Trial Date set and Trial Proceeding Discussion Here

[SleuthyGal]

If that's true, it doesn't seem likely that the trial will start on Monday. I expect to hear it is being moved out another week or so.

 

[calgary123]

Thanks for posting the video link from Monday.

Two strikes against the Defence right off the start. First they bring too many people to the counsel table, second they seem to want to use the media feed.

My impression is that Brad's defence (while apparently competent) is not experienced in conducting serious murder trials. I say this because, bringing so many extra bodies to the table was something they expected as of right, while it was actually out of the ordinary. I also think the judge took at dig at the defence when he suggested they comply with rule 15.

EDIT: Strike 3, the defence served a document on the SBI improperly. Personal service was required, they took a shortcut. Wow.

EDIT AGAIN: Strike 4, tried to obtain information previously denied, via a second method. This is a semi strike, probably a good idea to ask for it and put the lack of the disclosure (which I think should have been produced originally) in issue. Were Brad's attorneys more aggressive, they might have commented that the SBI knows full well this information (email between the police and the SBI) was discoverable and should have been provided up front. Of course, the counter argument is, if the defence wanted it, they've had in excess of 18 months to request it.

 

[calgary123]

A question to those who may know:

What is the reputation of Brad's defence team? Are they considered heavy hitters? Up-and-comers? The last choice?

I don't ask this question in the sense that I'm asking they are good lawyers or not, just what their reputation may be, and knowing the information might not be reliable. Just your impression from what you have heard or know.

 

[ncsu95]

They are very competent lawyers.

 

[raisincharlie]

Thanks for posting the video link from Monday.

Two strikes against the Defence right off the start. First they bring too many people to the counsel table, second they seem to want to use the media feed.

My impression is that Brad's defence (while apparently competent) is not experienced in conducting serious murder trials. I say this because, bringing so many extra bodies to the table was something they expected as of right, while it was actually out of the ordinary. I also think the judge took at dig at the defence when he suggested they comply with rule 15.

EDIT: Strike 3, the defence served a document on the SBI improperly. Personal service was required, they took a shortcut. Wow.

EDIT AGAIN: Strike 4, tried to obtain information previously denied, via a second method. This is a semi strike, probably a good idea to ask for it and put the lack of the disclosure (which I think should have been produced originally) in issue. Were Brad's attorneys more aggressive, they might have commented that the SBI knows full well this information (email between the police and the SBI) was discoverable and should have been provided up front. Of course, the counter argument is, if the defence wanted it, they've had in excess of 18 months to request it.

JMO - they are experienced enough to take some pretty dramatic steps to try and get a stay and to try to weasel the judge about things that have been ruled on by an appellate court. Maybe it is more desperation, as you are quite correct, they have had plenty of time to make requests and there is little doubt they know the proper method of performing service of a subpeona.

 

[Just the Fax]

A question to those who may know:

What is the reputation of Brad's defence team? Are they considered heavy hitters? Up-and-comers? The last choice?

I don't ask this question in the sense that I'm asking they are good lawyers or not, just what their reputation may be, and knowing the information might not be reliable. Just your impression from what you have heard or know.

Kurtz took this case for the $85/hr the state pays for indigent defense.
I am told most private criminal lawyers in Wake County charge between $150 - $300/hr for murder cases. I suspect his willingness to accept such a low fee centers around publicity.

 

[BrownRice]

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/9184089/

I was reading the comments section of this article and it seems like Nancy's reputation is going to be thrown in the gutter during this trial.

 

[SleuthyGal]

it seems like Nancy's reputation is going to be thrown in the gutter during this trial.

That became evident with the initial affidavits during the 2008 custody part of the case and then during the custody hearing itself. Take a look at the defense motions in recent months to see where they intend to go with dirt slinging. It seems to be defense tactic 101 to try and get the jury to hate the victim as much as possible and at the same time try to suggest that lots of other people had motive.

<snark>
I imagine it's only a matter of time until the defense dredges up references to the 'drug filled world of Faye Resnick' (c.f. O.J. Simpson murder trial 1995) and try to suggest a friendship between Nancy and Ms. Resnick to insinuate that Nancy was into drugs and her murder was the result of some Colombian drug lords out for a hit, like what was said during Simpson's trial.
</snark>

 

[ncsu95]

Are you saying that the things they brought up recently aren't relevant? Obviously they shouldn't trash her just to trash her...but given this appears to be a circumstantial case (based on what has been made public), I would think it could be relevant. At least adds doubt.

And as I have said in many discussions on this case, I have not formed an opinion on guilt or innocence yet. I'm clearly on the fence based on what has been made public so far.

 

[BrownRice]

Are you saying that the things they brought up recently aren't relevant? Obviously they shouldn't trash her just to trash her...but given this appears to be a circumstantial case (based on what has been made public), I would think it could be relevant. At least adds doubt.

And as I have said in many discussions on this case, I have not formed an opinion on guilt or innocence yet. I'm clearly on the fence based on what has been made public so far.

Not saying it's not relevant, but if you didn't know anything about the case and had to form opinions strictly from the 61 comments, you'd think Nancy was a cheating spouse, money hungry, mean, and an irresponsible parent. And Brad was just a chump who had to go out at dawn to HT to purchase supplies while his wife was out bedding some other man.

 

[Just the Fax]

Are you saying that the things they brought up recently aren't relevant? Obviously they shouldn't trash her just to trash her...but given this appears to be a circumstantial case (based on what has been made public), I would think it could be relevant. At least adds doubt.

And as I have said in many discussions on this case, I have not formed an opinion on guilt or innocence yet. I'm clearly on the fence based on what has been made public so far.

Even if it is proven she had an affair, the jury will clearly understand It was Brad, and only Brad that had a motive to kill Nancy.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Anyone know how many jurors have been seated?

I checked the WRAL site but they don't say anything about it.

 

[carolinalady]

Anyone know how many jurors have been seated?

I checked the WRAL site but they don't say anything about it.

If I heard the anchors correctly on this morning's news, WRAL said juror selection was continuing and NO jurors had been seated.

 

[Skittles]

If I heard the anchors correctly on this morning's news, WRAL said juror selection was continuing and NO jurors had been seated.

Yup, same status today on the noon news as well. WRAL said at noon "not a single juror has been seated." They don't seem to be putting any info on their websites for these brief updates.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Thanks CarolinaLady & Skittles.

Zero jurors seated. I think it's safe to assume that the trial will be delayed at least another week, if not 2 or 3.

 

[LivinginNC]

Interesting...I know someone who got jury duty notice for Tuesday the 1st, when he called his number was higher then they requested to come in, and the jury notice indicated that if he was not called on his day that his services would not be needed (it stated that you are only responsible to serve one day, if called, unless your hearing lasts longer). Next day he called back and the recording said they were not taking any one that had their notice that they were up for duty on the 2nd. I am not knowledgeable on how the jury system works but this seems odd if they have yet to seat a single juror. Can anyone clarify how they go about calling in potential jurors?

 

[SleuthyGal]

Since no juror has been selected (i.e. approved) to be a juror on the case after questioning during voire dire means they will keep going through the existing pool of candidates they have called in so far. Any other folks waiting to see if they'd have to go in 'served' their jury obligation on that one day of waiting, according to the rules.

If they have to go out to find more people they'll call in the next pool.

Interestingly in the 19 yrs I lived in CA, I only got one notice for jury duty and never had to go in (just place one phone call to see if my number was on a list, and it wasn't). In the 9+ yrs I've lived in NC I've never gotten a notice for jury duty. I'm registered to vote and have a driver's license.

 

[Just the Fax]

I was reading some material on the Michael Peterson murder trial and saw it took 6 weeks to finally seat a jury in that case. As evidenced by the change of venue request (denied), the defense may find it difficult to find a jury to their liking in short order. It may indeed be late March before the actual trial gets underway.

This Peterson scenario may end up being close for Cooper.
Sounds like Kurtz is looking for jurors that have never watched WRAL or read the N&O. You know, someone that has lived quietly under a rock the past 2 1/2 years.

 

[Just the Fax]

Wral said part of the problem was finding jurors that could reasonably commit their time to an 8 week trial.

 

[RaleighNC]

I don't know how you find those rock dwellers. And - as folks have noted - there's many that seem to think that Brad is very innocent, just as it seems easier to find the Brad=guilty folks here. I'd hope for a smart mix, myself.

I'd like to think that I am analytical enough that - even having read through a lot of the documentation on this case - I could still be impartial / be open to facts. I know the odds are that he killed her (strictly odds - women are usually killed by their spouses) but agree that the case is quite circumstantial based on what has been disclosed to date.

And - quite honestly - I find BOTH of their behaviors outlined in the custody docs pretty bad. I don't think Nancy was a saint AT ALL. But - no matter - bad behavior, adultery, lying, etc - most any behavior is not a reason for murder.

There does appear to be some bias in the reporting to not explore some of the things that were brought up about Nancy's blackberry, etc and worry that it's painting such a perfect picture of someone that there isn't some sort of weird desire to find the bad and then somehow Brad ends up being the beneficiary of that.

None of any which is relevant to the case.............. but I am SURE we'll hear.