State v. Bradley Cooper 4-6-2011

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #441
why would her "friend" tell Nancy she was sleeping with her husband...not very friendly if you ask me

Nancy's friend had a little too much to drink one night, and told another friend of Nancy's about the affair. Friend B told friend A, she'd better tell Nancy or she (friend B) would tell her.

So basically, the friend who had the affair was kinda coerced into telling NC about the 'affair.'

HTH
fran
 
  • #442
But the 6:40 call wasn't 22 or 23. What is this supposed to mean? If he was testing it at 6:05, why is the call duration different at 6:40?

32 seconds I think
 
  • #443
It was 6:05 ...set up time before he left on his mission!!

All remote calls should have terminated at 22 seconds. Were any of the calls between 6 and 7 AM longer than 22 seconds?
 
  • #444
Huh? Every way he has described would place a call over the TWC phone line which would show up in the TWC call logs.

That's not the way I heard the testimony. Yes, several methods, but I have yet to hear that he could access the TWC modem/phone interconnect. That must happen for TWC to have a record of the call.

Be safe, BDI members, there's still time.
 
  • #445
32 seconds I think

That would mean that it wasn't automated ... or that Brad figured out how to extend the call.
 
  • #446
The witness is providing excellent testimony but I sense he is offering more than Zell wants at times.
 
  • #447
And that ladies and gentlemen, is how you make a call look like it came from a landline when it really didn't.

This guy makes it sound pretty darn easy.

Did someone say it appeared BC was texting on one of the HT trips? Texting could be 'click to call'
 
  • #448
All remote calls should have terminated at 22 seconds. Were any of the calls between 6 and 7 AM longer than 22 seconds?

The landline call at 6:40 was 32 seconds.
 
  • #449
First it seemed odd that police wanted to tie the time of death close to 1 AM (stomach contents) but that made sense with the bug testimony. I think police were stumped about how to explain the 6-7 AM phone calls and this phone testimony is the only way to explain the call. Brad clearly had access to the equipment and could pre-schedule a phone call ... one that lasts 21 - 22 seconds. I think this is good testimony for the prosecution.


I could see this evidence making sense for the 6:05 call. But not the 6:40 call. So I'm confused about how the 23 second call is relevant with the 22 second call duration the witness talked about (I realize the additional second could be added by the cell phone to release) when the supposed call from Nancy was 16 seconds longer than that.
 
  • #450
All remote calls should have terminated at 22 seconds. Were any of the calls between 6 and 7 AM longer than 22 seconds?

I think the 6:40 one is longer than 22 seconds, but I can't remember exactly how long. Anyone?
 
  • #451
So all they are doing is showing multiple ways of doing this? We already knew there were multiple ways of doing this. My guess is they don't have proof that he did any of these, or they wouldn't be showing all the different ways. And all of these require the fxo, which wasn't found in the house. This is disappointing.

They don't necessarily need {proof} BC did this. It's a preponderence of the incriminating evidence that's going to MOST LIKELY convict the defendent.

JMHO
fran
 
  • #452
So all they are doing is showing multiple ways of doing this? We already knew there were multiple ways of doing this. My guess is they don't have proof that he did any of these, or they wouldn't be showing all the different ways. And all of these require the fxo, which wasn't found in the house. This is disappointing.

It's not disappointing in that it's true that it can be done.
 
  • #453
All remote calls should have terminated at 22 seconds. Were any of the calls between 6 and 7 AM longer than 22 seconds?

6:40 - 32 sec
6:45 - 63 sec
6:47 - 25 sec
 
  • #454
All remote calls should have terminated at 22 seconds. Were any of the calls between 6 and 7 AM longer than 22 seconds?

He also explained how to use commands to extend the length of a csim call. I think talking about all these multiple things is going to be very confusing for the jury.
 
  • #455
I could see this evidence making sense for the 6:05 call. But not the 6:40 call. So I'm confused about how the 23 second call is relevant with the 22 second call duration the witness talked about (I realize the additional second could be added by the cell phone to release) when the supposed call from Nancy was 16 seconds longer than that.

According to testimony, if the maximum length of time for a pre-scheduled remote phone call is 22 seconds, then the 6:40 couldn't have been generated this way. I don't think there's any way around that.
 
  • #456
32 seconds I think

Right. But the 6:05 call looked like a test call. But I would then expect the 6:40 call to be the exact same duration if it was done the same way. The witness said you couldn't make it last longer.
 
  • #457
They don't necessarily need {proof} BC did this. It's a preponderence of the incriminating evidence that's going to MOST LIKELY convict the defendent.

JMHO
fran

I am still hoping and praying that there is at least one person on the jury who can explain all of this back in a simple and easy to understand manner when they deliberate. I'm afraid if anybody but Zell does the closing arguments, it will all be lost.
 
  • #458
why would her "friend" tell Nancy she was sleeping with her husband...not very friendly if you ask me

No kidding, with friends like that.....
 
  • #459
6:40 - 32 sec
6:45 - 63 sec
6:47 - 25 sec

Then all this testimony is interesting, but it doesn't explain the phone calls.
 
  • #460
So all they are doing is showing multiple ways of doing this? We already knew there were multiple ways of doing this. My guess is they don't have proof that he did any of these, or they wouldn't be showing all the different ways. And all of these require the fxo, which wasn't found in the house. This is disappointing.

Sorry for you disappointment...All I need to say is IF SODDI he would have to have really have personal accesses to the Cooper phone and be of the expertises like Brad...Is that reasonable..I personally dont think so..but once again it just goes onto the pile of circumstances ..Did Brad have the capabilities to do what they are talking about..YEP..but it is going to be the call logs that will likely link it..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
130
Guests online
3,015
Total visitors
3,145

Forum statistics

Threads
632,671
Messages
18,630,198
Members
243,245
Latest member
noseyisa01
Back
Top