State v Bradley Cooper 04-20-2011

[jrb0124]

I am not sure about that. I don't remember that. Since his witness didn't qualify, it might be possible.

It would be at the judge's discretion.

 

[gritguy]

NCSU95, further to your prior point, if the defense has knowledge that tampering happened, then it is in the interests of justice that they get that in. Of course, that does not mean the trial is not legally fair if they don't. I just haven't seem enough of all of it to give a decent opinion. Plus, currently there is the DA's opinion, the defense opinion, and the judge's opinion. Rarely do the three meet! A fourth lawyer opinion probably wouldn't clear it up. But, if I can, through the haze of time from back when I used to try cases, help with a point of process I will and try.

I have a personal opinion on this case. I don't want to come across that my professional license makes my opinion more weighty than anyone else's because it doesn't. The jury decides the facts and gives the verdict, so it is clear the lay perspective on evidence is truly the most important.

 

[otto]

We have heard from eye witness courtroom observers that the majority of the jurors are African American women. And there are 2 men. Do any of you who have been in the courtroom think the men appear to be 30-40 somethings who hold degrees? I'm trying to determine for myself if there is anybody on the jury who has an analytical mind and who can look at the evidence re the computer and cell phone technology testimony and break it down. I am saying 'man' simply because most of the men on here appear to be more analytical.

Analytical minds are, thankfully, not gender specific.

I am hoping that a couple of jurors have a strong aptitude in analytical reasoning. They will most likely not settle on a verdict unless they are sure that all the questions have been answered. Sending a man to jail for the remainder of his life should not be done except when there is no doubt that he is guilty. Excluding the computer and phone evidence, there is already a strong argument for Brad being the most likely suspect.

 

[Danielle59]

Could you cite the 'limited budget' of the defense please? 'Usually' most especially in a first degree murder case, the defense is allowed a hefty budget when it comes to expert witnesses. It is most definitely up to Kurtz to apply for the funds.

I have no clue as to their direct budget numbers, I do know he is indigent and does not have as much money or access to Experts as the state would have.

 

[Danielle59]

It is equal supposition about the defense budget.

Any theory as to why Kurtz engaged this expert only is mere supposition.

It seems better to take the defense expert's testimony for what it is rather than either side speculating on significance of the lack of any other expert. Putting a guy up who had never qualified as an expert before was risky, but we don't know why Kurtz did that.

So are you implying that the State gives indigent defendants unlimited budgets for their defense?

 

[gritguy]

Is the State v Howard the New Hanover case?

I didn't read it; it was just cited for the point in my Rules of Civil Procedure and Evidence handbook. Don't even know why I cited it - old habit!

 

[Danielle59]

Thank you. Just as most of what you post is supposition - unless, of course, you are telling us you are part of one of the legal teams.

When I post something I post about its possibilities, I don't post it as fact. Why do you think I am part of the Defense team? I am not part of the Defense team, but I have to wonder why you would assume that? Because I believe in justice, or because I am not in lockstep with your thinking?

 

[Danielle59]

That's not what I got from his testimony and I'm sitting here listening just like the jurors. What I got is that it is possible to manipulate files and he showed some of the tools for doing that. He did not show that any files on Brad's computer were manipulated. MOO

I think he was asked if any of the files were tampered with and the Pros objected and he was not allowed to answer. I think that may raise a Juror or two's heads.

 

[NCEast]

Analytical minds are, thankfully, not gender specific.

I am hoping that a couple of jurors have a strong aptitude in analytical reasoning. They will most likely not settle on a verdict unless they are sure that all the questions have been answered. Sending a man to jail for the remainder of his life should not be done except when there is no doubt that he is guilty. Excluding the computer and phone evidence, there is already a strong argument for Brad being the most likely suspect.

Most of the men on this forum have analytical minds....many of the rest of us do not. We feel what we feel.
I have said from day one I want this to be a fair trial with evidence supporting the supposition that Brad killed Nancy. I think he did, but I do not feel at this point in time that there has been enough evidence, hard evidence, that is easy to understand, to prove it. The computer testimony was a wash with respect to not so much coming out on either side. I would not want to be a juror, going into deliberations, and not really understanding why they had to sit through 7 or 8 weeks of testimony that made very few points on which to render a verdict.

 

[cody100]

When I post something I post about its possibilities, I don't post it as fact. Why do you think I am part of the Defense team? I am not part of the Defense team, but I have to wonder why you would assume that? Because I believe in justice, or because I am not in lockstep with your thinking?

I would like to know the answer to that as well. Very strange assumption.

 

[NCEast]

I didn't read it; it was just cited for the point in my Rules of Civil Procedure and Evidence handbook. Don't even know why I cited it - old habit!

Well actually, that was the case cited by BZ yesterday. If it's the New Hanover case.

 

[gritguy]

So are you implying that the State gives indigent defendants unlimited budgets for their defense?

No I'm saying that you (and likely anyone else, unless on the defense team) have no idea of the defense budget or its sources of funds or the cost of any given potential expert or whether that had any impact on Kurtz's decision on this expert testimony.

I don't think anybody in the legal system has unlimited budgets. I never ran across anyone who did.

ETA: Doing a little research, if the client is indigent, the defense attorney makes an ex parte motion to the court to allow retainer of an expert. The fee bill is then sent to the office of the IDS for payment, after services are rendered. I have no idea if Kurtz made such a motion for other experts and if so whether they were allowed or denied. If I gathered correctly from the forum that the witness today was not to be paid, then perhaps there was no motion.

 

[Danielle59]

My opinion runs along the same lines as well. Of course it is hard to know what they are thinking, but it is clear the prosecution did not wanted to keep his testimony out completely.

I think they did want to keep it out completely but the Judge said he could testify as an Expert in Computer Security.

 

[gritguy]

Well actually, that was the case cited by BZ yesterday. If it's the New Hanover case.

Well the handbook usually tries to cite pole star cases.

 

[ncsu95]

NCSU95, further to your prior point, if the defense has knowledge that tampering happened, then it is in the interests of justice that they get that in. Of course, that does not mean the trial is not legally fair if they don't. I just haven't seem enough of all of it to give a decent opinion. Plus, currently there is the DA's opinion, the defense opinion, and the judge's opinion. Rarely do the three meet! A fourth lawyer opinion probably wouldn't clear it up. But, if I can, through the haze of time from back when I used to try cases, help with a point of process I will and try.

I have a personal opinion on this case. I don't want to come across that my professional license makes my opinion more weighty than anyone else's because it doesn't. The jury decides the facts and gives the verdict, so it is clear the lay perspective on evidence is truly the most important.

Thanks. We all have our own opinion. I just like hearing yours from a true legal point of view...or at least someone that deals with stuff like this.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Well actually, that was the case cited by BZ yesterday. If it's the New Hanover case.

I thought the one Boz cited yesterday was "State vs. Ward". I thought at the time it was weird since that was the witness's last name.

 

[ncsu95]

Most of the men on this forum have analytical minds....many of the rest of us do not. We feel what we feel.
I have said from day one I want this to be a fair trial with evidence supporting the supposition that Brad killed Nancy. I think he did, but I do not feel at this point in time that there has been enough evidence, hard evidence, that is easy to understand, to prove it. The computer testimony was a wash with respect to not so much coming out on either side. I would not want to be a juror, going into deliberations, and not really understanding why they had to sit through 7 or 8 weeks of testimony that made very few points on which to render a verdict.

Thanks. Honestly, I am not sure who on here is male or female. Some are obvious...but I've also been surprised by some. For some reason, I assumed you were male.

 

[Danielle59]

gritguy has made it quite clear that he believe Brad is guilty. Please don't start accusing people of being part of either the prosecution or defense. He's just an observer like the rest of us. He's offering his perspective as a lawyer.

I also think gritguy when he made hsi statment was implying what Kurtz may have said to himself when he used the word "I."

 

[jrb0124]

I think they did want to keep it out completely but the Judge said he could testify as an Expert in Computer Security.

I agree, and its evidenced by the incredibly ineffective cross. They didn't ask JW a single question about the most critical parts of his testimony.

 

[Wyn]

I saw those hot cross buns in HT yesterday and almost bought them. Let me know if I should have...

I've got bagels and cream cheese for errbody. And cold pizza (Godfather's) and birthday cake (Blue Moon Bakery) for everybody.

OT: Out all day, just starting to catch up, but had to ask...have you had Blue Moon Bakery's raspberry brownies? Give me one and I am in HEAVEN!