State v. Bradley Cooper 03/16/11

[Cheyenne130]

I'll be interested to see what the defense comes up with in cross examination.

If it's anything like the cross examinations to date, they will dig their client into a deeper hole.

 

[Just the Fax]

BC says she was wearing a black dress and everyone goes off because he got the color wrong. He says she is wearing a black and red sports bra and everyone goes off because he got the color right.

He got the color wrong on the dress intentionally.
He got the color right on the bra intentionally.

I can see why everyone 'went off'

 

[DogWood]

 

[Maja]

At the time of track no one was in yard except BC and the detective, he and the dog. BC had gone in house to retrieve the shoe for detective. Max spent time with the shoe and then he gave command to track. Spent a few seconds in the yard and then over to the driveway, near a fence, and then back to the yard. This was casting - where he is just getting used to the scent - NOT tracking here. He was just looking for the odor that was presented in the shoe. Max never entered into the tracking mode. Max never indicated he found the odor and go into track mode.

Had a strange thought today: What if the shoe was BC's?

 

[DogWood]

Thanks for all of the updates from today everyone!

 

[raisincharlie]

From WRAL article:

Among other testimony from Dismukes:

Dismukes saw a purse in the floorboard of Nancy Cooper's BMW SUV with cash and a pair of children's jeans on the car seat. Outside, he observed a floor mat on the ground between her SUV and Brad Cooper's BMW that appeared to belong to the car.

Brad Cooper told investigators that, although he did not see his wife leave, he thought his wife usually wore a black and red sports bra when she ran. Nancy Cooper’s body was found with a similarly colored sports bra, the only piece of clothing on her.

** note: the article doesn't say WHICH car that floor mat belongs to, but I'm thinking it was BC's.

I wish the article reflected when Detective Dismukes observed the above. If it was on the 13th, which I think it might mean, it has a bit different context. For example, we know Brad was not there when LE arrived on Saturday; I figure it is unlikely they saw a car floor mat between the two vehicles on the 12th. Now if it is seen on the 13th, reason to think about that for me anyhow.

 

[raisincharlie]

Doesn't look very happy does he ?


:seeya:

 

[SleuthyGal]

That photo is from Tuesdays' testimony (according to the caption on the N&O site)

 

[DogWood]

Doesn't look very happy does he ?


:seeya:

Nope! That vein in his neck looks like it's about ready to burst.

Sure wish someone would post a transcript of the testimony today. If we can't hear it, we should at least be able to read all of it!

 

[SleuthyGal]

I figure it is unlikely they saw a car floor mat between the two vehicles on the 12th. Now if it is seen on the 13th, reason to think about that

This is the kind of missing detail that is problematic. I highly doubt the mat was sitting out like that on Sat 7/12. Neighbors would have seen it.

On the 13th (Sun) it could have been because other officers were searching his car trunk (remember he allowed them to look). Maybe Dismukes got there after some other cop(s) and the mat was taken out.

Without the context, we don't know...

 

[Maja]

CC said sometimes she picks NC up for a run and visa versa.

 

[DogWood]

Anyone know anything about this?

From the comment section on WRAL. Hope this is OK to post.

"I heard that the defense attorney asked to see the officer's notes, something about his investigation notes not matching the testimony given on the stand. The judge is supposed to "decide" or rule on that in the morning. I'm betting the judge doesn't allow it. That's my gut feeling. Guts count in this trial, you know."

itsmyownopinion
GOLO member since February 4, 2011
March 16, 2011 6:28 p.m.


http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/story/9277884/

 

[raisincharlie]

Don't know anything about it Dog Wood. Did not see any tweets to that effect, from the media anyhow. Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me as Kurtz has been taking this line for a very long time in motion after motion saying he does not have the investigators notes. Gotta try everything.

 

[raisincharlie]

This is the kind of missing detail that is problematic. I highly doubt the mat was sitting out like that on Sat 7/12. Neighbors would have seen it.

On the 13th (Sun) it could have been because other officers were searching his car trunk (remember he allowed them to look). Maybe Dismukes got there after some other cop(s) and the mat was taken out.

Without the context, we don't know...

WRAL needs to get a "blue dot" and a pitch bender so we can watch and listen to a blue dot with a squeeky voice

In their defense - they can't get every detail into print - short articles.

 

[DogWood]

Don't know anything about it Dog Wood. Did not see any tweets to that effect, from the media anyhow. Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me as Kurtz has been taking this line for a very long time in motion after motion saying he does not have the investigators notes. Gotta try everything.

Thanks, RC!

I'm sure you're right.

I took some time today to go back and find old notes. Found the picture of the business cards MM made for Nancy. I thought they really looked nice.

 

[calgary123]

Just watched the K9 testimony in its entirety. It was completely neutralized by a short but effective cross-examine. I'm surprised but that's how a good defense should be. This time I think the prosecution screwed up. The cross was so devastating they should have raised the issue in direct. After watching the cross I thought the direct was misleading by omitting the most key fact.

 

[jilly]

Thank you everyone for all the updates today.

Just re-reading the tweets - can anyone give any details about the 10 questions asked of Officer Burgin with respect to being a K9 handler?

ETA - nevermind, I've found the video!

 

[jmflu]

Thanks for all of the notes today, everyone! Hi, Topsail!! Good to see you!

 

[jilly]

Just watched the K9 testimony in its entirety. It was completely neutralized by a short but effective cross-examine. I'm surprised but that's how a good defense should be. This time I think the prosecution screwed up. The cross was so devastating they should have raised the issue in direct. After watching the cross I thought the direct was misleading by omitting the most key fact.

I guess I was reading the tweets while you were posting. Can you elaborate a bit of this for me please?

 

[Just the Fax]

For an indigent defendant, Cooper is getting a very capable defense team, led by Howard Kurtz. Personally, I don't care for him, but he is nevertheless a very good defense attorney. A lot of bang for the buck, considering he is court appointed.