatever items he had were somehow connected to him..so IF goes awol it could be tracked..but it would not stop or deter Brad from using it for his own personal gain.

Apparantly Brad brought all sorts of stuff earlier in the year 2008..and found her phone her phone line clicking (suspecting tapping) and demanded it all be removed..Think it was back..Sorry dont have ha link to earlier testimony or depos..so guess I can only say IIRC