State v Bradley Cooper 4-27-2011

[Amster]

I guess you missed the testimony? Brad, or Bradly, Bradley, Bradely if you prefer, did not offer his possessions to the attorneys to pay the bill, that was his mother who did that. She also gave them Brad's car.

I doubt she did that without the blessing of her son. After she had packed up and stored...whatever...he wanted to keep. For himself. Were Nancy's belongings given to her parents?? How about the little girls? Were their toys and clothes given to Nancy's family? I hope nothing belonging to Nancy or the girls was used to provide a defense for Bradley!! :banghead:

 

[gritguy]

What was the state's witness *wrong* about? JA testifed the ducks were present on the table in the front hall the day before nancy 'went missing' and the ducks were no longer there on the table after nancy 'went missing'. That was a true statement. The fact that all this time, the ducks were in Brad's civil lawyers office doesn't make JA's testimony 'wrong' IMO. Everyone, including all of us WS'ers, knew they were looking for the ducks. That they were in an attorney's office no less, you don't consider that to be concealing evidence in a murder trial? It would appear they took a lesson from Michael Peterson's blow poke IMO.

Perhaps she didn't say that but the state proferred the theory they were dumped b/c of the struggle. Not handing over any or everything not requested by the other side is by no means wrongful, of concealing or anything else.

It is the obligation of the parties to secure the evidence they want to prove their points through discovery requests. Plus, the police had the place to themselves.

I'm positive BZ didn't call Kurtz weeks before the trial and say I'm going to bust JW on his facebook page so get him ready. Does that mean he concealed that from Kurtz?

The ducks are nonsense. Whether they were there or not have nothing, IMO, to do with whether BC killed NC.

But, it was sloppy of the state to make the contention without backstopping themselves with discovery. Both sides have made some mistakes this case, and this one was on the state. Typical litigation; if it were anything more the state would have objected.

 

[3doglady]

Are you sure about that? Even so, they clearly all were a set. JA said it did not look the same (color aside).

They showed one duck that I saw. It was white. BC's mom said the one on the fridge was different from the other two and was black.

 

[RaleighNative]

why are we discussing ducks when the prosecution was just talking about a missing router that Cisco has logs about???????? ducks are a non-issue now!

I'm very interested in hearing this Cisco router/logs information. I guess not knowing exactly what evidence it is yet officially puts me back on the fence! :fence:

 

[Madeleine74]

Missed all this cisco router stuff discussed after jury was dismissed.

Sum it up for me?

 

[gritguy]

First off, I'd love to have seen some of these depositions...because criminally...I don't believe you can just drop stuff like this. I'd like one of the attorneys to chime in 'cause IMO there's definitely something not right about this.

I'm chiming in as an NC attorney. Also, the state chimed in by not objecting but rather doing a c-x on it. If someone else has a more specific answer, I'm open to be corrected.

 

[RR0004]

there was no signs of struggle. Someone took Nancy by surprise. I don't care who agrees or not...the broken hyoid bone.....not an easy thing to do because of the size and location, but possible if a sharp edge is delivered to her neck in the strong grip of an ace tennis player, using his well practiced and "winning" swing.

Whoa...unfortunately, that left me with a pretty awful visual...but I do see what you're saying.

 

[RR0004]

I doubt she did that without the blessing of her son. After she had packed up and stored...whatever...he wanted to keep. For himself. Were Nancy's belongings given to her parents?? How about the little girls? Were their toys and clothes given to Nancy's family? I hope nothing belonging to Nancy or the girls was used to provide a defense for Bradley!! :banghead:

Amster...do you know why they were painting right after Nancy's death?

 

[Sailor Bug]

I guess you missed the testimony? Brad, or Bradly, Bradley, Bradely if you prefer, did not offer his possessions to the attorneys to pay the bill, that was his mother who did that. She also gave them Brad's car.

Do you really believe Mrs Cooper would have offered Nancy and Brads possessions WITHOUT Brads permission?:crazy:

 

[sunshine05]

Missed all this cisco router stuff discussed after jury was dismissed.

Sum it up for me?

It was off camera so not sure.

 

[RR0004]

Chloroform is in!!

 

[GhostCrab]

I'm chiming in as an NC attorney. Also, the state chimed in by not objecting but rather doing a c-x on it. If someone else has a more specific answer, I'm open to be corrected.

As far as I know you are correct. But that obviously doesn't sit well with some posters. Go figure.

 

[kantoo]

They showed one duck that I saw. It was white. BC's mom said the one on the fridge was different from the other two and was black.

me me :seeya: i saw the black one

 

[Amster]

Amster...do you know why they were painting right after Nancy's death?

Nope. Nor do I know why keeping the yard nice was suddenly of interest to Bradley. Maybe mommy didn't like the paint color and enjoyed yardwork?

 

[borndem]

didn't they show pictures of the frig (kitchen) earlier in this trial? anyone see the duck on the frig then?

That particular duck was never in question -- it didn't "disappear."

Why indeed were those 2 ducks put in a box, or put somewhere out of sight? Did they need to be washed first? This just may be one of those unexplained-forever things that just rattle around...

 

[3doglady]

First off, I'd love to have seen some of these depositions...because criminally...I don't believe you can just drop stuff like this. I'd like one of the attorneys to chime in 'cause IMO there's definitely something not right about this.

Either way I think it makes the defense look worse than the SA. Yeah, LE looks inept because they should have found the ducks in their search. But the defense knew where they were and withheld that info just so they could say "gotcha" in court after a lot of wasted time. How many jurors will appreciate that?

 

[LyndyLoo]

Chloroform is in!!

Wrong thread RR...but thanks for the info

 

[Amster]

Chloroform is in!!

:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!

:great::great::great:

 

[RR0004]

Wrong thread RR...but thanks for the info

I know...but it just came in...and I was so excited!!

 

[lilypearl]

Mrs Cooper stated that there were boxes of items given to the atty's for payment. She had no way of knowing what the atty's did with those items after they got them. I don't think any one was hiding anything.