State v Bradley Cooper 5-3-11

[SleuthSayer]

There would be a TCP connection entry in the CSA log if he accessed the router via telnet or ssh from the laptop.

There's not in mine. I just tried it.

 

[ncsu95]

I asked RKAB:
Did he loose his apples over her talking back to him at the BBQ when he finally tried to socialize which he is not known to do?"

She answered:
I definately don't think he slept on it. IMO, he went home and grumbled and festered about it and was really really angry when she got home. It would probably start with him making snide comments that, if they were already in "hate" mode, she was probably defensive in her speech back to him (and I would be).
I don't think he meant to kill her initially but I think he got to a point where he had seriously injured her and that he thought if he DIDN'T kill her, he'd be in serious trouble when she was able to escape and tell someone. I don't think he would have laid in wait for her to come home, you know, with a shoelace in hand that he had decided earlier that he would strangle her with. I think he finally lost total control.

He would have been absolutely LIVID at being corrected in front of other people at the BBQ. They were probably already on edge if they had been fighting earlier in the day and anything at all that was coming out of her mouth, he was getting more and more agitated by it. He would be storing each and every word in the little backpack in his mind to bring out later to use against her. He wouldn't say anything at the time of the BBQ but later on, he would regurgitate all of it and start a fight. That was his way. Sulk and pout and then when a fight does start, typically with his little snarky comments, he rolls out everything that he's been holding in.

While I appreciate you posting this, it doesn't fit with the premeditation evidence like the google search. Of course, we didn't know about that search back then, so him snapping was a realistic thought.

 

[gbay]

Listen to Miglucci's testimony.

And that's the point. If it's not delivered until September 2008, how is it relevant to a July 12 phone call? Is it really missing?

The defense had a piece of paper stating that the delivery date was September, 2008. However the witness had no idea what this paper represented and he never agreed that the dates were correct. He did however find the box the router came in and it was dated Jan. 8, 2008. He also had signed for it on that date. He also had the inventory sheet with the date it was initailly received. In addition, the email from Brad himself confirmed it was in building 9 as he asked to take it home in January 2008.

 

[Lori59]

That was good...but then turned around and was quite silly by showing pictures of boxes and pointing out an antenna behind one of them.

Agreed, that part not very effective.

 

[3doglady]

Listen to Miglucci's testimony.

And that's the point. If it's not delivered until September 2008, how is it relevant to a July 12 phone call? Is it really missing?

That invoice was not for the 3825.

 

[bloghooligan]

Poll says 74% believe BC is guilty

Poll also says 55% think he won't be found guilty.

 

[CarolinaTitan]

Listen to Miglucci's testimony.

And that's the point. If it's not delivered until September 2008, how is it relevant to a July 12 phone call? Is it really missing?

I think you are confused. BC had a Cisco router from work in Jan 2008, of which there were two. One was found, the one he had out (identified by serial number) was not...anywhere.

 

[ncsu95]

Actually, that brings up another point about where the prosecution blew the case. The only "expert" that the jury saw on the computer stuff was JW. Instead of trying to discredit him with the low-blow Facebook stuff, they could have put someone's high school kid up on the stand to do a Google search and then show that the cached files are in fact .bmp files and not .cur files, which JW claimed they would be. That would have proved he wasn't much of an expert without looking like an fool for digging up his FB page.

Exactly. The prosecution blew this.

 

[sunshine05]

Here's the core of the Prosecution's case:

Nancy Cooper, Mother of two was horribly strangled on July 12th, 2008:

But we don't know where she was killed. But trust us, it was in the house, somewhere.

We don't really know what time she was killed. But trust us it was sometime after midnight but before 11 am...

We do know that her husband Brad did the deed, but we have no evidence he transported her body in any vehicle available to him. But trust us, cause we know what we know even if we cannot prove it.

He spoofed a call @ 6:40 to provide himself an alibi, even though our lead detective said on the stand "we have no evidence he spoofed the call", but trust us he did, even if we never proved it .

And Brad did a google search of the dump site, the day before the murder, but the time stamps are all invalid, therefore it's Microsoft's fault, even though we never put a witness on the stand to prove it was just a computer glitch. But trust us, cause were the prosecution, and were the good guys.

And you folks want to convict a man on this evidence???? Are you all crazy or just delusional??????

Excellent summary!

 

[johnfear]

That invoice was not for the 3825.

It was for the second router in the order. It even confused GM if you look at the testimony again. He wasn't sure what routers he was talking about anymore.

 

[WolfpackWoman]

That invoice was not for the 3825.

Serial numbers read off and matched for the other 3825 in the order. Miglucci said he didn't recognize the document. But he did recognize it was from the Chicago office.

 

[sunshine05]

It makes sense if you have already physically visited the site but want to see what it looks like from overhead.

And then he just left it there for the police to find. Why would he?

 

[gracielee]

I didn't see any "corruption" during the trial but I guess it all depends on which side of the fence slats you're looking through. Do wish more people felt the same as you though so feel free to talk it up. It's getting pretty crowded on our streets these days since Cary is always ranked one of the top places to live in the US. :tyou:

Especially with that inept police dept. :waitasec: One would think with all those nice homes and rich people, criminals would be making out big time. :fence:

 

[ncsu95]

I thought there was a discussion about this the other night that if the call was made through the Cisco Managed call system, there would be record.

But if it was made directly through the router, the person would have to be in close proximity.

NCSU95 or SleuthinNC, is that right?

SleuthinNC will have to answer. I don't know Cisco equipment.

 

[WolfpackWoman]

I think you are confused. BC had a Cisco router from work in Jan 2008, of which there were two. One was found, the one he had out (identified by serial number) was not...anywhere.

I'm not confused. There were two 3825's that Miglucci testified to. He stated that BOTH were assigned to VTG Alpha RTP. Yet, the other one in the order had a "received from manufacturer date of 9/11/2008" and was accounted for in the Chicago office. Miglucci testified both were received at the same time. How is one received in September 2008 and the other in January 2008 and they are received at the same time? Are Miglucci's records off? Or are the Chicago records off? And how can you believe the records are so amazing now, when for the majority of the Prosecution case in chief they tried to convince you that there were no check-in and out systems at Cisco??

 

[3doglady]

Serial numbers read off and matched for the other 3825 in the order. Miglucci said he didn't recognize the document. But he did recognize it was from the Chicago office.

No, there were two routers purchased at the same time. The Chicago invoice was for the other router not the 3825. If you don't believe me listen to that part again. That was Kurtz misleading again.

 

[ncsu95]

Gotcha! What I didn't understand is why the defense didn't go with the guy who clearly had the credentials (but wasn't given much of the evidence to analyze) in the first place.

They didn't have the money to go with the other witnesses on their list. The one they used for the offer of proof was pro-bono who volunteered his services after watching the JW testimony.

 

[Cheyenne130]

And then he just left it there for the police to find. Why would he?

I believe he tried to delete it and it didn't work. MOO

 

[WolfpackWoman]

No, there were two routers purchased at the same time. The Chicago invoice was for the other router not the 3825. If you don't believe me listen to that part again. That was Kurtz misleading again.

That's my point. How can both routers be purchased at the same time, and one be from January and the other from September? Kurtz was not misleading.

 

[bloghooligan]

It makes sense if you have already physically visited the site but want to see what it looks like from overhead.

So, this guy that's being held out as an expert in computers... BC....

he's already physically visited and picked out a dump site

decides, even tho he knows everything about computers and that internet browsers keep a history, to just pull the site up briefly at his work computer to get an overhead looksee??

Doesn't make sense and as Judge Judy says 'if it doesn't make sense, it's not true."