State v. Bradley Cooper 4-6-2011

[Star12]

8 seconds at 6:40 seizure time

 

[ncsu95]

All remote calls should have terminated at 22 seconds. Were any of the calls between 6 and 7 AM longer than 22 seconds?

The 6:40 call supposedly from Nancy was. Don't you remember all of the discussion that he had to spoof that call because Nancy wouldn't have talked to him for 32 seconds?

 

[otto]

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.

The jury should be able to figure out that if the max length of a remote call is 22 seconds, and some of the calls were longer, then the calls were not generated this way ... seems like that's all they really need to understand.

 

[SleuthinNC]

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.

I am going to go out on a limb and guess they are going to say that the 22/23 second csim call combined with an 8 second seizure time comes close to a 32 second duration since the duration is reported in seconds and rounded up.

did it have an 8 second seizure time? I could be completely jumbling my numbers.

 

[Palomine]

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

thanks

 

[NCEast]

Witness opened the Samsung Blackjack phone and said the program could have been run from it. He had been told that Brad had a Samsung Blackjack.

 

[ncsu95]

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'

Yes, but the call in question didn't occur right then, or anywhere near when he accessed his phone during his first trip.

 

[gbay]

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.

Seisure time was 1 second...not sure if that counts or not...I didn't think so but....

 

[FullDisclosure]

The 6:40 call supposedly from Nancy was. Don't you remember all of the discussion that he had to spoof that call because Nancy wouldn't have talked to him for 32 seconds?

Oh, yes. I remember that.

 

[ncsu95]

It's not disappointing in that it's true that it can be done.

But we all knew it could be done. The defense said in opening statements that it could be done. But do they have reasonable proof that it was done?

 

[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.

IF I can understand it, I think the jurors can too. I would hope they're paying as much attention as we are, even us computer-novices.

JMHO
fran

 

[gbay]

I am going to go out on a limb and guess they are going to say that the 22/23 second csim call combined with an 8 second seizure time comes close to a 32 second duration since the duration is reported in seconds and rounded up.

did it have an 8 second seizure time? I could be completely jumbling my numbers.

yes...the 6:40 call did have an 8 sec. seisure time.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I am going to go out on a limb and guess they are going to say that the 22/23 second csim call combined with an 8 second seizure time comes close to a 32 second duration since the duration is reported in seconds and rounded up.

did it have an 8 second seizure time? I could be completely jumbling my numbers.

8 second seizure time is what I remember as well.

 

[raisincharlie]

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.

If Brad answered it, the bill will show the length which of course would be longer than 22 seconds - his phone records do reflect that.

 

[otto]

The 6:40 call supposedly from Nancy was. Don't you remember all of the discussion that he had to spoof that call because Nancy wouldn't have talked to him for 32 seconds?

Someone must have made the call from the house ... and I think that angry spouses like talking to each other so they can get other jab in.

 

[NCEast]

I am going to go out on a limb and guess they are going to say that the 22/23 second csim call combined with an 8 second seizure time comes close to a 32 second duration since the duration is reported in seconds and rounded up.

did it have an 8 second seizure time? I could be completely jumbling my numbers.

I wish they would clarify if the seizure time was included. Good thought SleughinNC.

 

[Palomine]

too bad for Brad he couldn't erase stuff from the server

 

[ncsu95]

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.

Right. It's more throwing a bunch of crap out there to confuse the jury since you don't have proof and hope something sticks. :banghead:

 

[raisincharlie]

uh oh - another coininky dink - Brad's phone was equipped with Windows Mobile 6, which in 2008 would support this capability...the coininky dinks are multiplying. Like Kurtz kittens

 

[ncsu95]

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..

Huh? If SODDI, it means Nancy made the call and none of this testimony matters.