State vs Bradley Cooper 4-21-11

[sunshine05]

By instructions from someone whose name he didn't write down and doesn't remember. Using instructions he didn't write down and didn't use for 1 week. And ignoring the warnings given by the phone itself.

I fully believe it was not intentional on the part of Det. Young to wipe the phone. But it was incredibly inept to do so...and to do it twice (alleged by the defense).

I guess I'm much more cynical than you because I believe it was intentional.

 

[CaryFrom NJ]

She believes what she believes and that is fine. I am sure she did see a jogger but it wasn't NC. This lady represents my definition of a busy body wanting to attention and to be heard. I don't mean she didn't see somebody but not for a split second and know who it was.

How can you possibly say this without even knowing the witness personally (and if you do, I apologize). I think it is very unfair to call her a busybody, when all she was trying to do was provide information that the "inept" CPD failed to follow up on. Would it really have taken them that long to follow up on a few more leads, rather than putting all of their focus on BC.

But, when all of NC's friends were called by the prosecution, weren't they indeed "busy bodies" all stating what they "claimed" to hear from NC. Wasn't that for some attention, as well. Afterall, after hearing from 2, then 3, then 4, etc of her friends about how horrible the Cooper marriage was, wasn't it overkill on the prosecution's part to keep calling witnesses to say the same thing over and over. And - after hearing of some of these things these friends stated, it was obvious that it was just for a moment of publicity and "wanting to be heard"

 

[sunshine05]

They would still have the record of calls and texts from the phone company. It wouldn't give details of what was discussed any more than a voice call would but there would be a record of communication to and from. I agree with the mini conspiracy theory to a degreee. I'm suspect of WHY the defense by way of their client focused on that cell phone and made it SO important. I find it very hard to believe that Brad didn't already know what was on that phone. MOO

How could he? The phone was locked, right?

 

[Cheyenne130]

She talked about that today during her testimony.

Yes she did. I watched her testimony. I didn't see any pictures presented and I didn't see what she had to pick from. Were all of the others blonde? Grey haired? Short haired? What was she shown to pick from?

 

[Maja]

No. I have Google Earth up in Chrome on the laptop that I am on now and no one has ever logged in to a Google account on here.

Believe in order to get google earth, you have to download it. In order to do so, you must set up an account. From my recollection. In fact, I tried to put it on my work computer today and it wanted me to set up an account for it and I don't have administrator rights on the system to do it

 

[Cheyenne130]

How could he? The phone was locked, right?

As the owner and administrator of her account, he had a lot of access to communications going to and from her phone.

 

[WolfpackWoman]

Yes she did. I watched her testimony. I didn't see any pictures presented and I didn't see what she had to pick from. Were all of the others blonde? Grey haired? Short haired? What was she shown to pick from?

I have no idea. But I am fully confident that if the selection of photos wasn't fair, the prosecution would have jumped all over that.

 

[Maja]

No. I have Google Earth up in Chrome on the laptop that I am on now and no one has ever logged in to a Google account on here.

I thought that yesterday was Conspiracy Theory Day. :waitasec:

I honestly don't follow the thinking here. The detective described what he did to the phone and what he did definitely results in the phone being erased. And the detective testified to the fact that he got a warning that he was about to erase everything on the phone and he said "ok". Brad didn't make him click "ok" rather than "cancel" when he was prompted.

I could understand thinking that Brad did something devious if the detective testified that he just turned the phone on and it wiped itself or he just touched one key and it wiped itself. Instead, he described doing something that is supposed to wipe the phone.

Same Detective was in the court today. Wonder if he's on standby to explain his actions again?

 

[CrimeAddict]

Ok so for this Food Lion guy, did they check bank statements to find out if she actually shopped there. She does have a familiar face, he could have just thought he saw her. I just don't find any of these people reliable at this point and I have a feeling she did not go to that Food Lion often., She lived close so I bet she had been there at some point for something quick but probably shopped at HT.

 

[raisincharlie]

My own personal belief is that Brad rigged it. Why else was that the one thing he had his attorney write to the prosecution about? Reminds me a bit of the 'red & black jogging bra'. MOO

I'm not sure Brad rigged the phone to wipe but I do believe he tried a few passwords to get into it when he had it in his possession before LE showed up on that Saturday.

 

[sunshine05]

Not delving into any conspiracy theories but can you think of a reason why Brad through his attorneys would be so adamant about the necessity to protect that phone? My simple thought is that he pulled a "Scott Peterson" and left some voicemail or text message that would portray him as a loving husband. What would be on that phone and not in phone records that Brad would KNOW about that would be exculpatory?

Voice mail messages? If you think for a second that he is innocent (just pretend), he would have wanted to know what was on there that would hopefully clear him or at least point the police in other directions to find the real killer.

 

[jmflu]

CPD talked to people and ruled out those that sounded confused and inaccurate. They didn't rule out a man who told them exactly what Nancy was wearing when she was found... no more and no less.

No one even came forward to say that Brad just wasn't that kind of person, that he would never do something like that. People did come forward to say that, from knowing Brad, they suspected he murdered his wife.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I have no idea. But I am fully confident that if the selection of photos wasn't fair, the prosecution would have jumped all over that.

And I believe if it was fair, the defense would have shown the photos and had her show what she had selected. The prosecution didn't have to jump on something that was never done. MOO

 

[sunshine05]

Believe in order to get google earth, you have to download it. In order to do so, you must set up an account. From my recollection. In fact, I tried to put it on my work computer today and it wanted me to set up an account for it and I don't have administrator rights on the system to do it

It was google maps though, right? I never heard he "allegedly" used Google Earth for the searches.

 

[SleuthSayer]

I have a lock screen on my Samsung, and while I have never tried entering an incorrect password that many times, I'm sure it has a similar feature. I know that after like 3 or 4, it will start to lock you out for a few minutes and then longer and longer.

Right, what you are describing makes more sense to me. If you continue getting the password wrong, the phone software assumes that it may be someone up to no good so it locks itself down even tighter. I don't follow why a phone would reward you for not knowing the password by blowing everything away.

Suppose you and your husband are in "hate mode" and you've got a lot of valuable information on your Blackberry. Well, when you go to take a shower (can't take the phone in there with you), the husband gets your BB and does this 10 failed password thing and blows away all of that important info that you had. He's happy, you're screwed.

 

[raisincharlie]

Ok so for this Food Lion guy, did they check bank statements to find out if she actually shopped there. She does have a familiar face, he could have just thought he saw her. I just don't find any of these people reliable at this point and I have a feeling she did not go to that Food Lion often., She lived close so I bet she had been there at some point for something quick but probably shopped at HT.

The 90% sure guy who said it was 5 minutes to 7 when he saw "the jogger" until the defense reminded him it could have been as late as 10 minutes after 7 ? To me his time line just does not work out if one wishes to believe Brad that Nancy left at 7 am.

 

[WolfpackWoman]

And I believe if it was fair, the defense would have shown the photos and had her show what she had selected. The prosecution didn't have to jump on something that was never done. MOO

Perhaps the defense was afraid to show the photos for fear she would identify the wrong person. And the prosecution was equally afraid to show the photos for fear she would identify the right person! I think you and I must just be content to disagree on this point. I do see your point though, even if I shift the onus of proof onto the prosecution for this matter.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Voice mail messages? If you think for a second that he is innocent (just pretend), he would have wanted to know what was on there that would hopefully clear him or at least point the police in other directions to find the real killer.

And they would have phone numbers to and from. They have a trail. They can show that *advertiser censored*-xxxx called at whatever time and left a voicemail. If they don't have the actual voicemail message it is no different than not have the actual phone call back and forth between two people on the phone. They still have evidence that communication was made. Bring it on.

 

[sunshine05]

Ok so for this Food Lion guy, did they check bank statements to find out if she actually shopped there. She does have a familiar face, he could have just thought he saw her. I just don't find any of these people reliable at this point and I have a feeling she did not go to that Food Lion often., She lived close so I bet she had been there at some point for something quick but probably shopped at HT.

No one needs to go that far. Defense is showing the pattern of how CPD handled witnesses - ignored them. This isn't about trying to discredit people who believed they saw her. In fact, Detective Hayes thought he saw someone matching her description that morning too. Lots of people thought they saw her. CPD had tunnel vision.

 

[jmflu]

Voice mail messages? If you think for a second that he is innocent (just pretend), he would have wanted to know what was on there that would hopefully clear him or at least point the police in other directions to find the real killer.

Yes, because he was so helpful to the officers before.