Anthony's Computer Forensics

New Posts

goldenlover said:
I can be on my computer talking to my sister on the telephone and she is on her computer and we both put the same word in the search and we both end up with different results.
Click to expand...

goldenlover said:
I don't think it's a "conspiracy". I just think they are taking the evidence that they have and presenting it to the jury in a way that alters what it really means. Why does the number of myspace searchs seem to correspond with the chloroform search? The computer must have been auto-refreshing, but they will not let that little tidbit of information out for the jury to hear.
Click to expand...



I've also had situations where my screen just starts popping up new windows over and over again and as soon as I close one, another one pops up. There are a million reasons so I kind of hate the way they are presenting this. Like I said, I don't think it should have been allowed at all.
 
84 searches to MySpace.
84 searches to chloroform site.

I don't think that is a coincidence. Something is not right about that.

Then there was 83 to MySpace, and 82 to MySpace.

That is just too strange that you would have all these daily visits to MySpace always being in the low 80's.
 
Does anyone know if there is a copy of Bradley's computer report out there? I cannot find it....
 
Hot Dogs said:
84 searches to MySpace.
84 searches to chloroform site.

I don't think that is a coincidence. Something is not right about that.

Then there was 83 to MySpace, and 82 to MySpace.

That is just too strange that you would have all these daily visits to MySpace always being in the low 80's.
Click to expand...

Exactly, something is not right, especially when one report shows only one visit where the other shows 80+ visits. The DA misinterpreted the report, and now they're going to have to explain that to the jury.
 
Hot Dogs said:
84 searches to MySpace.
84 searches to chloroform site.

I don't think that is a coincidence. Something is not right about that.

Then there was 83 to MySpace, and 82 to MySpace.

That is just too strange that you would have all these daily visits to MySpace always being in the low 80's.
Click to expand...

and each day back in the calander the number went down by 1 number, 84, 83, 82, 81 etc. There is something wrong with the evidence being presented as 84 searches...I don't understand it, but I can see something is wrong.
 
Hot Dogs said:
84 searches to MySpace.
84 searches to chloroform site.

I don't think that is a coincidence. Something is not right about that.

Then there was 83 to MySpace, and 82 to MySpace.

That is just too strange that you would have all these daily visits to MySpace always being in the low 80's.
Click to expand...

I agree, and that's huge. I can't count the number of times I've heard people say they're convinced she did it because "who searches chloroform 84 times?!?!"
 
Chilly Willy said:
Exactly, something is not right, especially when one report shows only one visit where the other shows 80+ visits. The DA misinterpreted the report, and now they're going to have to explain that to the jury.
Click to expand...

And it goes back to what I said in this thread last week. It is completely nonsensical for a person to visit the exact same chloroform recipe site 84 times. It's too many visits to make any real world sense.

I could even say the same about 84 MySpace visits. That's probably too many times for a person in one day. That's more than 10 visits per hour over 8 hours. Over an 8 hour period, you'd have to go to MySpace every 6 minutes. My goodness, if you are that addicted just leave the browser (or tab) open on MySpace all day long.
 
the chloroform site DID NOT auto-refresh per the site owner from here.

i have not heard anyone who believes based on 84 searches alone that this confirms she did it. of course, we are all entitled to our own opinions based on the information we have read. we do not have to remain impartial. we are not the jury. many of us feel very involved and believe that based on all the discovery we have read, 84 searches is a part of a puzzle that shows ICA's guilt. not everyone feels that way and many people here frequently try to point out that this is opinion/speculation only, even in siggies.
 
I don't understand how the computer forensic expert does not see there is something wrong with this picture. If we can see it, can't he see it, and expecially JA. He would be all over it if it was the other way around.
 
Hot Dogs said:
84 searches to MySpace.
84 searches to chloroform site.

I don't think that is a coincidence. Something is not right about that.

Then there was 83 to MySpace, and 82 to MySpace.

That is just too strange that you would have all these daily visits to MySpace always being in the low 80's.
Click to expand...
I agree.

As much as I want KC convicted, something is not right with the computer forensics, IMO.
 
ladylurker said:
the chloroform site DID NOT auto-refresh per the site owner from here.

i have not heard anyone who believes based on 84 searches alone that this confirms she did it. we are all entitled to our own opinions based on the information we have read.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I wasn't clear, I meant I've seen a lot of people write that they believe chloroform was used because of the "84 searches", while I completely agree that everyone is entitled to their opinions, I just know, that I personally, like knowing when my opinions are based on false information so that I can reevaluate.

I do know the site didn't auto refresh, but that's not what is being discussed here.

MOO
 
Turnadot said:
I agree.

As much as I want KC convicted, something is not right with the computer forensics, IMO.
Click to expand...

ITA I'd like her convicted too, but only based on facts.
 
The point for me is that I feel the computer forensics are worthless now. Not really because of Cindy's testimony, but as Hot Dog pointed out, it looks hinky.
 
GeekyGirl said:
Perhaps I wasn't clear, I meant I've seen a lot of people write that they believe chloroform was used because of the "84 searches", while I completely agree that everyone is entitled to their opinions, I just know, that I personally, like knowing when my opinions are based on false information so that I can reevaluate.

I do know the site didn't auto refresh, but that's not what is being discussed here.

MOO
Click to expand...

i didn't mean to misunderstand you, apologies for that.

the auto-refresh link was meant in reply to some other post that asked about the site refreshing itself. i really need to be better at quoting/using people's names!
 
ladylurker said:
i didn't mean to misunderstand you, apologies for that.

the auto-refresh link was meant in reply to some other post that asked about the site refreshing itself. i really need to be better at quoting/using people's names!
Click to expand...

No worries :)
 
Its called a Julian Date. All the number 84 means is someone visited MySpace on the 84th day of 2008, which happens to coincide to same date of search.
 
Velouria said:
Speaking for myself only, I'm troubled by the idea of a nurse who has to look up what chloroform is making health care decisions for unsuspecting patients.
Click to expand...

How about an experienced nurse that had two grown kids, who had to look up chloroform, acetone, and alcohol, to see if it's dangerous for kids!? :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 86 more.
Total: 2,811 (members: 87, guests: 2,724)

Online statistics

Members online
87
Guests online
2,724
Total visitors
2,811
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,779
Messages
17,992,343
Members
229,236
Latest member
Sweetkittykat
Back
Top