State v Bradley Cooper 04-19-2011

[Just the Fax]

The defense doesn't have to suggest someone framed him, just that the integrity of the evidence was compromised. Pretty simple.

Compromised by whom? Motive? Inquiring jurors will want to know.
Pretty simple concept.

 

[TXredhead178]

But that is a double edged sword isnt it..IF a nosey neigh could do this..then why not Brad..as he was the one who would benefit from having an alibi by this same evidence..and how would the neighbour know that Brad even went to HT twice and what times in order to spoof activities on his computer..Dont think LE even knew about HT video as of July 16th..?? Let alone call logs of AT&T and other data info??? Kurtz better be careful just how he handles this expertise..IMO of course

The AT&T logs weren't provided until 7/22 or thereabouts, after subpoenas were issued.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Yes they did. Their were reports on here that weekend about the HT visits.

Interesting..as at that point Nancy was only missing..not found yet?..Do you have a link to that?..maybe it was the following weekend?? Not sure they would even be investigating Brad's activities at that point in time??? :waitasec:....or they would have seized his phone, computer back then??

 

[sunshine05]

I don't think it's too far-fetched that CPD may have looked at Fielding DR relative to the Cooper's residence. Not to try to plant any evidence, but as part of the investigation. Then changed the date so no one would suspect they were using the computer during those 27 hours.

None of this would be happening right now if they hadn't left it up and running for 27 hours. Why would they do that?

 

[TXredhead178]

This what I mean about insulting the jurors intelligence.
The idea a neighbor somehow cracked into his Cisco computer to frame him is so far fetched, Kurtz may as well say it could have been some extraterrestrial being. :ufo:

:floorlaugh:

 

[Just the Fax]

I don't think it's too far-fetched that CPD may have looked at Fielding DR relative to the Cooper's residence. Not to try to plant any evidence, but as part of the investigation. Then changed the date so no one would suspect they were using the computer during those 27 hours.

None of this would be happening right now if they hadn't left it up and running for 27 hours. Why would they do that?

How would CPD log into his PW protected computer to do an innocent search of the dump area:waitasec:

 

[jrb0124]

Compromised by whom? Motive? Inquiring jurors will want to know.
Pretty simple concept.

"Compromised" is an adjective too, and that's how I am using it. Defense doesn't need a who or a why, the jurors can come to their own conclusions. Remember, the defense only needs to create reaosnable doubt, they don;t have to prove anything. The fact that the laptop could have been accessed by someone other than BC greatly diminishes the integrity of that evidence.

 

[NCEast]

But they haven't proven that it was compromised have they? Just that is could have been?

 

[LyndyLoo]

I don't think it's too far-fetched that CPD may have looked at Fielding DR relative to the Cooper's residence. Not to try to plant any evidence, but as part of the investigation. Then changed the date so no one would suspect they were using the computer during those 27 hours.

None of this would be happening right now if they hadn't left it up and running for 27 hours. Why would they do that?

Dont know SS..but I dont think LE actually knew exactly what Brad's expertise was let alone how the computer would become such an intregal part of their investigation..They were looking for physical evidence of a crime scene on July 16th, video taping the house and all its contents..long before collection of evidence...Heinsight is always 100%..Their case went from missing women, to a murdered women..ya think they thought computer collection was prioirty?? They knew it was something they would need to collect,,and the residence was secured evening of July 15th..so NO human person touched that computer..and IF hacker did..then they would have had to know a whole lot of guarded specifics prior to power down..:twocents:

 

[cody100]

"Compromised" is an adjective too, and that's how I am using it. Defense doesn't need a who or a why, the jurors can come to their own conclusions. Remember, the defense only needs to create reaosnable doubt, they don;t have to prove anything. The fact that the laptop could have been accessed by someone other than BC greatly diminishes the integrity of that evidence.

Yes it does open up Pandora's box so to speak. Whether the hacking occured or not is not as important as the reasonable doubt that is planted regarding the computers. And in this field, the defense has an expert in regard to hacking into computers.

 

[otto]

The trial seems to be coming down to phones and computers ... Brad's area of expertise. If he wasn't an expert in those areas, would police have looked all the ways to misconstrue phone and computer info?

 

[jrb0124]

But they haven't proven that it was compromised have they? Just that is could have been?

No they have not gone that far down the line of questioning yet, but that's where it appears to be headed: evidence of an intrusion(s). Guess we'll find out tomorrow.

 

[Just the Fax]

"Compromised" is an adjective too, and that's how I am using it. Defense doesn't need a who or a why, the jurors can come to their own conclusions. Remember, the defense only needs to create reaosnable doubt, they don;t have to prove anything. The fact that the laptop could have been accessed by someone other than BC greatly diminishes the integrity of that evidence.

Enough of the lectures please. I am fully aware the defense does not have to prove anything. "Reasonable" is the key word here.

 

[TXredhead178]

I don't think it's too far-fetched that CPD may have looked at Fielding DR relative to the Cooper's residence. Not to try to plant any evidence, but as part of the investigation. Then changed the date so no one would suspect they were using the computer during those 27 hours.

None of this would be happening right now if they hadn't left it up and running for 27 hours. Why would they do that?

The house was sealed off as a crime scene on the 15th, BC refused to allow a consent search, so they didn't have a search warrant until the 16th. They couldn't have seized the computers before the 16th. And, as has been testified, you can't just power computers down before seizure. There are specialized procedures.

And as I recall from testimony, BC's laptop was password-protected.

 

[Just the Fax]

The trial seems to be coming down to phones and computers ... Brad's area of expertise. If he wasn't an expert in those areas, would police have looked all the ways to misconstrue phone and computer info?

Computer forensics is now included in Murder Investigation 101.
A detective would indeed be inept if he did not look at the computers and phones of their suspect(s).

 

[sunshine05]

The trial seems to be coming down to phones and computers ... Brad's area of expertise. If he wasn't an expert in those areas, would police have looked all the ways to misconstrue phone and computer info?

I think about that a lot, how he is penalized for being a VOIP engineer. No, I don't think they would have suggested the phone spoofing.

Isn't it interesting that JA and BA's affidavits both made mention of BC's VOIP knowledge? They steered the police right down that track too. They have driven the entire investigation from the 911 call to the laundry detergent(lie) to the paint plan story to the VOIP expertise. And let's not forget the ducks and sticks.

 

[sunshine05]

The house was sealed off as a crime scene on the 15th, BC refused to allow a consent search, so they didn't have a search warrant until the 16th. They couldn't have seized the computers before the 16th. And, as has been testified, you can't just power computers down before seizure. There are specialized procedures.

And as I recall from testimony, BC's laptop was password-protected.

No, I am sure CPD took over the house, BC left and they had access to the powered up computer for 27 hours. Don't know the exact dates but this has not been disputed.

I don't think they needed the password. The PC was up and running.

 

[Just the Fax]

I think about that a lot, how he is penalized for being a VOIP engineer. No, I don't think they would have suggested the phone spoofing.

Isn't it interesting that JA and BA's affidavits both made mention of BC's VOIP knowledge? They steered the police right down that track too. They have driven the entire investigation from the 911 call to the laundry detergent(lie) to the paint plan story to the VOIP expertise. And let's not forget the ducks and sticks.

Penalized?
They found the smoking gun. Do you honestly think they would not then try to bust his phone alibi? It was said there were 10 ways to do this and most ways didn't require someone with much telecom expertise. The fact that Brad was an expert only made it easier for the cops to realize he would have no problem at all.

 

[Just the Fax]

No, I am sure CPD took over the house, BC left and they had access to the powered up computer for 27 hours. Don't know the exact dates but this has not been disputed.

I don't think they needed the password. The PC was up and running.

Nope.
Per FBI, the computer required Ctrl Alt del - PW after 10 minutes of non-use.

 

[otto]

Enough of the lectures please. I am fully aware the defense does not have to prove anything. "Reasonable" is the key word here.

Is it reasonable that any of the neighbors decided to mess with the computer ... one comes to mind right away. I don't know his name, but he's the guy that had quite the attitude on the stand, who I think swore a bit and who lived across the street. Is it reasonable that he, his wife and all her friends were convinced that Brad was guilty before the investigation started, and is it reasonable that this gang of neighbors matched their stories, covered for each other and gave police whatever they could to ensure that Brad was arrested? Is it then reasonable to wonder how far this gang of neighbors was willing to go to see their justice done?

After all the testimony we saw from the neighbors, I have no problem believing that they were willing to do whatever they thought necessary to have Brad convicted.