State v Bradley Cooper 4-25-11

[Danielle59]

The thing that bothers me is it's not only the sim card that's blank, but the WHOLE phone. Not even pictures.

JMHO
fran

Det Young erased it all, wiped it out, he testified to that on the stand.

 

[bloghooligan]

Following AT &T's directions - which said the phone would ask for the PUC, which it did not do. Det Young is not an expert, was following directions given to him by the provider.

Having AT & T internet service, I can tell you, if you have a problem - good luck getting it resolved in one or even two hour long phone calls which may involve four or five different people. Phone service is even worse.

But he entered the puc.. I could understand him getting the error message once or twice, maybe even three times but 10 TIMES? and prior to the 10th time he's told it will permanently erase the data and he does it anyway??

 

[otto]

He's referring to pages 99+ on this link: http://www.wral.com/asset/news/news_briefs/2011/02/17/9132146/coopermotion.PDF

 

[raisincharlie]

But he entered the puc.. I could understand him getting the error message once or twice, maybe even three times but 10 TIMES? and prior to the 10th time he's told it will permanently erase the data and he does it anyway??

Well if he entered the PUC - then AT & T gave him the wrong data - right ? The PUC should have opened the phone the first time, if it was correct.

 

[Danielle59]

This post says that 10 incorrect password attempts will wipe a blackberry.
http://www.bbgeeks.com/blackberry-guides/guide-to-wiping-your-blackberry-88202/
So, if BC knew this, and entered the wrong password in 9 times, the next attempt by Cary PD will have wiped the phone.

Det Young testified doing it 10 times before it wiped. There wasn't already a start on that. Also, they, in addition to securing the laptops appropriately, we now have also learned they secured the cell phones in appropriatleyl

 

[otto]

Not unusual for both defense & pros to follow websites. At minimum it gives them an idea of what the jury is thinking. At best they get some valuable information/evidence.

Information/evidence should be collected in a more professional context, and I doubt that opinions here, or any other website, truly reflect what a jury is thinking.

 

[jrb0124]

Det Young is not an expert

And yet he was attempting an amateur examination, violating foundational standards of handling cellphones, on a piece of evidence deemed "critical".

Wow. Why not just send it to the lab like he did 6 weeks later for a proper examination if he is "not an expert"?

I guess its a good thing for the State that Det. Young didn't also attempt to do the computer forensic exam on the laptop - otherwise they'd have no evidence.

 

[gracielee]

I couldn't believe my eyes when I read that someone from the prosecution is reading here. Unbelievable! I fail to see how anything written here bears any relevance to this trial.

IIRC, during the David Westerfield trial, it was gleaned from one of the crime forums, to check the length of the hair/s found in DW's home/trailer because Danielle had just had her haircut only a day or two before she was taken and murdered. Often times ideas or thoughts from 'real people', those that would be making up a jury, both the defense and prosecution find to be handy as to what kinds of questions and concerns the jurors might have during deliberations. Sometimes for professionals, it's hard to see the forest for the trees.

 

[LAWsy_ME]

IIRC, during the David Westerfield trial, it was gleaned from one of the crime forums, to check the length of the hair/s found in DW's home/trailer because Danielle had just had her haircut only a day or two before she was taken and murdered. Often times ideas or thoughts from 'real people', those that would be making up a jury, both the defense and prosecution find to be handy as to what kinds of questions and concerns the jurors might have during deliberations. Sometimes for professionals, it's hard to see the forest for the trees.

Sure. This is a forum where all the details can be examined and tossed about like a hot potato......or like pasta thrown on the wall.....wondering if it will stick.,

 

[raisincharlie]

And yet he was attempting an amateur examination, violating foundational standards of handling cellphones, on a piece of evidence deemed "critical".

Wow. Why not just send it to the lab like he did 6 weeks later for a proper examination if he is "not an expert"?

I guess its a good thing for the State that Det. Young didn't also attempt to do the computer forensic exam on the laptop - otherwise they'd have no evidence.

No disagreement - he should have sent it out to an appropriate facility, especially since they had her phone records. But that does not prove he intended to wipe the phone data out. Besides that - Levitan just said, the Sim is just like a disc - you can wipe it out but the data is still there somewhere. I don't see the big deal other than the defense trying to make something out of it. Now if Detective Young never advised what had happened, I believe that would definitely mean something but that is not the case.

 

[LyndyLoo]

I'll be back after lunch recess, when I assume the cross exam will start! See ya all then @215PM..

 

[otto]

IIRC, during the David Westerfield trial, it was gleaned from one of the crime forums, to check the length of the hair/s found in DW's home/trailer because Danielle had just had her haircut only a day or two before she was taken and murdered. Often times ideas or thoughts from 'real people', those that would be making up a jury, both the defense and prosecution find to be handy as to what kinds of questions and concerns the jurors might have during deliberations. Sometimes for professionals, it's hard to see the forest for the trees.

I have to wonder who pays for someone to take the time to read through 40-60 pages of daily posts ... at some outrageous pay schedule. Does the prosecutor's office have too much money or what?

 

[NCEast]

I'll be back after lunch recess, when I assume the cross exam will start! See ya all then @215PM..

Yea, I'm going to go mow a bit more while the sun is hidden by clouds. I hope you guys have solved this case when I return

 

[bloghooligan]

Well if he entered the PUC - then AT & T gave him the wrong data - right ? The PUC should have opened the phone the first time, if it was correct.

Right, if the procedure worked he should have only had to enter the code one time.

He was asked to preserve the data on the phone. Specifically asked.

Even if AT&T gave him the wrong PUC or wrong instructions, it doesn't make sense that he would enter the code 10 times (or even 3) with the last instance after being specifically told by the device that by entering the code one more time he would permanently erase the data? Just doesn't make sense to me:banghead:....

 

[bloghooligan]

I have to wonder who pays for someone to take the time to read through 40-60 pages of daily posts ... at some outrageous pay schedule. Does the prosecutor's office have too much money or what?

lol, you pay them!

 

[Danielle59]

I didn't realize JW was a 'civil engineer'?

He is not, but your comment I was replying to was vague in insinutating that all engineers that were anything were part of the IEEE.

This was your comment: "IEEE is one of the professional organizations most engineers belong to. Recognized internationally. "

 

[otto]

He is not, but your comment I was replying to was vague in insinutating that all engineers that were anything were part of the IEEE.

Jay Ward has a Bachelor of Arts in interdisciplinary studies.

 

[jrb0124]

So, CPD brought in the FBI to examine BC laptop - but let a detective who didn't even know what a SIM card was fiddle around with the victim's blackberry before any lab could properly process it?

I must admit though, this comes as no surprise given that three CPD detective were riding around on a golf course chasing psychic tips vs interviewing witnesses in person (the detectives that is) who said they saw NC the morning of 7/12.

 

[otto]

lol, you pay them!

Someone stop paying them to sit around and read message boards all day! They are the trained professionals, we are the laypersons that are curious about the outcome of the trial. If they can't do their jobs without snooping on what others think, then they should find another line of work.

 

[LAWsy_ME]

I have to wonder who pays for someone to take the time to read through 40-60 pages of daily posts ... at some outrageous pay schedule. Does the prosecutor's office have too much money or what?

Interns....law students...... for example would be a source and I betcha, law students are following this trial. This is a virtual reality and certainly this forum has proven itself as useful in the past, per my peruse of the introductory information I read on Websleuths home page.

In my field, interns were able to perform parts of my job, under supervision....anywhere from arm's length supervision to minimal supervision. I don't know if this is true in a court of law.....Anyone know?