State v. Bradley Cooper 4-6-2011

[cityslick]

Working with a lump of clay, LOL.

 

[Palomine]

Oh, c'mon, show the objections argument!!!!!!

its on

 

[Wyn]

Hey, since Brad isn't a U.S. citizen, does he even have those rights? :fence:

Only if he's here illegally. :floorlaugh:

 

[LyndyLoo]

Okay, I'm confused. Did this witness say that the cisco phone could be connected to both the Cisco call manager and the twc port (using an fxo port) at the same time? Because he would still have to use the call manager to remotely initiate the call.

Unfortunately we will have to wait until after lunch to find out...I do believe it will show how such a call will show up on a call log..which then could be connected with that time period July 12th 640AM...IF so, Brad is caught in one huge lie...Yet another brick for tha wall of circumstantial evidence..

 

[Palomine]

Brad's 4th, 6th, and 14th amendments are being violated again

yes they are...poor.poor Brad

 

[NCEast]

Prosc. just stated that the last 5 emails from A. Stubbs came off of defendant's computer!

 

[gracielee]

Now you see WHY we have all this foundation testimony! Kurtz and Krew DEMAND it. So those who want to know why we have to listen, excessively, to minutia, this is why.

 

[gbay]

If Brad did spoof the call, I want to know he actually did it, not just that he could! Pretty please??

I don't think this witness can attest to that. He is just stating Brad has all the equipment and the knowledge to use it.

 

[NCEast]

Excellent witness, easily explains everything, seemingly down-to-earth guy.

He certainly has a strong sense of what's he's talking about. Excellent.

 

[Palomine]

Hey, since Brad isn't a U.S. citizen, does he even have those rights? :fence:

yeah .whats up with that...never thought about that
I just hope he does NOT get to serve his time in Canada

 

[RaleighNC]

Interesting - no FXO found, but it is required to do this kind of spoofing... so.. they need to show that he purchased one - either as part of his Cisco job (wouldn't that be internal requisition?) or that maybe he used Employee Sales?

Need to check this out...

Since this is more commercial in nature - wonder if they even have it on employee sales.

I am guessing he could have installed and then uninstalled and brought back to Cisco - esp if he had access to this. Less of a paper trail.

 

[ncsu95]

Unfortunately we will have to wait until after lunch to find out...I do believe it will show how such a call will show up on a call log..which then could be connected with that time period July 12th 640AM...IF so, Brad is caught in one huge lie...Yet another brick for tha wall of circumstantial evidence..

Actually, it doesn't sound like they will. It sounds like he needs equipment that they didn't recover from the house.

 

[FullDisclosure]

Dang. I had planned to be productive over the jury's lunch. I can't leave now!!

 

[Palomine]

Bring in the FBI.... which you will object to that also

 

[borndem]

I think this witness brought some Meow Mix with him today......

 

[SleuthinNC]

Okay, I'm confused. Did this witness say that the cisco phone could be connected to both the Cisco call manager and the twc port (using an fxo port) at the same time? Because he would still have to use the call manager to remotely initiate the call.

The call manager is required for the Cisco IP Phone to work. The FXO is required to connect the Cisco IP Phone through the call manager to the TWC phone line.

Being able to remotely initiate the call is an inherent function of the Cisco IP Phone/Call manager system.

 

[RaleighNC]

Ha - bought it using his Cisco ID as part of his job - internal procurement

Certainly relevant.

Cisco could authenticate through their procurement org.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Voir Dire of witness regarding this email that shows Brad purchasing this FXO from Cisco.....Auto generated order form...and I believe this witness can testify this is a order form for this FXO...

 

[NCEast]

Interesting - no FXO found, but it is required to do this kind of spoofing... so.. they need to show that he purchased one - either as part of his Cisco job (wouldn't that be internal requisition?) or that maybe he used Employee Sales?

Need to check this out...

Since this is more commercial in nature - wonder if they even have it on employee sales.

I am guessing he could have installed and then uninstalled and brought back to Cisco - esp if he had access to this. Less of a paper trail.

I think they are showing the order for it now?

 

[ncsu95]

Just agreed this was purchased for work not for home.