The Verdict is In - post your thoughts here

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Who could forget Brad in Raleigh.

Wow - the BC case sure had a tangled web, but just imagine if the "Brad in Raleigh" from MP case was somehow connected to BC of the BC case. That would have really been over the top!...
 
I think it possible both sides use bloggers to make some adjustments. That shockingly goes both ways. Why I heard WS posters mention their involvement in trials before. Can't have it both ways. I doubt Kurtz used this significantly if he only read 20 or so bloggers. Again read my other post, and please read UNC70. I believe he sums up public outrage better than anyone else.

Thanks. I was trying to capture how the opinions of so many people changed during this trial. Not just those posting online, but the general public. There are many long-time posters on GOLO who have never agreed on anything before -- politics, school board, sports, Greg Fishel -- but they are now more-or-less in agreement

Anything being read in real-time during the trial probably would not have been at GOLO because everything there is pre-screened by their mods. Delays of 20-30 minutes are routine and on a hot topic like this trial a lot of comments just disappear into the void. My guess would be that in real-time they would likely be reading here at WS.
 
Really who would want to Frame Brad Cooper...I hope Brad gets a faster talking appellate lawyer...slow talkers give me a creepy feeling
 
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.

I agree with the exception of the Friday afternoons. I think the judge did it with the approval of the jury -- maybe it should have been every other Friday, however. And when the Friday thing was agreed and announced, no one really had any idea of how long the whole thing would last. The judge got estimates from both sides, but I think the estimates were best-case-wishful-thinking and not as good as they should have been, and I guess it was just another kink in this whole deal (??). Anyway, there were a lot of sending-the-jury-out times, and that, as you say, really added to the total amount of time spent on this case.
icon7.gif
 
the brad didn't have much going for him for defense....hammering away on a house of cards, saying the same disparaging remarks over and over again, (20 pairs of typing hands continuing abuse IMO in Social media), "I've been framed defense....I guess Kurtz depended on 'ole lying brad for that brainstorm, and believed him....), law enforcement inept ( not by results in successful investigations and convictions of murderers in Wake County that have gone to trial). What use would coming to W/S's or any message board be if he wasn't grasping for straws? Next thing we know there will be real time virtual surgeries happening with Surgeons consulting real time message boards for ideas of where to cut next. UGH! Trying to build a defense by saturating Social Media with innuendo, snide remarks, misogynistic comments....its just dirty tricks and of no substance. All of that backfired, blew up and the defense was left with a whole lot of smoke and no cigar! the brad is in jail where he belongs. The justice system prevailed and time marches on leaving brad in jail as brad's appeal team climbs that slippery slope and continues to try and get traction on what utterly failed their client. MOO
 
Really who would want to Frame Brad Cooper...I hope Brad gets a faster talking appellate lawyer...slow talkers give me a creepy feeling


LOL. You must not live in the south, Palomine. I think BC is just fine with Kurtz who was slower talking in that interview because he wanted to choose his words wisely. Get used to the slower speach, and it doesn't mean they are dumb.
 
The first I remember locally where the smoking gun was a Google search a few days before the murder for where the body was found was the trial of Robert Petrick, another computer expert, over in Durham.

How often does this happen elsewhere, or is this just some local weirdness?

I just read about the google searches. That was an interesting case. He represented himself?!

Prosecutors had seized several computers from Petrick's home after Sutphen, a concert cellist, disappeared in January 2003. They used evidence collected from the hard drives to make their case. Internet histories showed that showing someone used Google to search the terms neck, snap break and hold and reviewed a document entitled "22 Ways to Kill a Man With Your Bare Hands." They also said that someone had researched body decomposition and the topography of the lake where Sutphen's body was found.

Several witnesses testified that Petrick had a history of affairs, financial problems and deceit, which prosecutors said could have motivated Petrick to kill.

Article:http://www.informationweek.com/news/174403074

Some eery similarities to the Cooper case, for sure.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tink56
Kurtz was definitely emboldened by the bloggers...He stated in his "set up" interview...in front of his law books (Must have been his dad's), with make up and lighting...that he read 20,000 of 25,000 blogs and 75% were positive. Maybe he should have been looking for the right computer witness rather than reading blogs...My reaction to all of this is so negative, I can't even begin to comment.

Who was the defense's jury/trial consultant? Which jurors did Kurtz and company recognize as favorable to the defense DURING the trial? There are a gazillion things I could say about the new meaning of "handling media relations" during a trial for a defense team? UGH...

bbm

I am stunned to learn that! Unreal! He absolutely got caught up in the vitriol. His closing argument was for the benefit of the bloggers! !
Yes, I'm curious NCSU, doesn't this bother you at all? Kurtz, admitting he spent hours upon hours reading blogs and basing his arguments on what social media was saying? I find that to be far more offensive IMO. Yes, we do chat and discuss and debate, but one hopes the defense has better material to base their arguments on, no? I mean, they get to see the real evidence, we only hear about what gets entered in evidence. MOO


No it doesn't bother me, because Kurtz doesn't represent me. The prosecutors represent the people of NC, not the defense.
 
If he did this, then yes, he is an extremely violent man. There was some evidence missing from tiral. How Nancy was found was far from how a loving husband would leave his wife - even after accidental murder.

The problem with this statement is first off, this wasn't an accidental murder, the jury found premeditation of the crime. Secondly, Brad wasn't a 'loving husband'. A loving husband doesn't intercept his wife's correspondences, he doesn't take her names off marital assets without discussion. He doesn't tell her 'he's in love with HM.' etc. etc. They were in hate mode, remember?
 
I just listened to the interview with Kurtz. Very interesting and I found him more likable when he wasn't whining to the judge. :)

One point of irony is how he mentioned that JP was dishonest with the police. Pot, meet kettle.

Thanks for that one -- you made me LOL -- really. And you're right on target.
I'm still chuckling -- loved it!!!
icon10.gif
 
Precisely my question too..Bring a big gun, properly credentialed..to testify to that fact..and NOT rely on a Non-forensic "Hacker" of computers..who only look for "Hackings"..What the heck does he really KNOW what is normal or acceptable in the "Forensic World"??..He doesnt...Tho the true expert in his "Offer of Proof" testimony said quite simply the cur. file showing as bmpfile was normal...yet JW said it was "Mysterious"..IMO Def. made a huge strategic error relying of JW:banghead:

Yep -- goes to show that you get what you pay for...JMHO
 
20 to 25
What is that about?

I hope you're not thinking that 20/22,000 forum comments means 20/25.

IIRC, Kurtz said 'he'd read 20 of the 22,000 or so remarks and of those 75% were positive towards the defense.' Now, IMO, that could be interpreted as 20 thousand of the 22 thousand. Were I to attempt to make a statement as to 75% of 22,000 people were in my corner, pro defense, questioning veracity, etc. I'd hope I would use more than 20 hits out of 22,000 to come to the conclusion of 75%. That is what I meant by Kurtz statement 'could be interpreted differently depending upon who read it IMO. I realize most here, probably including myself, agree he most likely meant 20 total posts. But statistically speaking, I hardly think reading 20 of 22.000 of anything could come to a 75% determination with such a minute sampling. MOO
 
I didn't hear "travesty of justice." I heard "the judge was not qualified to rule on the case." I didn't hear "my client is innocent." I heard "police did not propertly investigate hard evidence such as tire tracks, foot prints and discarded objects at the scene." I didn't hear "we will appeal all the way to the supreme court." I heard "we allege spoilation of evidence", the Judge should have "recused" himself due to lack of knowledge of the evidence, "we would like a fair trial where the prosecution discloses evidence to the defense, and the defense is permitted to present rebuttal witnesses."

That's what I heard.

This is not Mike Peterson, Jason Young or Scott Peterson; who were afraid of losing their wives income due to corporate downsizing or pregnancy. This is a guy that provided for his family and who stood to gain less and lose more, in every way, by murdering his wife. He's a logical, smart, computer savvy guy. He can figure that much out ... while he's supposedly accessing a map of the dump site 12 hours before putting his wife there.

The prosecution alleges that he had an angry outburst. No one ever saw him have angry outbursts. In fact, it looks like sports were a healthy outlet for Nancy and Brad. Are we to believe that because he is reserved, he has an angry outburst where he murders his wife, and not before or after?

No one ever saw him have an angry outburst, huh? Are you trying to mislead us, or do you not remember, or never were aware of, the fight in the pre-school parking lot?
 
Kurtz had one of his assistants (the one with the long hair) reading WS every day, all day long. I saw it on her laptop when I was in court. She would highlight things and IM it to Kurtz. So yes, this defense attorney was using things from WS and likely other online places, to get ideas. The prosecution was not doing this. They were not sitting in court reading WS like Kurtz' team was. I suspect when the trial first started the prosecutors probably were unaware of WS. Kurtz had been monitoring it for 3 yrs.

People who have zero legal knowledge, don't know anything about the laws of this state, don't know anything about rules of evidence, and that's who Kurtz was using to figure out if the judge was ruling incorrectly and to get legal strategy? Foolish man. That to me demonstrates he didn't know what conspiracy to play, but he was looking for the one that would cause the most uproar.

He started by throwing everything against the wall, then whittled down to whatever played the best in the cesspool of social media. Further indication that there was no tampering and no conspiracy. The social media decided which one he would use based on their reactions. Played like a Hollywood producer looking to edit the ending of their movie so audiences will react.
 
If I needed a defense attorney I would hire Trenkle. I would never hire Kurtz. Think Trenkle & Kurtz walked away from this case on friendly terms? I think not. I doubt you'll ever see them willingly work together again.
 
The problem with this statement is first off, this wasn't an accidental murder, the jury found premeditation of the crime. Secondly, Brad wasn't a 'loving husband'. A loving husband doesn't intercept his wife's correspondences, he doesn't take her names off marital assets without discussion. He doesn't tell her 'he's in love with HM.' etc. etc. They were in hate mode, remember?

did you watch closing arguments/pros closing when the prosecutor held his neck area..to show strangulation it was very powerful
 
If I needed a defense attorney I would hire Trenkle. I would never hire Kurtz. Think Trenkle & Kurtz walked away from this case on friendly terms? I think not. I doubt you'll ever see them willingly work together again.

Good thing these will not be their appellate lawyers...Kurtz imo was not a strong lawyer..If I was on trial for my life NO WAY would I want a passive defense team
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
239
Guests online
280
Total visitors
519

Forum statistics

Threads
609,044
Messages
18,248,792
Members
234,531
Latest member
CinnaMint444
Back
Top