State v Bradley Cooper 4-13-11

[NCEast]

Nooooooo, it's another, much less intelligent venue!!!! I need to just stay off of them and keep my butt parked here and only here!!!
:crazy:

I quickly scanned a few posts on another site last night and was appalled at the ignorance and stupidity I read there. Probably the same site--just letters, no words?

 

[NCEast]

From Twitter:

stevengauck Steven Gauck
Def Kurtz motioning to strike testimony of FBI agents from yest for failing to disclose exculpatory info #coopertrial

Do we know how the judge ruled on this yet?

 

[cody100]

It's not going to happen. This was discussed when it came up (I was surprised it was sustained) but if you look at it a certain way, it is prejudicial. The site was about suicide, and the judge didn't want the jury to assume just because he was looking up suicide that should translate into him looking at ways to kill her.

I agree. I think the judge made the right call in this situation.

 

[gracielee]

Hmm, I think there was testimony that while sister was visiting she witnessed screaming obscenities at the house and the older daughter was holed up in a bedroom in a corner crying and wouldn't come out. Imagine what that house was like when there were no witnesses beyond those little children. If you'll do that in front of people and in a parking lot - do you honestly believe they sit quietly at home when they don't have an audience.

I grew up, or rather, managed to survive, in a house like that. Small 30 ft. city lot. Other than the next-door neighbors & a few close relatives, no one witnessed anything 'first hand'. Of course I'm sure rumors were around. When the Jeffrey MacDonald case was being tried, I had flashbacks of how the DA described it happening, that 'backhand to the older girl, sending her flying into the doorframe, serious head injury, etc.' I've got a broken tailbone from preschool age, that has given me serious back problems my entire life. And those internal scars from the abuse that doesn't show on the outside. Yes, when there are no witnesses...you can only imagine what's going on inside the house.

 

[NCEast]

And circumstantial evidence, even though acceptable by our legal standards, isn't evidence?

You are right, it's evidence and important evidence. But I just want a solid, hard-rock piece of evidence that nobody can deny. And we may not ever get it. I was hoping this computer testimony would be it but I don't think it is.

 

[cityslick]

Maybe he acted on his shot fuse physically rather than verbally...and NC went missing then dead.

But that's an assumption. How was it established he had a short fuse prior to July 12? Because he argued in the parking lot with his estranged wife?

 

[ncsu95]

The only explanation is that Brad's personality if interspective, he boils inside, keeps to himself, has enormous self-controls. BUT when his buttons gets pushed LOOKOUT!! Explosive and mean!!

The best way to describe it ~~ "Still Waters Run Deep"! JMOO

ETASK~ Who here knows guys or gals like that?? Different persona outside of home?? Reminds me of that song "What Goes On Behind Closed Doors" Charlie Rich song I think

There is absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever. None. No one had testified that he has an anger and/or rage issue.

 

[Danielle59]

Key to what? It's key that he read her emails. But how is that key to showing he murdered her?

It was also shown that the sep draft was forwarded to him from Nancy's account on April 18th, or it was in some finding. According to her friends she had also discussed it with him.

I am curious, they say he intercepted all her emails by having them sent to the email associated with adventuresofbrad blog, but they don't tell us how often he accessed that email. I would be curious to know that.

 

[cityslick]

Sometimes it escalates to murder - you can't deny that.

You're correct, but a vast majority of time it does not, or else the murder rate in the country would be insane.

 

[gracielee]

I spent the entire 6 months or whatever on the OJ trial recovering from surgery--with complications. After that trial ended I had a ton of work and catching up to do so I'm not familiar with the two you mentioned. Or they may have come first? I think the next one I was involved with was the S. Peterson...and the following year M. Peterson. And the a couple of years ago Court TV changed their format, changed it again, and I don't even know if I can get the network any more.

These were both well before O.J. Court TV was just fledgling (sp?) in those days. Probably very early 1990's. Wish I knew what happened to the drunk guy who killed that family though.

 

[KellyCrash]

Do we know how the judge ruled on this yet?

No. Waiting on Twitter to update. I'm not there.

 

[ncsu95]

I thought it was book-marked?

It was. But haven't you ever bookmarked something that you never looked at again? Maybe he saw reference to it in a blog or forum and found the subject interesting. I've looked up quite a few odd things during this trial. I haven't bookmarked anything, but strange searches. And I do have bookmarks that I have never gone back to once I set the bookmark. I bookmarked it because I didn't have time to read it then but just forgot about it or no longer cared anymore about the subject.

 

[Palomine]

No. Waiting on Twitter to update. I'm not there.

I just tweet from Wral there is nothing yet...hopefully they will be quick on cross and on to live trial

 

[Danielle59]

I thought it was book-marked?

I don't think bookmarking something means anything, I have so much bookmarked I don't even know what half of it is and I bet 90% of the bookmarks I have I never revisited. My puter is six years old, I have bookmarks from then.

 

[luckyme]

just denied! per tweet

 

[kljohnson0458]

I quickly scanned a few posts on another site last night and was appalled at the ignorance and stupidity I read there. Probably the same site--just letters, no words?

I know where you are speaking of and trust me, they don't post anything nearly as informative as WS's on ANY case I've ever followed. I always come here first. Ya'll rock.

 

[ohiogirl]

IIRC..All these items were obtained from Nancy's computer yesterday , Yes? No? I seem to recall from another witness (notblacked out) that Brad's Blackjack Phone had been either wiped, or been reset to indicate was it 31 hours, or 31 days...Of course he did have that phone until Oct.-8 and Nancy's computer was handed over on the 15/16th....Her phone seemed to have been worked on first. IF Brad could sign on her acct. on her computer, surely he could have signed on her phone too??..Then locked it pasword protected...Voila.Det. McDreamy ended up deleting data :banghead:

I agree, I tend to think Brad's plan backfired..He was not prepared for such a quick alert of her being missing...He had to go into high gear to unload more stuff. BTW..Did I hear from that security guy that Brad went to office on that Sat. July 12th?..IF so, what did he return to his office? and What time of day was that?..

Sorry to take so long, but I went back to WRAL videos of 4/7, testimony of security guy from Cisco, he didn't say BC went on 7/12, I don't know where that came from. Sorry.

 

[snowshuze]

You're correct, but a vast majority of time it does not, or else the murder rate in the country would be insane.

You don't think the murder rate in this country is insane?

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s0306.pdf

 

[less0305]

You are right, it's evidence and important evidence. But I just want a solid, hard-rock piece of evidence that nobody can deny. And we may not ever get it. I was hoping this computer testimony would be it but I don't think it is.

I understand what you're saying you feel. But my feelings are this: I'm convinced there is no DNA or eye witness or blood evidence or confession to anyone, and since a strangulation, no murder weapon - so outside of that, I'm stringing together all the circumstantial evidence in this case and it's a homerun to me - already! It was back in 2008. I'm on that jury of public opinion - and should I follow a case this intently and be called for jury duty for that case, I'm sure I'd never be seated with the same views. It all begins with BC being the last known person to see NC alive and I think it snow balls from there.

 

[Cheyenne130]

It was. But haven't you ever bookmarked something that you never looked at again? Maybe he saw reference to it in a blog or forum and found the subject interesting. I've looked up quite a few odd things during this trial. I haven't bookmarked anything, but strange searches. And I do have bookmarks that I have never gone back to once I set the bookmark. I bookmarked it because I didn't have time to read it then but just forgot about it or no longer cared anymore about the subject.

I thought there was testimony that he printed it out.