1240 users online (215 members and 1025 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 3 of 53 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 793
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    147
    Correct me if I am wrong

    Cisco already testified that when someone takes equipment out of the building there are no log sheets an employee has to fill out.
    I remember BZ questioning that. Someone could take and return gear and Cisco would never know. The witness said using gear was like an honor system. That is why many speculated that JW had stock piled his home lab with Cisco gear from his time working there. Now Cisco is saying they cannot find a specific router that matches a serial number.

    If they have no means to track the equipment, how do they really know it is missing?

    Could another employee have the missing router at home and not be using it?
    Did they send an email out to everyone asking if they had it and since no one responsed, then BC must have ditched it.

    It just strikes me odd that 2.5 yrs later, Cisco is now looking for the router and it took 2.5 yrs to see an entry on the windows event log ?

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,338
    Motion to suppress computer testimony
    Hoisted with his own Petard

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    N.C.
    Posts
    4,097
    Quote Originally Posted by cody100 View Post
    Morning Gracie, I know they have nothing in common at first glance. However, Nifong created tremendous credibility issues among the public. That distrust is still prevalent and can impact the State, especially if the defense can show some blatant discrepancies with the State's case and eye witness testimony. IMHO
    I'm over it, my friends are over it, my family is 'over it'. It may be prevalent with *some*, but in my crowd, 'it's over'. MOO

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by gracielee View Post



    Although you continue to try to link them together, IMO the two cases have NOTHING in common. MOO

    While you are correct in that they are not related, the Duke case did change my view of LE. Before that case, I really did not believe in LE or a DA framing an innocent person. I didn't believe in planted evidence.

    But then I saw it happen in the county adjacent to me. So I realized I had been naive.

    I am still extremely hesitant to believe in LE conspiracies. However, after the blackberry expert came on last week, I am convinced LE tampered with evidence in this case. JMO>

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,235
    Quote Originally Posted by RaleighNative View Post
    Of course if the majority of those 10 female jurors are stay-at-home moms, I'd think they'd be leaning towards a guilty verdict. Hmmm, it's all very interesting. I hadn't read too closely into the juror demographics until now, when things are wrapping up.
    I doubt any of these jurors are SAHM's. How would they be able to sit on jury service with kids at home? Maybe there could be a few previous SAHMs (kids are older and in school now), but I wouldn't think right now. I would not be able to serve on a jury right now because of that.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    7,230
    Quote Originally Posted by BrownRice View Post
    I doubt any of these jurors are SAHM's. How would they be able to sit on jury service with kids at home? Maybe there could be a few previous SAHMs (kids are older and in school now), but I wouldn't think right now. I would not be able to serve on a jury right now because of that.
    HP seems to do it every day. Granted she can probably afford full time daycare.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,291
    These delays are what annoys the jurors. Kurtz could have made this argument Friday after the witness testified outside of the jury.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,234
    Quote Originally Posted by SleuthinNC View Post
    Motion to suppress computer testimony
    I'm sure the jury is unhappy to once again sit for an hour or two in the morning awaiting testimony...and they know who's 'turn' it is, the defense rested Friday.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    362
    Quote Originally Posted by garner_nc View Post
    Correct me if I am wrong

    Cisco already testified that when someone takes equipment out of the building there are no log sheets an employee has to fill out.
    I remember BZ questioning that. Someone could take and return gear and Cisco would never know. The witness said using gear was like an honor system. That is why many speculated that JW had stock piled his home lab with Cisco gear from his time working there. Now Cisco is saying they cannot find a specific router that matches a serial number.

    If they have no means to track the equipment, how do they really know it is missing?

    Could another employee have the missing router at home and not be using it?
    Did they send an email out to everyone asking if they had it and since no one responsed, then BC must have ditched it.

    It just strikes me odd that 2.5 yrs later, Cisco is now looking for the router and it took 2.5 yrs to see an entry on the windows event log ?
    From court on Friday:
    Witness to say router was in a locked storage room in Jan 08. BC requested a key to storage room in Jan 08 and discussed with witness bringing router home in Jan 08. Inventory done in Sept 08 did not show the router at Cisco.

    In any event, windows system event log showed a router locally connected to the laptop at 10:21 7/11. That it's the same router that BC brought home in Jan 08 is just gravy.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,436
    Quote Originally Posted by Palomine View Post
    These delays are what annoys the jurors. Kurtz could have made this argument Friday after the witness testified outside of the jury.
    It was information he received over the weekend.


  11. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    N.C.
    Posts
    4,097
    Another note from a juror. I don't know why we can't *hear* it, it will be reported later in the paper.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Palomine View Post
    These delays are what annoys the jurors. Kurtz could have made this argument Friday after the witness testified outside of the jury.
    His motion has to do (I believe) with the mismatch of serial numbers in the documentation received over the weekend from the pros.

    The fact that the pros is providing all of this at the last minute is not the defense's fault - and I do not think they should deal less throroughly with it (in the interests of time) than anything else. I'm sure any defense attorney or their client would agree.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,248
    Live testimony from GM from Cisco
    "The dead cannot cry out for justice; it is a duty of the living to do so for them."
    ★★★★★ ღ♥Lois McMaster Bujold♥ღ ★★★★★

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    NC Coast
    Posts
    1,353
    Quote Originally Posted by gracielee View Post
    Another note from a juror. I don't know why we can't *hear* it, it will be reported later in the paper.
    Umm...that does not sit well with me. That note brings on the perspective they are reading the papers IMHO.

    I am off to work, Hope everyone listening will report back during the day!

    Kelly

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    43
    Feed is live again.

Page 3 of 53 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. State v Bradley Cooper 04-18-2011
    By borndem in forum Nancy Cooper
    Replies: 740
    Last Post: 04-19-2011, 12:21 PM
  2. State v. Bradley Cooper 4-7-2011
    By hotpinkstef in forum Nancy Cooper
    Replies: 733
    Last Post: 04-08-2011, 02:58 PM
  3. State v Bradley Cooper 3-21-2011
    By Cheyenne130 in forum Nancy Cooper
    Replies: 523
    Last Post: 03-22-2011, 09:38 AM
  4. State v Bradley Cooper 3-17-2011
    By CyberPro in forum Nancy Cooper
    Replies: 498
    Last Post: 03-18-2011, 11:52 AM
  5. State v Bradley Cooper 3.11.2011
    By RaleighNC in forum Nancy Cooper
    Replies: 186
    Last Post: 03-14-2011, 08:29 PM

Tags for this Thread