State v. Bradley Cooper 4-29-2011

Status
Not open for further replies.

gritguy

Verified Expert
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
1,068
Reaction score
82
Let's see if I can start a thread.

Here are some NC Pattern Jury Instructions I have quoted before and that relate to how the judge will probably charge the jury when he instructs them, in regard to evidence, the burden of proof, and weighing it all to decide a verdict.

“There are two types of evidence from which you may find the truth as to the facts of a case -- direct and circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence is the testimony of one who asserts actual knowledge of a fact, such as an eye-witness; circumstantial evidence is proof of a chain or group of facts and circumstances indicating the guilt or innocence of a defendant. The law makes no distinction between the weight to be given to either direct or circumstantial evidence. Nor is a greater degree of certainty required of circumstantial evidence than of direct evidence. You should weigh all the evidence in the case. After weighing all the evidence, if you are not convinced of the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find the defendant not guilty.”

“You should consider all the evidence, arguments, contentions and positions urged by the attorney(s) and any other contention that arises from the evidence; and using your common sense you must determine the truth in this case.”

“Reasonable doubt is a doubt based on reason and common sense, arising out of some or all of the evidence that has been presented, or lack or insufficiency of the evidence, as the case may be. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that fully satisfies or entirely convinces you of the defendant's guilt.”

“You are the sole judges of the weight to be given any evidence. By this I mean, if you decide that certain evidence is believable you must then determine the importance of that evidence in light of all other believable evidence in the case.”
 
Question for Gritguy?

Do you think the judge will address the note from the jury yesterday, and how do you think he will handle it? I believe he's getting a tad annoyed. :)
 
Question for Gritguy?

Do you think the judge will address the note from the jury yesterday, and how do you think he will handle it? I believe he's getting a tad annoyed. :)

Just for clarification if anyone hasn't seen it yet, here is the note sent by the jury to the judge yesterday:

"Please encourage the attorneys to use time more wisely.Shortened days prolong this process. We are hoping to finish this soon! Please ask them to have their witnesses ready to go. We want our lives back."
 
Just for clarification if anyone hasn't seen it yet, here is the note sent by the jury to the judge yesterday:

"Please encourage the attorneys to use time more wisely.Shortened days prolong this process. We are hoping to finish this soon! Please ask them to have their witnesses ready to go. We want our lives back."
It's my personal opinion the jury have themselves contributed to how long this trial is taking. Judge Gessner has been very generous in allowing time off THEY have requested.


<edited for grammar>
 
Mornin' all! Unfortunately, today turned out to be too busy for me to head down to the courthouse.

Do we think we can lay to rest the Harris Teeter necklace video debate today? I don't think that line of debate/discussion has been useful.

We may as well be talking about Obama's birth certificate. Sometimes people believe what they believe. :)
 
Question for Gritguy?

Do you think the judge will address the note from the jury yesterday, and how do you think he will handle it? I believe he's getting a tad annoyed. :)

He sort of already did when he read it. He asked the lawyers to get together to kind of be more efficient. I think he also said he wasn't going to address the note in front of the jury and open court.
 
Question for Gritguy?

Do you think the judge will address the note from the jury yesterday, and how do you think he will handle it? I believe he's getting a tad annoyed. :)

I'd be surprised if he didn't speak to them about it. But I would be surprised if he acted annoyed, even if he was.

I would think he'd tell them that while there have been times the lawyers might have gone more speedily there are also things in the process that slow things down that the jurors don't see that are not the fault of the lawyers. I would tell them their attention and sacrifice is greatly appreciated and that they have come a long way and the case is not so far from being in their hands. I would ask them for the sake of justice and everyone involved not to let their frustration with the length of the trial impact their consideration of the evidence one way or the other, or perception of either side, on way or the other. That's what I'd say, at least.
 
Question for Gritguy?

Do you think the judge will address the note from the jury yesterday, and how do you think he will handle it? I believe he's getting a tad annoyed. :)

Hiya, Glee - I'm not G-guy, but I'll throw in my :twocents: .

I think JG understands that they want their lives back and that they are getting weary -- but, as he tactfully said out of their presence, he has tried to accommodate them as best he could while trying not to drag this thing out any longer than necessary. OTOH, I feel sure he doesn't want them to "rush to judgment" on the verdict, if that is even remotely possible in this case!!.

I think he'll just leave it alone without a response -- that's what I would do [since I know so very much (!!!) about jurisprudence]. He doesn't want to admonish them to be more patient, but he doesn't want to go overboard in dragging this thing out or in shortening any procedures which could harm one or both sides of this case.
 
Is this morning the defense evidence buffet table? Well it may just be passing of the plate.
 
I found that note quite nervy, myself...LOL. <exclamation point>
 
I found that note quite nervy, myself...LOL.

This is the third 'complaint' that I have heard from this jury so far.

1. Too much talking in the courtroom
2. Too much staring at the jury
3. Wanting the trial to move a little faster, tired of being there
 
Question for Gritguy?

Do you think the judge will address the note from the jury yesterday, and how do you think he will handle it? I believe he's getting a tad annoyed. :)

Well, I'm starting out fresh & smart this morning. I responded to your question above but stuck our pal gracielee in my greeting. Please excuse. I obviously need at least one more :cup: . Forgive my fogginess, snowshuze and gracielee!!
 
Hi, I'm a long time lurker and first time poster. I've watched this case from the beginning, and started reading this forum about 1/3 of the way through the trial. During that time, it's been interesting to observe the passions and convictions of various members.

Before the trial, I really had no clue if he had done it or not. The affidavits were compelling on both sides. And if you remove the murder, the rest seemed like a typical suburban family that was breaking up. As around 50% of marriages end in divorce, this isn't all that unusual. During most divorces, there is a breakup of friends, and the he-said/she-said creates enemies among friends. Add to that the differences in personalities between NC and BC, and it is reasonably obvious that a lot of ill-will was going around.

At this point, I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that BC is innocent. Not "Not Guilty" as in the state hasn't proven their case, but actually Innocent. Two things bring me to this conclusion. First, all of the evidence presented to suggest his guilt is either heresay, random, or has been refuted. Second, and the most important, the state proved he was innocent with the physical evidence: contents of the stomach, alcohol, and caffeine. These three pieces of physical evidence together clearly demonstrate that NC slept that night, and had caffeine in the morning, which was typical before a run. IMO, based only on the hard evidence presented by the state and the corroboration from other witnesses, NC went running that morning and was killed during her run. I cannot see how any reasonable person can refute this. This alone makes BC innocent of the charges, and a victim of a malicious campaign that caused him to lose his children, his livelihood, his possessions, and his freedom.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
141
Guests online
906
Total visitors
1,047

Forum statistics

Threads
589,931
Messages
17,927,829
Members
228,004
Latest member
CarpSleuth
Back
Top