State v Bradley Cooper 04-20-2011

[SleuthSayer]

After skimming through today's thread to see what happened in court, I think that we may well some day look back and say that today was the day that the BC trial jumped the shark. Hacking into his wireless network to plant evidence? Trying to discredit a witness by showing what was on his Facebook page? This has become the Theater of the Absurd.

The whole Facebook thing seems kind of like the nuclear option. I.e., guaranteed mutual destruction. Now that this card has been played, I'm guessing that we are going to see more of the same from the defense's side. I see that some of the folks on the prosecution's side have protected/removed some of their info from the web in the past few days. :waitasec:

 

[Cheyenne130]

I disagree again. They skimmed over most of the files that were clearly just updates and honed in on the questionable/penetration/tampering files. They should not have been there....unless someone was on there when no one was supposed to be.

It might be interesting if you have someone examine your own computer. You will have "questionable" files on there. I don't care how careful you are. You will have files with invalid timestamps. You will have evidence of intrusion attempts. It's not just on the computer of someone accused of murder. It is on ALL of our computers. MOO

 

[ohiogirl]

The pros seemed to have nothing to refute this "expert" other than his facebook page
it was very weak
I was expecting much more, hopefully there is something coming

 

[Cheyenne130]

After skimming through today's thread to see what happened in court, I think that we may well some day look back and say that today was the day that the BC trial jumped the shark. Hacking into his wireless network to plant evidence? Trying to discredit a witness by showing what was on his Facebook page? This has become the Theater of the Absurd.

The whole Facebook thing seems kind of like the nuclear option. I.e., guaranteed mutual destruction. Now that this card has been played, I'm guessing that we are going to see more of the same from the defense's side. I see that some of the folks on the prosecution's side have protected/removed some of their info from the web in the past few days. :waitasec:

I looked at my profile page today and saw that my cell phone number was displayed as well as my twitter page (which is just a silly, fun thing that my family doesn't even know about). I removed those bits. I did look at it after today's court episode just to see what I had in my profile. There's nothing that would get me kicked out of court. No pics of interest either. (I guess I'm just boring!)

 

[Madeleine74]

Giving the illusion of someone accessing a system for the purpose of changing a file stamp is not proof. I realize many people bought it hook, line, and sinker. I did not. The fact that someone can get on someone's wireless network does not give me any insight into why someone would or could frame Brad Cooper.

It is an absurd leap to make and I cannot do it without suspending all my logic and common sense. I believe what the FBI showed was real, was valid, and that no one did or could frame Brad Cooper.

Until someone can prove to me that Cooper was, in fact, framed and show me who did it, I will not assume he was simply because J Ward knows how to access someone's wireless network.

Ridiculous.

 

[ohiogirl]

So what do we have, a call that could have been spoofed, a web search that could have been back dated, what do we really have here?

 

[johnfear]

I wonder how many friends of Jay Ward pulled up BZ's private facebook tonite?

Although, I must say, it's an awfully cute photo of Boz standing on top of a very large cliff. It's actually quite appropriate.

 

[ohiogirl]

not me

 

[SleuthSayer]

So what do we have, a call that could have been spoofed, a web search that could have been back dated, what do we really have here?

Don't forget the white mica that may or may not have been from the dump site which was found on the shoes that he may or may not have been wearing when he may or may not have scoped out the location.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I wonder how many friends of Jay Ward pulled up BZ's private facebook tonite?

Although, I must say, it's an awfully cute photo of Boz standing on top of a very large cliff. It's actually quite appropriate.

Really?

 

[johnfear]

Really?

Which part?

 

[unc70]

It might be interesting if you have someone examine your own computer. You will have "questionable" files on there. I don't care how careful you are. You will have files with invalid timestamps. You will have evidence of intrusion attempts. It's not just on the computer of someone accused of murder. It is on ALL of our computers. MOO

Yes, it is on all MS Windows computers, I am sure including one that I own. (Would not be true for my OpenVMS systems; unlikely on most UNIX/Linux type systems I have.)

But a bit strange that the "questionable" files on the accused computer include ones containing the damaging evidence of the Google Maps search.

 

[otto]

After skimming through today's thread to see what happened in court, I think that we may well some day look back and say that today was the day that the BC trial jumped the shark. Hacking into his wireless network to plant evidence? Trying to discredit a witness by showing what was on his Facebook page? This has become the Theater of the Absurd.

The whole Facebook thing seems kind of like the nuclear option. I.e., guaranteed mutual destruction. Now that this card has been played, I'm guessing that we are going to see more of the same from the defense's side. I see that some of the folks on the prosecution's side have protected/removed some of their info from the web in the past few days. :waitasec:

I thought they stood a good chance in starting closing arguments as soon as the prosecution rested. They have nothing to say, and they could do themselves more harm if they take it too far.

Since the defense has not yet presented (or been allowed?) the testimony they need to refute computer evidence and the Judge will not recuse himself, it looks like it's a lawyer game of timing. It's all in the timing ... to some degree.

 

[ohiogirl]

Just to be up front, i think bc is guilty, I am looking for the proof, give it to me, please!
Will he really get off on the computer bs?

 

[Cheyenne130]

Which part?

Sorry. After I posted that I thought I should have elaborated. I was just taken by surprise. I thought you were pretty objective about the case. That came across as being pretty defense biased. MOO

 

[jmflu]

I keep wondering why anyone would think someone tampered with BC's computer. Why would they do that? To make him look guilty? Even if they did tamper with it, that doesn't mean Brad isn't guilty!

I'm assuming those who actually think CPD and the FBI are involved in a cover-up have answers to all of the questions, namely HOW it could have been anyone else but Brad. It requires a complete suspension of belief in anything Nancy would have normally done in order to go running, even as attested to by her own family and Brad! She always ran with keys, her cell phone, and her necklace on... But not that day. Her running shoes? Not even missing. Unless you count two missing left shoes. Her sports bra? Found rolled under, not over, proving the bra was being put ON, not being taken off. Brad has never even said he didn't kill Nancy! I can see where someone wanting to make sure an innocent man doesn't get railroaded could make excuses for some abnormalities... But all of them? Why? Why would someone take her shoes and socks? Her shoes weren't missing, guys, except two left shoes! And the way Brad acted and continues to act was and is not of a man who was trying to work things out with his wife. No emotion. Nothing but resentment in his demeanor. That man hated Nancy, and he alone had the means, motive, and opportunity to kill her.

Please, please explain how and why all these unusual things happened, if not for Brad doing them. Discussing the extra-minute details of timestamps and things most of us don't even understand does not mean Brad didn't kill Nancy.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Yes, it is on all MS Windows computers, I am sure including one that I own. (Would not be true for my OpenVMS systems; unlikely on most UNIX/Linux type systems I have.)

But a bit strange that the "questionable" files on the accused computer include ones containing the damaging evidence of the Google Maps search.

I don't even know that we know that. We saw a page with two icons followed by files. In computer terms, I don't think that was in context. I would need to see them as they were found on the computer and not isolated like that in some slide or whatever that was.

 

[johnfear]

Sorry. After I posted that I thought I should have elaborated. I was just taken by surprise. I thought you were pretty objective about the case. That came across as being pretty defense biased. MOO

Oh, no. This was BZ biased (not the pros as a whole). I don't like when people make serious errors in judgement on the fly. I like it less when those errors come from serious mis-steps that make it clear one thing.

They PREPARED (with photos and facebook docs) to smear this witness.

I don't like that. I would have taken a tough cross. I would have taken fair game questions.

But, the photos being linked back to him that were on facebook were wrong. (like being on a cliff, sorta)

BTW: Boz was my favorite, followed by Trenkle when this all started. Now he's been replaced by T MFH. And she's tied with Trenk. I think he has basically abused the judge's lack of knowledge and interest in technology.

 

[ohiogirl]

night all

 

[ncsu95]

My husband has a computer science degree. He likes looking like a hobo. lol He can afford better, he's just cheap.

Men are all about comfort. My favorite shirts have small holes in them from being worn/washed so much.