I do this ALL the time. I usually leave early in the a.m. Maybe if I wasn't home by 2 or 3 my husband might start getting worried. Maybe not.
State v Bradley Cooper 4-26-11
- Thread starter otto
- Start date
- Status
I do this ALL the time. I usually leave early in the a.m. Maybe if I wasn't home by 2 or 3 my husband might start getting worried. Maybe not.
Except that would be kidnapping and illegal my friend. That doesn't solve her long term problem; only adds more problems for her. And I can't imagine her parents conspiring with her to break the law.
I got the feeling of drugs being abused with a few other witnesses as well.
Two things:
1. After watching JP yesterday, I got a very bad vibe from him. So much, that I'm kinda falling off the fence to the other side.
2. Besides OJ and Robert Blake, what other murder trials have resulted with a not guilty verdict? I can't think of any, but know there must be some out there?
I guess I have 3 things. Is court 1/2 day tomorrow (Thurs) and no court Friday? Thought I read that somewhere.
1. After watching JP yesterday, I got a very bad vibe from him. So much, that I'm kinda falling off the fence to the other side.
2. Besides OJ and Robert Blake, what other murder trials have resulted with a not guilty verdict? I can't think of any, but know there must be some out there?
I guess I have 3 things. Is court 1/2 day tomorrow (Thurs) and no court Friday? Thought I read that somewhere.
carolinalady
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2008
- Messages
- 646
- Reaction score
- 0
IIRC, court is 1/2 day Thurs and Fri. There may still be some action in the courtroom though b/c they discuss the offer of proof for the other expert.
You are right, except it would have only been parental kidnapping if she concealed or prevented BC from seeing the children after she fled. Her bigger problem I think would be that BC would have been in court the next morning obtaining an ex parte order for the return of the children and NC would have lost any favor she might have had with the court.
First, I have no problem with staunch BDIers for using CE alone to base their opinion as long as I am not attacked for not being in agreement with only using CE to base my opinion. When I first came on this site, I was jumped on every time I said anything other than BC did it. I have said this many times, this is a great site. What makes it so good is the open discussion forum of different opinions.
As for the experts on the site, some are experts by training, others are not. If you have a bad gut feeling about JP, I can understand why. If you don't think some of the Cary clique are not hinky, I dont understand why. Some of the behaviors they display are just not normal IMO
I haven't laughed at gut feelings. I have had strange gut feelings about this case from Day 1. I like Physical Evidence, and the State's supression of Defense experts on the computer testing really bothers me because I believe there is something there that might help in making up a lot of folk's minds regarding BC's involvement.
The truth is, the jury is the group that will ultimately make the decision. I have no idea how they will vote, but my hunch is it will be a Hung Jury,.
At this point I think it would be a darn shame if he was convicted in light of the obvious bias on the part of LE and the judge, not to mention the total lack of any physical evidence. Even most of the circumstantial evidence is flimsy and in doubt. I realize that the BDI camp doesn't want to acknowledge any of this but it is what it is.
Cheyenne130
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2008
- Messages
- 1,823
- Reaction score
- 0
I was waiting for someone to acknowledge that JW was wrong when he stated as fact that you would not find the open and closed hand files with a .bmp extension AND you would not have all the times the same. Is it possible to now understand why the prosecution wanted to keep him out as an expert? There are so many people on here that believed him just because he said it happened. Now that you have been shown how wrong he was, isn't it much more likely that Brad did that search on his computer at the time shown and it wasn't some big conspiracy/computer tampering?
feisty little baiter tonite, eh? I think something has to give.
Either a) he did not kill nancy, and it is one of those rare moments where coincidence and circumstance collide to create a series of unfortunate events, b) he killed her and did the impossible (basically committed the perfect, calm, cool and collective murder, but fell apart on the backside of it all) or c) we are all (cpd and wcda collectively with us and the general populous) trying to cram a very large cro-magnon looking square into a round hole.
I keep seeing words thrown around about his psychopathy and the ones i am seeing repeated the most are wrong. (psychologically speaking, he can't be much more than a narcissist) he can't lie about absolutely everything, yet never say he didn't kill his wife and that be held against him. He didn't strike me as charming or particularly suited to get away with anything (like most sociopaths). He was also trying to do the impossible in his own life (have the wife, the mistress and the woman he kept in the pumpkin) and they were both living a lie. Since none of us live fairy tales, you have to admit this is all fairly normal.
As for some of the circumstantial evidence:
The emails he was snooping into. (okay, so he got rid of the spoofed phone call and everything except a google map search, but left this? Come on. Also, the first words out of the multiple divorce attorneys mouths were a)don't leave the house and b) nothing is a secret now)
the bs spending habits (equal responsibility and while it was living above their means, it was fairly "planned overspending" with bonuses, etc kept in mind, knowing they had some safety there and with her parents).
He acted odd in the days beyond her death. (you guys keep tripping all over yourselves here, but i think most people would act odd with the death of a spouse. Grief does not have a set of circumstances associated with it, or mannerisms, or reactions. It comes in about five forms that are interchangeable and in the end, all a part of the loss)
he didn't talk to the cops. (neither would i. Not in those circumstances, not under any circumstances)
he lied. (cause he's a lying liar who lies. Doesn't making him a killing killer who kills.)
he trashed his wife. (where? He complained about the spending. He didn't want her to leave with the kids, etc. He went to hire a divorce attorney and bounced the check. He clearly knew about the separation agreement because alice stubbs testified he did. It was moving at a snail's pace because something was being thought of, not because she wanted to run away.)
she called a realtor and said i want out. (maybe he left her a message and said: Great, there's some new houses over off brittaby that will be going in this year and some places off greenstone lane i can show you asap. Not in testimony, but who cares at this point, right?)
he had scratches and marks. (show them to me. Show me where someone actually documented it.)
he had straw on the floor of his house. (seen by whom? Officer hayes? Did no one bring up during his testimony that he is clearly seen standing outside his squad car, on the edge of the road in one of the helicopter videos of the body site? Because it is definitely him. Maybe he brought the straw in.)
the detectives thought he did it. (great start. That's there job. Now show me something more than a hunch.)
his family and her neighbors were disappointed with his reaction, etc. (okay. They were seeing this situation from a variety of viewpoints, but none of them seem to have provided a lot of pointed evidence of abuse at all.)
he was a controlling, manipulative @$$hole. (okay. He controlled her into staying late at the party the night he allegedly killed her after controlling her into going on vacation with her family? Right. You guys have never met a real controllingbefore then.)
he didn't clean. He couldn't have. The house was a mess. (it was cluttered. Floor to ceiling. Houses don't get like that overnight. They don't get cleaned up from that in a weekend.)
the cpd can't be involved in a conspiracy. (i don't think they are. Nor do i think the lochmere clan is. I think they all pointed their fingers collectively at him and looked no further. I think it was less conspiracy, more fustercluck.)
they did a fine job investigating them. (i need the glasses you are watching this trial through because this is a nightmare. Maybe i can use them on the mirror when i wake up tomorrow and i will be a pretty princess in the mirror. Did you hear the pearson interview by dismukes? I am fairly certain that something was missed there, stopping short of did pearson do it or not. Who in their right mind rules that guy out in a murder investigation just weeks before indicting the other guy with equal opp, etc?)
this witness was bad. This witness was good. That guy lied. That girl lied. (none of them have offered up anything additional. The most convincing evidence (google maps) comes from a guy who as nervous as they come about something.
He didn't call the police that day she went missing. (so? He probably was thinking he'd "impress" her with his mad cleaning skills. I would not call the police til dark if my spouse went missing unless i was told: If i am not back in 5 minutes, call 911)
he knew about the sports bra. And it's color. (no, he didn't. At least, no two members of the cary police wrote it down the same way. He gave them options.)
he spoofed the phone call. (this is equally as likely as him having had an accomplice. Neither has been proven or disproven.)
he had the technical know how to __________________. (did he? Because he left a pretty clear trail from himself to various women, no? He didn't hide the email snoop trail? But he remembered to delete all the spoofing evidence and he remembered to get rid of the google search for the body?)
cary police was not inept at investigating this case. (really? I don't know who to point the finger at over there, so i'll point it in the air. This was a terrible way to run a case. Period. Mistakes do happen. And they are accepted. They should not pile up on each other and look like a lingering bag of flaming dog poop on the neighbor's porch.) several people (sh and mh) reported that they were being good copped/bad copped into "agreeing to certain facts" very early on.
I don't believe cary police looked further than jp and bc. Could they have went down the wrong fork in the road? Yes. Is that reasonable doubt? Yes.
excellent post
WolfpackWoman
Inactive
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2010
- Messages
- 399
- Reaction score
- 0
Yes--I believe they would have. But I also believe most hacker tools will modify timestamps down to the nanosecond.
Debating the implications of testimony and evidence, and being skeptical of the State's case does not equate to 'callous and shallow treatment of the victim'.
Being victim friendly doesn't necessitate buying into a misguided and inept prosecution of a potentially innocent defendent.
Don't be confused. If even this pro-pros, pro-state judge was that affected by the witness and couldn't hide it, you can just imagine how he looked to the unbiased observer/juror.
In order to believe BC did it, all you have to believe is that he faked a phone call and left no trace of it. Since that is his job, that isn't hard to believe, IMO.
In order to believe that anyone else did it, you have to believe that a fairly large number of odd things inside the Cooper house happened, through sheer coincidence, at the same time that his wife was killed.
Now, back to lurking.....
'
Glad you brought this up. I haven't seen one person here say they were not sorry that NC was killed. It was a very tragic event. However, everything becomes exposed in a case like this. There have been inuendos and horrific comments said about BC's affair(s), but there have been attempts on the site to overlook things in NC's life that were not so stellar. Both had affairs, both probably weren't good matches, and they both should have separated long before they did. But, I do not thing vigorous defense is a shallow and callous treatment of the victim. If the facts are shallow and callous treatment of a victim, then perhaps that has occurred here.
I wondered about this too - it was cleared up yesterday. Defense requested a DNA test multiple times, was refused by CPD.
Youngest daughter was not (and has not been since) in the custody of BC when the information of the Oct 2005 'sexual encounter' where 'intercourse was started' came to light in 2009.
Youngest daughter may very well be JP's child. Go to any site which calculates due date, enter the encounter date -14 days (per the norm) and see what the result is.
NC would have had to try within two days plus or minus of the couch episode with JP, and even if they (NC/BC) did - still no guarantee.
Paternity of the youngest has now become significant, given the suspicion hanging over JP after yesterday's bizarre sequence of testimony and recorded interviews.
Given the circumstances and evidence, I think the possibility of JP being the bio father is much greater than the possibility of BC spoofing a call.
If he is the father, that changes the dynamic of the case tremendously. If I were the CPD/pros, I too would refuse the test if I had any doubts about the result.
Faking calls without a trace is not his job, and the testimony and evidence that he did so is not conclusive in the least. In fact, the Cisco witness (PG) went into some detail about the calls he made and the buttons he pushed - all of which make sense, nothing nefarious. There are much easier ways to preprogram a call if one is inclined to do so.
The lead detective stated on the stand that he had no proof that BC spoofed the call.
But what you say is true, if I believed he spoofed the 6:40 call (the length of which exceeds the maximum time-out of an auto call) then I would believe he was guilty.
Good thinking...
re: the google maps, I believe the defense still has an expert witness to call specifically for this (?)
Without any further testimony, we're looking at a hung jury at the minimum. If another expert witness can cast doubt on the google maps, or the defense continues to make inroads in spreading suspicion and pointing out CPD tunnel vision...acquittal.
Regardless of how you personally feel about BC (G/NG), common sense should at this point tell you that a guilty verdict from this jury is out of the question IMO. If not, you're setting yourself up for a big disappointment.
Without any further testimony, we're looking at a hung jury at the minimum. If another expert witness can cast doubt on the google maps, or the defense continues to make inroads in spreading suspicion and pointing out CPD tunnel vision...acquittal.
Regardless of how you personally feel about BC (G/NG), common sense should at this point tell you that a guilty verdict from this jury is out of the question IMO. If not, you're setting yourself up for a big disappointment.
- Status
Similar threads
