State v Bradley Cooper 04-18-2011

[Palomine]

Six Hundred something items got evidence numbers. Those items will be available for the jury to review. If not today, then during deliberations for sure.

I thought the State was around 200 and the Defense was just about 100

 

[Madeleine74]

You may be right. Although on photographs alone there must be at least 100, yes?

 

[ncsu95]

Six Hundred something items got evidence numbers. Those items will be available for the jury to review. If not today, then during deliberations for sure.

Most of those are pictures or cell phone records, etc. This could take forever if they have to look at everything at the table.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Most of those are pictures or cell phone records, etc. This could take forever if they have to look at everything at the table.

I think that this is where the Juror's notebooks come in handy..As when they start their deliberations, and someone wishes to review something, having the exhibits oganized they can ask for whichever they wish to review...as it has been said individuals memory may differ on some issues..Just my thoughts on doing this..

I think in past trials, this is usually done behind closed doors, when organizing this kinda stuff :fence:

 

[BrownRice]

I thought the State was around 200 and the Defense was just about 100

I thought that was witnesses.

 

[sunshine05]

Not really...at least not evidence you can physically put on a table (unless they are going to set JA and HP and DD/CD and the others on the table). Putting the computers on there would be worthless. So the only physical evidence to look at would be pictures and maybe the dress. What else am I missing?

My guess is they're going to lug that big rolled up rug out there, even though it had no evidence on it, along with BC's Nike's.

 

[Palomine]

why would they need to look at evidence already admitted?

 

[cody100]

My guess is they're going to lug that big rolled up rug out there, even though it had no evidence on it, along with BC's Nike's.

Probably so. Now that will require a lot of room for some of that evidence.

 

[gbay]

I thought the State was around 200 and the Defense was just about 100

I think the state was up to at least Exh. #633 (letter sent from detective Daniels to Defense).

 

[FullDisclosure]

why would they need to look at evidence already admitted?

The State has at least 635 exhibits. (Whether or not they all constitute "evidence" is up for debate, IMO.) I think the display is so they can show the "big ol' pile of evidence" and say, "See, look at all this! He must be guilty!"

I say this having fallen off the fence when I saw the Fielding Dr. search, but creeping back over again when I listened to the cross exam and the cookie and time stamp debate (and went back a couple of days later to review the notes), followed by Detective Daniels' testimony. Do I think BC is guilty? Probably. Do I still have some doubt? I'm waiting to see what the defense brings.

 

[gbay]

I think that this is where the Juror's notebooks come in handy..As when they start their deliberations, and someone wishes to review something, having the exhibits oganized they can ask for whichever they wish to review...as it has been said individuals memory may differ on some issues..Just my thoughts on doing this..

I think in past trials, this is usually done behind closed doors, when organizing this kinda stuff :fence:

They must also have some of the information organized in a manner that can be reviewed easily as they talked about a telephone timeline and then a more extensive telephone timeline as part of the exhibits. Hope so!! Guess we won`t be able to see anything....sigh!!

 

[cody100]

The State has at least 635 exhibits. (Whether or not they all constitute "evidence" is up for debate, IMO.) I think the display is so they can show the "big ol' pile of evidence" and say, "See, look at all this! He must be guilty!"

I say this having fallen off the fence when I saw the Fielding Dr. search, but creeping back over again when I listened to the cross exam and the cookie and time stamp debate, followed by Detective Daniels' testimony. Do I think BC is guilty? Probably. Do I still have some doubt? I'm waiting to see what the defense brings.

I want to hear what the defense presents as well. And the cookie and time stamp debate is very interesting. It should be worth watching.

 

[gbay]

why would they need to look at evidence already admitted?

I think there are some things I would like to look at again. Things that originally didn`t seem significant and then after further information had more relevance. I think that I would try and have things straight in my head especially about the timelines on July 11 and July 12 - phones, email messages, computer useage, receipts times etc...before the defense muddies things up for them.

We have had the ability to go back and listen to testimony...they have not.

Just my 2 cents....

 

[cody100]

I think there are some things I would like to look at again. Things that originally didn`t seem significant and then after further information had more relevance. I think that I would try and have things straight in my head especially about the timelines on July 11 and July 12 - phones, email messages, computer useage, receipts times etc...before the defense muddies things up for them.

We have had the ability to go back and listen to testimony...they have not.

Just my 2 cents....

Although they can always call for an exhibit to be reviewed in the jury room, seeing it again before deliberations is a great idea. I sure would like to see all of that myself.

 

[FullDisclosure]

I think there are some things I would like to look at again. Things that originally didn`t seem significant and then after further information had more relevance. I think that I would try and have things straight in my head especially about the timelines on July 11 and July 12 - phones, email messages, computer useage, receipts times etc...before the defense muddies things up for them.

We have had the ability to go back and listen to testimony...they have not.

Just my 2 cents....

Excellent point.

 

[Palomine]

I want to hear what the defense presents as well. And the cookie and time stamp debate is very interesting. It should be worth watching.

that evidence is blacked out because they are the FBI guys..that is why the screen went off this morning when they called detective Desmuis or what ever his name is

 

[cody100]

that evidence is blacked out because they are the FBI guys..that is why the screen went off this morning when they called detective Desmuis or what ever his name is[/QUOT


Oh, I am aware of that. I am talking about the defense presentation of no doubt a computer expert to discuss the time date and cookie debate. Of course, I would have loved to hear this part but couldn't get down there today to hear it.

 

[cody100]

Do we have anyone in the courtroom today?

 

[Tipstaff]

Good afternoon...missed all morning but looks like state has no additional witnesses, setting up evidence tables to be reviewed.

Did I miss anything important and does Defense begin tomorrow? TIA

So glad to see you all 'safely on-line today'!!!!

 

[FullDisclosure]

Good afternoon...missed all morning but looks like state has no additional witnesses, setting up evidence tables to be reviewed.

Did I miss anything important and does Defense begin tomorrow? TIA

So glad to see you all 'safely on-line today'!!!!

Last week, the Judge made it clear that the Defense better be ready to go as soon as the State was finished. He said that he would not allow a half or 3/4 day, so to have their first witnesses ready. I don't know if the camera was on for that discussion, but he was adamant about it. So *if* the State rests before the end of the day today, the Defense should begin with their first witness.