State v Bradley Cooper 5-3-11

[SleuthSayer]

Why are you hoping for a hung jury?

Because I think [and said here weeks ago] that the prosecution made a circus of this case. Thus, I don't think that they "earned" a Guilty verdict. So, for the integrity of our justice system, I'd like to see a retrial with competent prosecutors. I don't want to see a guy get away with killing his wife because of incompetent police and DA's office work.

 

[Madeleine74]

I've learned from watching several trials, including some high profile ones, that juries are fickle beasts. I would not expect any particular verdict and instead be prepared for anything. I've been elated, I've had my heart broken; the only thing you can do is don't count on anything one way or another.

I know what I'm hoping for in this case, but no, nothing would really surprise me in the least. Disappoint me? Sure. Surprise me? Not so much.

 

[bloghooligan]

I just rewatched that interview, it is here.

Mr. Rentz was, in my opinion, very open to different possibilities, despite his belief that Brad had done it. I was quite impressed with the interview.

Thanks very much for posting. I had not seen that interview.

Nancy's parents are pretty amazing. They believe in the court/judicial process and want the person (he/she) who murdered Nancy convicted. But Mr Rentz believes there were only 4 people in the Cooper house the night of 7/11 to 7/12 and Nancy never went jogging.

 

[otto]

Mine too. BC's smirk during the strangulation part of Cummings end of closing spoke volumes to me. I feel for her family and her children and her friends. If he is found NG let him go on and be out of my reading of what he's doing. Something maybe something will prove the jury wrong if the NG case and it can be brought back to trial. He is the entire mastermind, electronic and physical of this crime IMO. God bless the children.

I didn't see a smirk the first time I watched the footage, and I didn't see it the second time. Could you please post the time when you think that Brad is smirking?

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9542700/#/vid9542700

 

[BrownRice]

Honestly, I do not think it's unusual for men my age (I am the same age as NC) to do household chores on a very regular basis. I don't know any men my age who are helpless with household duties.

Which is why I never put much weight into the whole "BC would never clean/do laundry argument". JMO.

Well, what I took away from the testimony was the "nevers" and "always" were never never and always. You usually back yourself into a corner using such definitive words. And they were proven wrong again and again by the defense.

I know I can be guilty of complaining to my husband that he "never" __________ (fill in the blank), but if I'm being honest, it isn't "never" - it's just not as often as I'd like him to.

 

[Cheyenne130]

You keep saying this, but really, how does anyone ever prove that someone made a phone call? She lived there, it is on the phone records, she made the call.

Can you prove all of your daily phone calls?

Not exactly but if something happened to me, it wouldn't be the phone that would determine my last communication. It would be this computer. I turn it on before I check my phone. If Brad had received a call to his cell phone from Nancy's cell phone, we wouldn't be having this conversation right now. Coming from the home phone with his equipment and his abilities, there is no proof that Nancy was alive at 6:40. MOO

 

[NCEast]

Because I think [and said here weeks ago] that the prosecution made a circus of this case. Thus, I don't think that they "earned" a Guilty verdict. So, for the integrity of our justice system, I'd like to see a retrial with competent prosecutors. I don't want to see a guy get away with killing his wife because of incompetent police and DA's office work.

If they have to go to retrial, would the same ADAs prosecute again? I am not totally opposed to a retrial, although I'm hoping for a big, fat guilty sometime this week. However, a retrial would give Boz some much needed time to firm up his technology issues. And maybe Cummings will have retired by then. I think the female ADA was ok but when it's all said and done I think they could have presented their case without her altogether.

 

[Madeleine74]

BTW, for those who want a do-over, a new trial with new prosecutors, consider that the evidence is not going to change.

NC's phone is not going to magically regain all the lost data. That 3825 router? Not going to be found. Brad's shoes from 7/12/08 HT trip #1? Still discarded wherever he threw them. There isn't going to be any additional physical evidence on NC's body, there isn't going to be a different cause of death, nor a different time estimate of death. That Google search on Brad's computer? That's not going away either. Brad's lies? Will stay lies in perpetuity on that video depo. Rosemary Zednick will still be a woman who thought she saw Nancy wearing an iPod and thought Nancy was hit by a car and discarded off of Fielding Dr.

It is what it is. The evidence is what it is. It's not going to change.

 

[bloghooligan]

Really though, what man dusts? If my husband cleans (which is unusual) he would never think of dusting. He doesn't even see it.

Heck, mine doesn't do kitchen counters even on the rare occasion that he does dishes (and putting them in to soak does not dount as doing them!)

 

[kljohnson0458]

I didn't see a smirk the first time I watched the footage, and I didn't see it the second time. Could you please post the time when you think that Brad is smirking?

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9542700/#/vid9542700

Honestly I'm not going back to find it. you can see from the posts after mine it happened. You can look at the end of Cummings closing when he reinacted the strangling. Sorry.

You also wanted to know why NC's twin didn't have her hair pulled back with a hair band. I think that was a ridiculous question but we are all entitled.

 

[Madflava]

Not exactly but if something happened to me, it wouldn't be the phone that would determine my last communication. It would be this computer. I turn it on before I check my phone. If Brad had received a call to his cell phone from Nancy's cell phone, we wouldn't be having this conversation right now. Coming from the home phone with his equipment and his abilities, there is no proof that Nancy was alive at 6:40. MOO

And there's no proof she wasnt either except that there is ZERO proof the call was spoofed. Do you really believe Brad had full access to every piece of equipment that he needed to spoof that call? Do you REALLY think he had time to go through and delete all traces in between the cleaning, going to HT and all the other stuff he supposedly was doing? Its not as simple as "delete call trace" and hit enter. Tossing the router doesnt get rid of the evidence either. There are always traces.

If they had offered a shred of evidence that he spoofed that call, I would be driving the guilty bandwagon but I just dont see how it would have been done without leaving a log entry or something SOMEWHERE.

 

[RR0004]

You keep saying this, but really, how does anyone ever prove that someone made a phone call? She lived there, it is on the phone records, she made the call.

Can you prove all of your daily phone calls?

Ok...sorry if if I'm not up to speed...was the phone call an actual call or a text? Did they ping his cell phone being somewhere other than home? Really curious about this. TIA

 

[sunshine05]

Not exactly but if something happened to me, it wouldn't be the phone that would determine my last communication. It would be this computer. I turn it on before I check my phone. If Brad had received a call to his cell phone from Nancy's cell phone, we wouldn't be having this conversation right now. Coming from the home phone with his equipment and his abilities, there is no proof that Nancy was alive at 6:40. MOO

It's unfair (to me) that what he did for a living was used against him and assumed that he must have faked the phone call. So if he was a plumber, the entire case would be different. There would have been other suspects and leads followed because they would have considered the phone call as proof she was alive at that time.

Someone brought up a good point a while back. Even the best expert would have been taking a risk doing this because no one knows all the different trails that are left behind, router logs, computer logs, timing, phone records, etc. It would have been very risky.

 

[cassius]

I didn't see a smirk the first time I watched the footage, and I didn't see it the second time. Could you please post the time when you think that Brad is smirking?

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9542700/#/vid9542700

It's the same smirk he's had the whole trial. Not sure what people saw that was so different about it.

 

[Cheyenne130]

And there's no proof she wasnt either except that there is ZERO proof the call was spoofed. Do you really believe Brad had full access to every piece of equipment that he needed to spoof that call? Do you REALLY think he had time to go through and delete all traces in between the cleaning, going to HT and all the other stuff he supposedly was doing? Its not as simple as "delete call trace" and hit enter. Tossing the router doesnt get rid of the evidence either. There are always traces.

If they had offered a shred of evidence that he spoofed that call, I would be driving the guilty bandwagon but I just dont see how it would have been done without leaving a log entry or something SOMEWHERE.

In a word, Yes.

 

[sunshine05]

Ok...sorry if if I'm not up to speed...was the phone call an actual call or a text? Did they ping his cell phone being somewhere other than home? Really curious about this. TIA

We were talking about THE call, the 6:40 call from the Cooper home to BC's cell phone. Phone records on both ends confirm the call was made. Everyone assumes since he did VOIP that he had to have faked the call. I don't think he did.

 

[bloghooligan]

BTW, for those who want a do-over, a new trial with new prosecutors, consider that the evidence is not going to change.

NC's phone is not going to magically regain all the lost data. That 3825 router? Not going to be found. Brad's shoes from 7/12/08 HT trip #1? Still discarded wherever he threw them. There isn't going to be any additional physical evidence on NC's body, there isn't going to be a different cause of death, nor a different time estimate of death. That Google search on Brad's computer? That's not going away either. Brad's lies? Will stay lies in perpetuity on that video depo. Rosemary Zednick will still be a woman who thought she saw Nancy wearing an iPod and thought Nancy was hit by a car and discarded off of Fielding Dr.

It is what it is. The evidence is what it is. It's not going to change.

The prosecution might be able to present actual data records or logs for those calls that are in question 6:05 and 6:4x. They might be able to get someone from Google to testify to the google map data. They might be able to have someone testify to the cookie issue. They might find someone who was jogging the morning of 7/11 that looks like Nancy.

For me if they can prove a spoofed call or firm up the google map search evidence, I'd be over the fence. These two items (and the fact that they can't prove either to my satisfaction) are case breakers for me.

 

[Cheyenne130]

It's unfair (to me) that what he did for a living was used against him and assumed that he must have faked the phone call. So if he was a plumber, the entire case would be different. There would have been other suspects and leads followed because they would have considered the phone call as proof she was alive at that time.

Someone brought up a good point a while back. Even the best expert would have been taking a risk doing this because no one knows all the different trails that are left behind, router logs, computer logs, timing, phone records, etc. It would have been very risky.

But he wasn't a plumber. He did have the knowledge and equipment to automate a call. And any murder is risky.

 

[3doglady]

I'm hoping the N&O puts that smirk on the front page tomorrow.

 

[kljohnson0458]

But he wasn't a plumber. He did have the knowledge and equipment to automate a call. And any murder is risky.

No intention here to you Cheyenne but Brad ISN"T a plumber in the present tense and neither was NC in the past tense.