The Verdict is In - post your thoughts here

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
macd said:
For number 1, if she puked when she got home, the stomach contents would be consistent with a time of death at night or the morning.

For number 2, the missing logs of the spoofed call are consistent with no router or a missing router. The logs would be on that router and only on that router. The 3725 is only 4"x17"x15". Easy to drop in the garbage with all his comings and goings on Saturday.

For the Google records: the search was partially erased; the cookies weren't there. I think he must of done lots of research to plan this perfect murder. There must have been lots of searches to learn to do what he did. I think he relied on his browser's "Clear history..." function, and something went wrong on that one search. Part of the time stamp was invalid on those files, that points to a bug in whatever program wrote those files.

I'm not sure where the police lied about the laptop storage. As I understand it they followed their policies: secure the residence as-is and wait for the computer experts to collect the computers. It took 27 hours for them to come in this case, time for automated programs to run (backup, defragmentation, email updates, pushed software updates). The computer was physically secured during this time, but online. After the CPD computer experts got there, the computer was handled properly AFAIK. In the beginning of the case, the CPD had no reason to know how big a part that computer would play in this case.

While it's easy to find a doubt in each individual piece of circumstantial evidence, the jury was instructed to look at all the pieces of circumstantial evidence together. They could not reasonably explain it all away.
Click to expand...

#1 it is rare for one to throw up the total contents of their stomach in one throw up, people said she didn't even appear drunk after drinking continously both beer and wine through out the night, so I doubt she threw up. Also, throwing up would not have lowered her BAC and that was too low to allow for death at the timeline.

#2 You are trying to get us to buy that no evidence of the spoofed call is evidence of a spoofed call, sorry, not buying it. There is no evidence he made the spoofed call. By the way, the router that the State finally decided on was a 3825, which is 5.25 x 17.25 x 16.0 in. it also runs very hot and would not have been able to be maintained in that cabinet with the dust spot that Boz wants us to believe it was.

The google search files had more to it then you are explaining.

The computer was handled inappropriately and even the FBI was suprised that it was handled in the manner it was. Obviously the evidence log did not show that it was mishandled. The .pst files were also manipulated and changed on the harddrive and that would not happen even if it was connected to the network, they had to have been physically manipulated. The computer evidence was spoiled.
 
octobermoon said:
which channel? TIA :)
Click to expand...

wral.com or wral on tv
5pm and 6pm news, I am watching 5pm now and they said they will talk about it again this hour, they like to keep you hanging there so it probably wont be till 550p!
 
CarolinaTitan said:
1) We don't know exactly what she ate and when she last ate. We don't know exactly what she drank and when she last had a drink. She was a runner and had Crohn's disease. These things might make it difficult to judge stomach contents and alcohol level...especially after sitting in the hot sun for 2 -3 days.

2) The only sure way to erase all traces of an event on a computer...is to wipe the drive clean by overwriting it completely numerous times. Can't do that when it's your work computer though, right?

3) The FBI agent told the jury 10 ways that such a call could be spoofed and we know he had the router to do it in Jan 2008 and it was never returned to Cisco. Yes, the prosecution would have been better served to have someone actually do it...would have been very powerful....but they made some mistakes as we all know.

4) Rosemary Zednik and Food Lion guy contradicted each other on the time they saw her. Rosemary should have seen her first, at 7:10am, which she was adamant about. Food Lion guy should have seen her 10-11 mins later at 7:20am (1.5 miles away). He said he saw her between 6:55am and 7:10am. Someone is clearly mistaken and they both could have easily been.
Click to expand...

1. Her friends, unless the implication is that they lied, said she ate and drank consistently throughout the night. Crohns Disease was not a factor in changing her stomach contents or BAC. BAC is also in the blood, and if she was murdered on the timeline they want us to believe, despite being in the sun for a couple of days, her BAC would not be lower, but higher.

3. The FBI agent did not give 10 ways it could happen. PG from Cisco said there were 10 ways with the router, but there is no evidence he had a router capable of doing that. We do not know that he didn't return the router that GM said he borrowed in January.

4. One of the eye witnesses then could have been correct.
 
Skittles said:
I think it's going to take a bit to decompress. I glanced at the clock this morning at 9:20 and for a moment thought "Oh, it's almost 9:30, I need to get to the computer!" Anybody else do that today?
Click to expand...

Needing to be de-briefed?
 
Okay, so my da*n modem fried. :( What did I miss?? Yes, I know I missed a lot, was so MAD and frustrated that I couldn't get online, but absolutely THRILLED at the verdict. It seems the jury took their time, view evidence, & deliberated, which is what they are supposed to do. Hubby is still working on the new modem, attempting to get the wireless feature working. I hope I don't lose my connection again.
 
otto said:
Guilty or not, I have to say that there were some aspects of the judicial process that concern me. The phone tampering was without doubt a serious error on behalf of the investigators. There is no question that it happened, that it is suspicious, and that the information was withheld from defense until long after it happened. I also have concerns about the "secret" methods used by the FBI expert, and the fact that the defense was prevented from presenting a witness to testify regarding the computer forensics. Personally, if I was on trial for something, and I was faced with the above two factors, I would be very concerned. I did perceive the judge to have a bias favoring the prosecution.

When the jury sent a note asking for things to go faster, we wondered what it meant. Today, I think it meant that they had made up their minds and were not at all interested in hearing defense arguments. I also see that as a problem.
Click to expand...

I disagree, no trial is perfect. No evidence gathering process is flawless. Humans, on occasion, make mistakes. But I don't think there was ever any sort of conserted effort to frame brad. Even though I was off line for nearly two days, I returned to see the same argument here. I don't think the jury sent a note because they had their minds made up, had that been the case, they would have come back with a verdict monday morning. The problem the jury had, and I too would have had, was all the 'time off'. The jury was there every day from 9:30 to 5:00, and they wanted their time to be used wisely. They were sick and tired of being stuck in the jury room for hours on end while *arguments* were going on out of their presence. I think witness & evidence arguments should be done before the court day begins, after the court day ends, or during the lunch break. Jurors, who don't have any choice in the matter, and who are in effect being told they have to give up their normal life, should not be forced to sit around and wait, day after day. I think it was a mistake for the judge to even begin to give friday afternoons off. Most judges don't accommodate the jurors in that regard to the extent this judge did IMO.
 
gracielee said:
I disagree, no trial is perfect. No evidence gathering process is flawless. Humans, on occasion, make mistakes. But I don't think there was ever any sort of conserted effort to frame brad. Even though I was off line for nearly two days, I returned to see the same argument here. I don't think the jury sent a note because they had their minds made up, had that been the case, they would have come back with a verdict monday morning. The problem the jury had, and I too would have had, was all the 'time off'. The jury was there every day from 9:30 to 5:00, and they wanted their time to be used wisely. They were sick and tired of being stuck in the jury room for hours on end while *arguments* were going on out of their presence. I think witness & evidence arguments should be done before the court day begins, after the court day ends, or during the lunch break. Jurors, who don't have any choice in the matter, and who are in effect being told they have to give up their normal life, should not be forced to sit around and wait, day after day. I think it was a mistake for the judge to even begin to give friday afternoons off. Most judges don't accommodate the jurors in that regard to the extent this judge did IMO.
Click to expand...

I just read an article on WRAL based on an interview that the Foreman gave...he said he was unaware of the note saying; "We want our lives back" until Friday. So it was only a few of them I guess.

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/story/9563005/
 
Danielle59 said:
We do not know that he didn't return the router that GM said he borrowed in January.
Click to expand...

That is a misstatement of the testimony. We know he took it home. We know he didn't bring it back. What else is there? I'm quite certain that if they had an explanation for where the router went, the defense would have had someone to testify about it, just like they did with the ducks.

Once the prosecution has shown Brad "borrowed" it, they have proven he had access to it. The prosecution had an opportunity to bring up evidence to the contrary but didn't. The implication is clear, there was no evidence to contrary because Brad dumped the $11,000 router.
 
otto said:
Guilty or not, I have to say that there were some aspects of the judicial process that concern me. The phone tampering was without doubt a serious error on behalf of the investigators. There is no question that it happened, that it is suspicious, and that the information was withheld from defense until long after it happened. I also have concerns about the "secret" methods used by the FBI expert, and the fact that the defense was prevented from presenting a witness to testify regarding the computer forensics.
Click to expand...

You make an excellent point, one that I had not considered. Essentially we,a nd apparently the jury, accepted the testimony regarding the Google Maps search as undisputed fact, but we forget that this guy was working for the prosecution. One only need look at our own NC-SBI to see that there in some bias in what they do,and that what they tell a jury isn't always accurate.
 
In the excerpt of his interview on WRAL just now, they showed Kurtz saying that the police planted the google evidence.

Wow!
 
calgary123 said:
In the excerpt of his interview on WRAL just now, they showed Kurtz saying that the police planted the google evidence.

Wow![/QUOTE

Reckon he has to stick to the story in preparation for the appeal.
Click to expand...
 
calgary123 said:
In the excerpt of his interview on WRAL just now, they showed Kurtz saying that the police planted the google evidence.

Wow!
Click to expand...

I think Kurtz believes that something shady went on behind the scenes with the electronics: phone, computer. One does have to wonder how a guy with a BSc in computer science would be so dumb as use a work computer to search the drainage ditch 12 hours before deciding to murder his wife and put her there. Brad, of all people, would know that police would look at him first, would examine his computers and would find something like that. It really is very surprising that he would do that. Someone without an understanding of computers might do something like that, but not someone that was so good with them that he could spoof phone calls. I'm having a hard time adding it up ... spoofing calls that cannot be proven as spoofed, and leaving clear evidence on the computer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 87 more.
Total: 2,143 (members: 88, guests: 2,055)

Online statistics

Members online
88
Guests online
2,055
Total visitors
2,143
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,094
Messages
18,134,630
Members
231,231
Latest member
timbo1966
Back
Top