State v. Bradley Cooper 5-2-2011

[RaleighNative]

No I'm serious. Evidence planting/tampering is illegal. Punishable by a lengthy jail term, perhaps even life in a capital case. It must be that securing a conviction for Brad Cooper is worth the risk of being caught, prosecuted, and sentenced to state prison. How else to explain it?

Securing a conviction for Duke LAX was enough for the Durham County DA, and his office, and Durham LE to do it. And the evidence of corruption was overwhelming.

And in the end, what happened? Nifong was disbarred and sentenced to one day in jail.

I am a person who is by nature hard-pressed to believe in LE tampering. But it does happen, and I believe it has in this case.

 

[unc70]

But forget about the phone for a minute. Phone does not equal Google search no matter how much people would like to link the two.

McDreamy tried to unlock the phone. McDreamy did not touch that IBM laptop. Period. End of comparison.

Conspiracy theories abound with wild neighborhood wifi hackers getting into BC network, Kurtz initially claiming BC gave out his network password (hey, NO EVIDENCE of that!), CPD 'planting' something or 'changing' files. Those are some of the wild conspiracy theories that are laughable. I bet the FBI just rolled their eyes at those allegations too. Perhaps they shouldn't have dismissed it, but they testified they didn't see evidence of planting and I certainly don't see where they would put themselves on the line to protect some cop in Cary.

I think the defense spun a lot of scenarios and I think lots of people are ripe for the picking when it comes to believing scenarios. The mere possibility being suggested gets imaginations spinning.

Maybe you are too young or not from around and do not know the history of the FBI under J. Edgar Hoover. Learn what they did regarding those in civil rights and antiwar groups.

 

[lib's mom]

Amazing how some are equating those not convinced of BC guilt/those who think he's innocent with OJ supporters?!

I mean take your pick of trial/case forums on this site where the sentiment is 99-100% guilty if you don't want your beliefs challenged in this one. This is one of the weakest CE murder cases I have ever seen. This and the guy in Texas who was executed for burning his family in the house and later pretty much exonerated...some consolation that was.

Cameron Todd Willingham was the guy in Texas. Absolutely awful what happened to him.

 

[SleuthSayer]

Securing a conviction for Duke LAX was enough for the Durham County DA, and his office, and Durham LE to do it. And the evidence of corruption was overwhelming.

And in the end, what happened? Nifong was disbarred and sentenced to one day in jail.

I am a person who is by nature hard-pressed to believe in LE tampering. But it does happen, and I believe it has in this case.

Uh, surely you can be that oblivious to what the Duke LAX case was all about. But, if you are, I'm not going to spoil the illusion for you.

 

[jumpstreet]

Twitter poll has 386 respondents so far, with 82% NG. [ Whereas the WS poll (though with about 1/4th of the responses ) is tracking 30% NG ]
Obviously different sample groups responding to the poll, each with their own interpretation of the presented (and non-presented) evidence...

The real question I guess is which group is more reflective of the folks sitting in the JB.... Guess we'll probably know by the end of the week, if not by the end of tomorrow...

 

[RaleighNative]

I haven't figured out why they aren't at the PD every day demanding that JA and JP be arrested - they seem to have all the answers on that too.

I'd be happy to answer. The reason we are not demanding JP or JA be arrested is because they were never investigated. And every citizen deserves due process.

 

[gbay]

Actually, in this case, the state tried to confuse the jury with the mica, bugs, giant rolled up rug lugged up to the witness that had zero evidence on it, the piece of straw that there is zero proof of, long sleeves instead of short sleeves, phone cell pings, and on and on.

Defense clarified everything so the jury was no longer confused. The state had fuzzy claims, the defense refuted them with facts.

Again...it depends on what side of the fence you are sitting. I think the opposite. Funny we can all listen to the same thing and come away with a different conclusion.

 

[Cheyenne130]

It seems like the premise for this statement is that all defendents are guilty; therefore, confusing the jury should be the focus of their case. I don't agree with that.

Or are you talking about just this case specifically?

This case. I followed another one recently that I felt the defendant was innocent. He was found guilty and the jurors after the verdict stated things like, "We felt he was guilty because the dog was barking on the 911 call. That told us that he had killed his wife and moved her and that's why the dog was barking." Another was, "We just didn't feel that they proved that he was innocent."

I have followed other cases where you just had to know that the defense knew their client was guilty but had to put on a good defense so they did the "smoke and mirrors" defense. That's what I saw in this one. I expect to see the same in the JY case. MOO

 

[SleuthinNC]

You think the state should have to go out and prove the defense falsehoods? Everyone is already complaining about the amount of time the state had to take in order to undermine the attempts of the defense to make it seem that they did not investigate the case fully. Do you want to add two more months? How would it help the case to go and prove that Brad is the father of his child? Or that RZ did have TONS of follow-up (although they did have to waste time with that today). The evidence is what it is and the job of the defense is to try to confuse the jury so they don't pay attention to the evidence. Hopefully the jury isn't swayed like some here are. MOO

If the defense makes an assertion and the prosecution provides no rebuttal, nothing at all to refute that assertion, do you think the jury sees that as defense trickery or a correct assertion?

 

[Madeleine74]

Nifong and J Edgar Hoover.

Yep, the terrible twosome. No one should ever be prosecuted if they live in North Carolina or evidence was examined by the FBI. Fruit of the poison tree; just the mention of either of those two names calls into question the very foundation of jurisprudence. If you can connect a case to either Nifong or J Edgar Hoover (using Six Degrees of Separation, Kevin Bacon style), the defendant should go free.

 

[SleuthSayer]

Twitter poll has 386 respondents so far, with 82% NG. [ Whereas the WS poll (though with about 1/4th of the responses ) is tracking 30% NG ]
Obviously different sample groups responding to the poll, each with their own interpretation of the presented (and non-presented) evidence...

The real question I guess is which group is more reflective of the folks sitting in the JB.... Guess we'll probably know by the end of the week, if not by the end of tomorrow...

What is the poll supposed to be:

1) Whether you think he's guilty
2) Whether you think that the prosecution proved that he was guilty
3) What verdict you think that the jury will return

?

 

[Cheyenne130]

Actually, in this case, the state tried to confuse the jury with the mica, bugs, giant rolled up rug lugged up to the witness that had zero evidence on it, the piece of straw that there is zero proof of, long sleeves instead of short sleeves, cell phone pings, and on and on.

Defense clarified everything so the jury was no longer confused. The state had fuzzy claims, the defense refuted them with facts.

Please. A lot of what they brought up was because they already knew the defense planned to bring up the "non" evidence to discredit them. No matter how you try to twist it, Brad was the last person to see Nancy alive. He and he alone made sure that he had that distinction. MOO

 

[less0305]

I'd be happy to answer. The reason we are not demanding JP or JA be arrested is because they were never investigated. And every citizen deserves due process.

Well, if BC is found not guilty, maybe an appointment can be made to make sure they're investigated. Seems several people here have them already tried and convicted.

 

[JBean]

OK, I'll bite on this one. Sorry, but I can be annoyingly logical.

When a sane adult makes a decision to do something wrong, they have typically done some mental evaluation of the risk vs reward of doing it and have decided that the reward outweighs the risk.

In this case, we know what the risk is. Evidence tampering is a felony in most states, I assume it is in NC as well. The maximum sentence that I see for this crime in many states is 10 years. I would guess that if caught, the person doing the tampering would also face perjury and possibly obstruction of justice charges. If multiple people are involved, there would also be conspiracy charges.

Thus, they would not only lose their job and their family's livelihood, they are facing prison time. Obviously they would never work in LE again and will face a challenge finding any employment after their sentence is complete as many companies do not hire convicted felons.

So, we understand the risk. What exactly is the reward that would outweigh this risk? Improving the odds of one single conviction in a career of investigations, arrests, and prosecutions? This isn't taking down the head of some major crime family or something similar that would be a "career making" case. Furthermore, it's not even guaranteeing a conviction. It's just boosting your chances.

What is the logical explanation of why a LEO would put everything he and his family have at risk to improve the chances of convicting BC?

IMO, this happens in cases when the overzealous LE wants to make sure that there is a conviction. We had a case last year where the defendant practically walked because one of the detective decided to threaten to "make stuff up" to make sure there was a conviction. But alas there was a police recording of the whole thing.
I can only speak for my area and while I am glad we have a strong police force they are not the most honest bunch I have ever come across. Maybe they think their dishonesty is in the interest of our community, to "get their man" but they don't realize the greater harm that comes to our community as a result. The DA's office similarly overcharges and is just ridiculous sometimes.

I have no idea if there were lies or honest mistakes involved in the Cooper case but both happen everyday,all day, everywhere.JMHO of course.


jmho of course.


>>‘I’ll Make Somethin’ Up’
OC sheriff’s deputy tanked Disneyland-adjacent drug case by threatening to fabricate evidenceLet’s assume an Orange County Sheriff’s Department (OCSD) report of the Nov. 8, 2007, arrest of a suspected drug dealer near Disneyland reflects reality. The report goes like this: At 3:15 p.m., an undercover narcotics unit led by Investigator Christopher M. Catalano decided to end surveillance on 58-year-old Danny Stephen Simmons. A husky, 22-year veteran, Catalano ordered a patrol unit driven by Deputy Gino Rodriguez to stop a 2007 Dodge truck driven by Simmons on Harbor Boulevard.
To officers’ frustration, a passenger holding a McDonald’s bag leaped from the still-moving Dodge, dumped the bag (which contained 3 ounces of methamphetamine and a glass pipe), climbed a fence and, despite Catalano’s chase, escaped. Meanwhile, Rodriguez halted Simmons at gunpoint and found half a gram of methamphetamine hidden underneath the driver’s-seat cover, plus 17 Vicodin pills in the vehicle’s center console. Deputies raided Simmons’ home; there, they say, they found 171 grams of marijuana and the tools of a drug dealer: small plastic bags, digital scales, a box of syringes, $3,300 in cash and a loaded handgun. Catalano reported that Simmons voluntarily confessed to selling drugs. Based on the investigator’s work, prosecutors filed seven felonies and two misdemeanors. The district attorney’s office thought the crimes merited an eight-year trip to a California penitentiary.
But Simmons didn&#8217;t spend one hour in prison. Indeed, his case never went to trial&#8212;because the sheriff&#8217;s report was not entirely truthful and the preliminary hearing testimony of deputies wasn&#8217;t especially credible. As a result, the DA&#8217;s office dismissed five of the most serious charges. Last year, Simmons pleaded guilty to two remaining counts: illegal possession of a handgun by a felon and possession of an amount of concentrated cannabis. His punishment? Ninety days of home confinement, a generous resolution for a man the OCSD had pegged as a drug dealer working on the outskirts of the Happiest Place on Earth.<<

http://www.ocweekly.com/content/printVersion/609508/

 

[Cheyenne130]

If the defense makes an assertion and the prosecution provides no rebuttal, nothing at all to refute that assertion, do you think the jury sees that as defense trickery or a correct assertion?

I need to see a point by point assertion to answer that question.

 

[SleuthinNC]

I need to see a point by point assertion to answer that question.

Never mind, I withdraw the question. It really doesn't require a point by point debate.

 

[Grammy Jean]

OK, I'll bite on this one. Sorry, but I can be annoyingly logical.

When a sane adult makes a decision to do something wrong, they have typically done some mental evaluation of the risk vs reward of doing it and have decided that the reward outweighs the risk.

In this case, we know what the risk is. Evidence tampering is a felony in most states, I assume it is in NC as well. The maximum sentence that I see for this crime in many states is 10 years. I would guess that if caught, the person doing the tampering would also face perjury and possibly obstruction of justice charges. If multiple people are involved, there would also be conspiracy charges.

Thus, they would not only lose their job and their family's livelihood, they are facing prison time. Obviously they would never work in LE again and will face a challenge finding any employment after their sentence is complete as many companies do not hire convicted felons.

So, we understand the risk. What exactly is the reward that would outweigh this risk? Improving the odds of one single conviction in a career of investigations, arrests, and prosecutions? This isn't taking down the head of some major crime family or something similar that would be a "career making" case. Furthermore, it's not even guaranteeing a conviction. It's just boosting your chances.

What is the logical explanation of why a LEO would put everything he and his family have at risk to improve the chances of convicting BC?

I love your post! I feel exactly the same!!!

 

[gracielee]

All I can say is Judicially it is unwise to give a limited verdict choice to any jury..given what has transpired in the past..and overturning of some verdicts after appellate panel's review testimony's dont GIVE jurors any other choices and choice the highest possible verdict,,,ALL or nothings does not always work..

I have watched many trials in the past years..and it is becoming more and more common for juror's to have more than Yay Nay for 1st or NG..

JMO...But why shut the door on a compromising verdict????

I would hate to be a juror..however, any hold out could conceivably create a RE-DO..and I am sure alot of testimony would be pared down to specifics in the re-trial..BUT lets just wait til we hear the closings in THIS case...OK?

You know, in a weird kind of way, I kind of think a mistrial would be interesting. The prosecution would know exactly what direction to take. Do you remember the Menendez Bros. second trial?

 

[sunshine05]

Please. A lot of what they brought up was because they already knew the defense planned to bring up the "non" evidence to discredit them. No matter how you try to twist it, Brad was the last person to see Nancy alive. He and he alone made sure that he had that distinction. MOO

What do you mean? Defense planned to bring up "non-evidence"? Can you be more specific.

I am not twisting anything. I am only concerned with facts.

 

[Madeleine74]

I imagine a petition with thousands of names will be sent to the DA's office, insisting they investigate the 'real' killer of Nancy Cooper. Then again, who's going to investigate the case since the CPD is inept and/or corrupt? Maybe they can put together a volunteer task force of concerned citizens.