State v Bradley Cooper 3-18-2011

[LaLaw2000]

On this lactic (sp.) acid thing.............I am wondering if the stomach does produce even more of it after having vomited. I do know that vomiting does upset the balance of stomach acids and irritates the lining of the stomach. Such a test for increased lactic acid might have been very useless because of the degree of decomposition. I do have to wonder what detailed answer the prosecutor was trying to elicit from the ME on this.

MOO

 

[SleuthyGal]

I would actually dread listening to this man. I am from the South, and we do not speak this slowly. I keep wanting him to go ahead and spit out what he is trying to say.

I am on the side of the prosecution in that I do believe BC killed Nancy, BUT I am embarrassed for them because of this man. I was especially taken aback this morning when he was questioning the ME. He simply could not seem to put his questions into words that would make it clear.

That sums it up quite nicely, LaLaw.

I do dread listening to him and I'm not on the jury. He is not an asset to this case when he's presenting. I'm frankly worried. I think the prosecution has enough of an uphill battle with this case and, IMHO, Cummings is failing at presenting and as a result is giving the defense the edge. I don't think it's just his speech, it appears his mind works slowwwwly too. It's like he's still on Daylight Standard Time and the rest of the world has moved forward an hour!

 

[DogWood]

I think Brad decided the dress was clean and he was 'ready' to hand it over to LE. So he draped the dress over the chair in the DR, to have to ready to hand off to LE.

Before he actually handed it to LE, DD was over, in the house, and saw the dress on the chair.

That's the assumption I'm going with at this point.

Maybe that's why it went from teal green to seafoam green - he washed it tons of times in hot water. lol

 

[SleuthyGal]

where was the green vegetable matter

In the car. HIS car.

 

[Cheyenne130]

RE the dress:

Brad bought himself time by trying to assert that the dress was black, when he obviously knew exactly which dress it was.

He washed the dress at some point that morning or day. When were the photos taken? Late afternoon of 7/12? He was cleaning and doing laundry all morning long, from at least 7am to when he left to go 'look' for Nancy (around 1pm?). So a minimum of 6 hrs to do laundry, and possibly a couple more hours.

For whatever reason Brad did not want to hand over the dress when asked. Nor did he want anyone to identify the dress that evening when he asked DD to help him look for 'the black dress.'

Brad himself contacted LE to let them know he found the dress...this was the day after they already did the K9 search using the shoe he gave them.

Does this mean that Brad called CPD on Sunday to let them know he had the dress but it was still at the house for Diana Duncan to see it on Tuesday?

 

[RaleighNC]

oh - one bout of vomiting doesn't necessarily clear the stomach of all it's contents (ask me how i know) - I would more likely believe she vomited once and then was killed before she could clear out the "rest".

 

[jumpstreet]

Another hypothetical since I am very good at them - what if vomit was found in the jogging bra Nancy was found in or on the underside of the key table in the foyer or even in the vase where the bamboo sticks were located on Friday ?

Then it would be solid evidence to back up the prosecutions theory.

I would assume the defense would just assert that any found on the bra could have gotten there at the time of assault while on the jog.

Any found in the house would have to be conclusive as (a) hers, and (b) recent. If so, then still wouldn't disprove that she got a little sick when she came home (while everyone was asleep), cleaned it up a bit herself, then went to bed.

I know it was just hypothetical... and it wouldn't hurt the prosecutions case... but certainly wouldn't nail it home either (imo).

 

[CyberPro]

I can't imagine BC had enough cleaning skills to perfectly sanitize that entire area.

That would be my smoking gun - vomit in the foyer.

I just finished listening to the ME testimony. I noted a couple of things that were pointed out that I thought were significant.

1. State referring to how she might have been strangled asked if she might have been strangled "...specifically with a piece of wire." ?

2. From previous testimony we have heard about BC doing the famous imitation of Mr. Clean, and admiting to using "warm water and vinegar" - perhaps to mask the odor and acidity of vomitus?

3. State asked the ME if someone were strangled how long to lose consiousness, and how long until death + possible missing head injuries "if there was no break in the skin." or were in the area that has much insect damage. Couple this with the missing sticks. Perhaps she was choked until she passed out, maybe with a little head bumping on the foyer floor. She comes to later and becoming nauseated vomits in the vase, BC hears her and returns to complete the job.

I know, a bit gross and no evidence for it yet, but I am trying to connect the dots in what we know now and how it fits the puzzle.

 

[LaLaw2000]

I am disappointed in the way the trial has gone so far. What I am looking forward to is the computer forensics and if there was any hint as to whether or not the landline phone call for the juice was programmed.

The State simply has to have much more evidence than we have seen so far.

JMO

 

[SleuthyGal]

I'm disappointed too.

They need to put some 'aha!' evidence on and they haven't yet. There are small snippets of possibility that were hinted at, but nothing big yet.

The problem is that many people have a short attention span these days and you have to hit 'em hard with something compelling. All of this 'well he could have' is fine, I suppose, but no one can convict on what might be. They need something more definitive and it hasn't come up yet and they're heading into week #3.

 

[Just the Fax]

Another hypothetical since I am very good at them - what if vomit was found in the jogging bra Nancy was found in or on the underside of the key table in the foyer or even in the vase where the bamboo sticks were located on Friday ?

If that were the case, I doubt Howard would have waffled and suggested she ate her meal at 7 and was killed 6 hours later, at 1AM. If he had the evidence of vomit, he would not cloud it with another scenario, as that just confuses the jury.
Sadly, it seems obvious to me he was trying to make the evidence fit his theory of Nancy's demise at midnight.

 

[ncsu95]

I just finished listening to the ME testimony. I noted a couple of things that were pointed out that I thought were significant.

1. State referring to how she might have been strangled asked if she might have been strangled "...specifically with a piece of wire." ?

2. From previous testimony we have heard about BC doing the famous imitation of Mr. Clean, and admiting to using "warm water and vinegar" - perhaps to mask the odor and acidity of vomitus?

3. State asked the ME if someone were strangled how long to lose consiousness, and how long until death + possible missing head injuries "if there was no break in the skin." or were in the area that has much insect damage. Couple this with the missing sticks. Perhaps she was choked until she passed out, maybe with a little head bumping on the foyer floor. She comes to later and becoming nauseated vomits in the vase, BC hears her and returns to complete the job.

I know, a bit gross and no evidence for it yet, but I am trying to connect the dots in what we know now and how it fits the puzzle.

ME said there were no marks from something like a wire, and would expect there to be.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Pinning themselves down to a TOD at/around 12:30am - 1am is a big mistake. The point is they don't know, so why limit the time span so specifically? That forces them to suggest Nancy stopped eating earlier than she may have. Again, I don't see the point of that.

He killed her sometime between 12:30am and (probably) 4am when he was up with the lights on.

 

[ncsu95]

I'm disappointed too.

They need to put some 'aha!' evidence on and they haven't yet. There are small snippets of possibility that were hinted at, but nothing big yet.

The problem is that many people have a short attention span these days and you have to hit 'em hard with something compelling. All of this 'well he could have' is fine, I suppose, but no one can convict on what might be. They need something more definitive and it hasn't come up yet and they're heading into week #3.

Maybe they don't have an "aha" item. Maybe they truly went to trial with a theory and a bunch of "could haves". It is shocking that we are 1.5 weeks into the trial without a single bit of "real" (ie, not someones opinion or interpretation of something) evidence against Brad.

 

[ncsu95]

If that were the case, I doubt Howard would have waffled and suggested she ate her meal at 7 and was killed 6 hours later, at 1AM. If he had the evidence of vomit, he would not cloud it with another scenario, as that just confuses the jury.
Sadly, it seems obvious to me he was trying to make the evidence fit his theory of Nancy's demise at midnight.

I completely agree with you. That's why I said I thought they messed up with the ME. If they switch now and suggest something else, then it will look even worse. So they've kind of stuck themselves with this 1 am death time....and that requires speculation about potential vomiting. I really do think they are in big trouble in this case.

 

[borndem]

water-dancing, that is a great observation. However, I think this is more an optical illusion.
Note the center space line in the drive. If it is like mine, that splits the drive 50/50.

I agree -- if he did have trouble, seems to me he could have moved NC's car -- he had the keys by now -- about 3--5 feet back, and gotten his car in. Unless he drove her car to the spot and came right back w/no other errands in NC's car.

If it was really dark that night -- I think there was a dead body by 3:00 am for sure, he could have just opened the trunk, gotten the body or poor NC, and put her in there. He was fit, and she was tall, but very trim at 130lb.

(I know this is a "late" reply, but I'm just catching up....

)

 

[Just the Fax]

Stupid move to try to pinpoint a TOD (up to 1AM) when the hard evidence does not back you up. All he had to do was give the jury the scenario of 4AM, where Brad's own words make that very plausible.

 

[Just the Fax]

"Dr. Butts, you identified an onion in the decedent's stomach, is that correct?
Correct
"Dr. Butts, how long does it typically take for an onion to pass the stomach in the digestion process?
3-5 hours.
"With that, would it be possible for someone to have an onion in their stomach after 7AM, assuming they ate it the night before?
Very unlikely.
"Thank you Dr. Butts, no further questions."

 

[SleuthyGal]

Man oh man Cummings effed that up.

Now that I see how easy it would have been to elicit testimony that supported the 'dead before 7am' scenario in a clear, simple, straight forward way.

I'd fire Cummings, if I could. (some of my tax dollars are paying for him).

I swear if he screws this case up and the Rentz family doesn't get justice....

 

[ncsu95]

"Dr. Butts, you identified an onion in the decedent's stomach, is that correct?
Correct
"Dr. Butts, how long does it typically take for an onion to pass the stomach in the digestion process?
3-5 hours.
"With that, would it be possible for someone to have an onion in their stomach after 7AM, assuming they ate it the night before?
Very unlikely.
"Thank you Dr. Butts, no further questions."

Maybe you are in the wrong line of work. Now that would have been effective. Of course, there could be other circumstances that slow digestion of raw vegetables, but that would have been a lot more effective than the crap put on by the prosecution today.