State v. Bradley Cooper 5-2-2011

[Cheyenne130]

Cheyenne, I'm right there with you. I simply changed the photo to B&W and zoomed in and I can see plain as day. I can not believe the prosecution didn't even try. That makes me furious!! It's there.

I'm not that bothered about the pros. not pointing out the error of the defense. Whether she was wearing it or not wearing it is not going to change anyone's mind regarding guilt or innocence. I'm more angry at the defense for their underhanded tactic.

 

[RaleighNC]

Exactly. Now imagine he is found guilty of 2nd degree (which would be the wrong verdict regardless of which side you are on)....would the fact that the judge added it as an option despite both sides saying it wasn't a valid option be something that could be appealed?

I believe that he quoted case law that points to it being an error if he DID not include it if there was evidence to support that verdict, despite objections by the defense.

I disagree - there is nothing here that is second degree material - your quote about "wrong verdict regardless of what side you are on" is perfect.

I don't know how a jury could justify this verdict to themselves or the public.

This is the first trial I have followed this closely and I am amazed that we're where we are right now.

 

[ncsu95]

Cheyenne, I'm right there with you. I simply changed the photo to B&W and zoomed in and I can see plain as day. I can not believe the prosecution didn't even try. That makes me furious!! It's there.

But that contradicts the testimony of this case. Can we all just agree to disagree?

 

[yeknomaras]

limiting closing arguments to 2 hours

 

[macd]

They need to put 2nd degree in there and maybe the pros case will fit.

Really? There is evidence that the jury could consider that the dump site was being researched the day before the murder. There is evidence that the jury could consider that a router with the capabilities to help build a false alibi was in use hours before the murder. Cause of death was asphyxiation, which takes time, enough to reflect on ones action between start and end of act.

If anything, 2nd degree doesn't fit.

 

[cygnusx1]

Just because you are unable to see it doesn't mean it's not there. She is wearing the necklace.

So you have seen the original video from the DVR - as both the def and pros has and do not refute - not the screenshot from a video broadcast over the internet displaying a video shot from a camera and displayed on a screen which is at an angle to the camera.

There are at least six opportunities for distortion of the image:

1) the original capture was compressed to save space on the DVR's hard disk in a format such as MPEG-2, MPEG-4, H.264, or WMV
2) the video was transcoded to MPEG-2 to play on a DVD player.
3) the video was played back by a computer on to a projection screen
4) the video was captured by a digital camera positioned at an angle to the projection screen in MPEG-2 or MPEG-4 and stored on the media pool's HDD.
5) the video was transcoded to an internet-friendly format such as MPEG-4 or FLV
6) Otto took a screen shot and saved it to JPG format - a lossy image format.

All of the above compression formats are lossy formats. That means that with each transcoding operation information is lost and noise and other artifacts are possibly introduced and enhanced.

There is NO WAY to conclusively determine from that screen shot that there is a necklace on her.

You are seeing the digital equivalent of Jesus' face in a potato chip.

 

[Palomine]

of course you would object to a two hour time limit, considering your opening was 3 hours and the state was 30 minutes

 

[RaleighNC]

limiting closing arguments to 2 hours

And HK objects... bwahahahahahahaha

 

[TigerBalm]

limiting closing arguments to 2 hours

Surprise surprise, mister three hour opening, objects..

 

[ncsu95]

It is NOT bias because it is the law. The judge understands that *some* jurors *could* believe that brad cooper killed his wife in the heat of an argument. *Some* jurors, while not necessarily believing the technical witnesses, could still believe other testimony given that *could* lead them to believe brad cooper murdered his wife 'in the heat of passion'. The testimony given 'could be interpreted' in different ways by different jurors. I hope if you truly do have an interest in our legal system, that you witness more trials, opening statments to closing arguments, so you will have a more well-rounded experience as to the how's and why's of the legal system. JMO

Thank you for the explanation. However, shouldn't the jury only consider the prosecutions actual case?

 

[Cheyenne130]

I am posting this again because I have been asked by more than one person. Here is a link to the second photo that otto provided:

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - April 29 weekend of Sleuthiness

 

[RaleighNative]

The State argues second?

 

[TigerBalm]

Defense will go first with closing argument, then lunch, then the state.

 

[yeknomaras]

The State argues second?

no, last.

State, Defense, then State rebuttal.

 

[Maja]

Cheyenne, I'm right there with you. I simply changed the photo to B&W and zoomed in and I can see plain as day. I can not believe the prosecution didn't even try. That makes me furious!! It's there.

Pwehaps pros could have had someone who resembled NC the nwcklace to HT and reinact. Then do so without necklace.

 

[Palomine]

Why even ask Pros or Def if he is gonna go with his opinion anyway?

because it is his job, it is the LAW not just his opinion...these are where trials get grounds for appeals..the charge to the jurors

if he had not included it the Defense could argue (on appeal) that the jurors only voted for 1st degree because that is all that was offered

 

[misstibbs]

limiting closing arguments to 2 hours

I think this is a good decision. The jury cannot focus beyond 2 hours...they need to choose what they want to bring into closing.

 

[BeBeBru]

What on earth is this judge doing but being biased.....I just can't believe that this is our justice system.....I want to have a voice in the matter of justice and I will find a productive way to do that.......I would like to see either guilty or not guilty.....to me that is the only reasonable choice....I wonder if the judge consults with the victims family......anyone know if that is possible.........With this jury in such a hurry to get back to their lives it seems to me they might
go to the middle - - second degree - - just to get out of there......I think Brad is innocent......
and I have first hand knowledge of the CPD and incomptencce.....I am 100% sure that the Mayor's office is concerned about how this case if going to affect Cary's reputation....Those officers and investgators were under the spell of the "desperate housewives of Cary"......they bought every word hook, line and sinker. JMHO

 

[metafizik]

I'm not that bothered about the pros. not pointing out the error of the defense. Whether she was wearing it or not wearing it is not going to change anyone's mind regarding guilt or innocence. I'm more angry at the defense for their underhanded tactic.

What underhanded tactic are you referring to? The defense presented evidence and I don't understand why some don't realize that both sides scrutinized the image with the best tools available and they both came to the conclusion that it is not there. There would only be 1 reason for this and that is -- she was NOT wearing it.

 

[ncsu95]

I'm not that bothered about the pros. not pointing out the error of the defense. Whether she was wearing it or not wearing it is not going to change anyone's mind regarding guilt or innocence. I'm more angry at the defense for their underhanded tactic.

Or maybe you just see something that you want to see. The prosecution made the necklace an issue in this case. I don't think they would not poin out the error of the defense. Much like the ducks, it makes their witnesses look like liars. So I don't buy your argument that the prosecution would just ignore it. There is nothing underhanded by the defense with regards to that HT video. She wasn't wearing a necklace and it refuted testimony of several prosecution witnesses that she was. That is the testimony in this case.