State v. Bradley Cooper 4-6-2011

[Palomine]

I get the sense that the pros. is looking for anything and everything to find a way he could have spoofed that call. When the witness brought up a fax, he asked a bunch of questions on that. Now he's showing him the # from France. They have no clue, IMO.

the France number is because of the alleged girlfriend in France
and Brad did make a fake phone call to his cell ...to make it appear his wife was alive at that time

 

[RaleighNC]

Interesting - the Cisco device allows you full network functionality - likely WITHOUT things like softoken...........

 

[fran]

Was it BC himself who said he disconnected the VOIP at home because NC asked him to?

fran

 

[Tipstaff]

Um, check the hug BC and HM exchanged....maybe the device was transferred ...

 

[LaLaw2000]

Was it BC himself who said he disconnected the VOIP at home because NC asked him to?

fran

I think so, fran.

 

[RaleighNC]

Was it BC himself who said he disconnected the VOIP at home because NC asked him to?

fran

I don't think the home phone was VOIP - but I think he had "other" things set up that were VOIP since he had that office hardware there - ostensibly he could say he needed to for work / test purposes. But - it wasn't the home phone.

 

[FullDisclosure]

I hope all this leads to more than "it could be done this way." I want evidence that it WAS in order to fall off the fence.

Bring it!

 

[fran]

Uh oh! Don't think the def will like that added comment from the witness. "Or you could tap a router in Cisco............."


fran

 

[Wyn]

If the jurors are taking good notes I don't think they're going to have a problem following this testimony. I wonder if any of the jurors are involved in this type of technology? Does anyone know if the type of positions the jurors hold is made public?

 

[LyndyLoo]

I don't think the home phone was VOIP - but I think he had "other" things set up that were VOIP since he had that office hardware there - ostensibly he could say he needed to for work / test purposes. But - it wasn't the home phone.

I have something very similar to that Time Warner modem..and tho it is considered wireless networking ..I have been told it is NOT VOIP...confused me at first, as I was paranoid of losing my landline..due to my job and necessary availability when power outages...I was assured it had a battery that would maintain contact during such a period....So yes...its NOT VOIP but is a wireless connection...

 

[cityslick]

I hope all this leads to more than "it could be done this way." I want evidence that it WAS in order to fall off the fence.

Bring it!

I think it's great he's explaining all this, but I would like it if he examines (or whoever) the call log and explain how the call log reflects how he could of done this. I think that may be clearer for the jury.

 

[obsessive]

I can't find the posts right now regarding the length of calls, but if I remember correctly, the 6:05 call was 22 (ish) seconds. That to me is VERY odd!! Kurtz claimed in his opening that the first call was made from the home phone by Brad himself to locate his cell. I get that...do it frequently myself. The odd part though (to me anyhow) is that when I do it, I listen for the ring, locate the phone, and hit 'end' or 'ignore'. I don't actually ANSWER it...I already know who it is. IT'S ME!! And further more, even if I hit 'talk' or 'answer', I am pretty sure I wouldn't carry on a 22 second conversation (with myself)...but maybe I am remembering the length of this call all wrong. If so, ignore me!!:rocker:

 

[Albert]

Perhaps. But why call into the conferencing number?

But he did not nothing when he dialed into the conferencing system, he simply entered "0" and then disconnected. There are two ways to join a conference on this type of system, 1- Have the conferencing system give you a call after you connect via the web, 2- manually dial into the conference system and enter the assigned meeting id. Entering a "0" and doing nothing else results in no action by the conferencing system.

 

[cityslick]

If the jurors are taking good notes I don't think they're going to have a problem following this testimony. I wonder if any of the jurors are involved in this type of technology? Does anyone know if the type of positions the jurors hold is made public?

I think the defense wanted to make sure none of them had any type of telephony experience, but I could be wrong.

 

[ncsu95]

But he did not nothing when he dialed into the conferencing system, he simply entered "0" and then disconnected. There are two ways to join a conference on this type of system, 1- Have the conferencing system give you a call after you connect via the web, 2- manually dial into the conference system and enter the assigned meeting id. Entering a "0" and doing nothing else results in no action by the conferencing system.

I understand that. But if the VM was from someone that said they can't access the conferencing server, a test call like this to verify the service was running wouldn't be anything more than a quick call. Again, I'm just making suggestions based on my role, which is similar to what this guy said BC was in.

Regardless, these calls don't make any sense except for work related activities.

 

[sunshine05]

Finally!

 

[FullDisclosure]

I gotta say I'm kinda wishing Trenkle was doing the cross.

 

[cityslick]

Surprised Kurtz is doing the cross. Personally if I was defense I'd have Trenkle do the cross from here on out.

 

[Palomine]

I wish the Defense didn't sound so whiny...Brad lucked out when he picked this team...they seem to have the same personalities

 

[sunshine05]

I think Kurtz just shot down everything the prosecution just tried to lay out for the past 2 hours.