BC is guilty and the State proved their case
BC is guilty but the State did NOT prove their case
BC is innocent but the State will prevail
BC is innocent and the State did not prove otherwise.
This thread will be open after closing arguments. Posting early so peeps can think about their answer before voting and commenting.
This is not a debate thread but a vote and leave a comment thread.
If there are other options you would like to see, please let us know before the thread is opened.
Last edited by JBean; 05-03-2011 at 09:50 AM.
I voted guilty but not proven.
I think he is guilty and the state proved it, despite themselves.
Guilty - they provided proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
It's my own two cents. You don't have to read or like it.
The State did not prove their case beyong a reasonable doubt. Still wonder about a hung jury though.
I voted guilty but not proven but I think he will be found guilty.
Google search has no innocent explanation and was not planted or tampered with.
The state proved to me, CPD, nor anyone else tampered with the computer.
Probably guilty, but if I was a member of the jury, it would easily be NG. LE and the prosecution butchered what could have been an open-and-shut case.
The State did prove their case.
JUSTICE for Nancy
Guilty of 1st degree murder
"The dead cannot cry out for justice; it is a duty of the living to do so for them."
★★★★★ ღ♥Lois McMaster Bujold♥ღ ★★★★★
I came into this trial believing BC guilty. But, as the trial progressed, I wasn't sure the State had given enough circumstantial evidence. I really was undecided until today.
I wasn't sure I could say this at the end, I do feel the State proved their case. Whether he'll be found guilty, it's anyone's guess.
I have seen a LOT of criticism of the pros, but I thought they did just fine. Sometimes the pros spoke painfully slow, but I guess that's just how he is. It's what's in the words that count. I also believe his closing presentation was factual and powerful. Just because some people would have said MORE or whatever, didn't mean his was wrong. Just not the same approach.
I voted guilty, and I think the jury will have a verdict sometime tomorrow. I would think the map search of Fielding Drive would be a hard thing for any jury to overlook.
**May God Watch Over All Missing and Abused Children**
I came into this trial without an opinion as to his innocence or guilt. Walking out of it with 99.9% certainty of his innocence. All of the physical evidence demonstrated that he was innocent. Add to that Occam's Razor, and there is no way this should have ever gone to trial.
I live nearby and came here believing BC was guilty based on news reports. I still believe he is 'probably' guilty but do not believe the state has proven their case.
That said, we saw a different trial than the jury did in this case so I'm not sure where they jury will land. I'm guessing they'll hang.
If BC is found guilty I believe he stands a pretty good chance of winning a new trial.
Without looking at any more detail, I voted guilty but did not prove. I would of felt better about the states case if they were better at closing to tie everything together. I don't think they did.
They proved his guilt, by the skin of their teeth.
Before the trial, I had no opinion G or NG in this case beyond knowing that the husband or BF is the murderer more often than any other single category (e.g. friend, stranger, other family members), but far less often than all other categories.
Since I am still on the fence, my vote was Not Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and therefore still Presumed Innocent. Somewhat frustrated that the poll did not allow for this option.
This case, by itself, raises many issues that regularly threaten our legal and Constitution rights. At its core is the right to a fair trial, defendants rights including Brady, concept of real evidence in a virtual world, and how woefully equipped are our public institutions, our judges, attorneys, our law enforcement, members of the press, elected officials, and ordinary citizens.
Consider how difficult it already is to evaluate electronic evidence in forensic investigations -- whether provable beyond a reasonable doubt or not. Step back from the Cooper trial, look at the problems from a wider view, and use your common sense. Can you tell the difference between a valid piece of electronic evidence from one that is faked, modified, planted, doctored, or otherwise not what it claims to be? Could a jury if you were on trial?
One can suddenly face huge problems with little more than a Shockwave Flash (SWF) delivered to your browser via an email, an ad hosted by a compromised site, or with the SWF attack code embedded in a PDF file embeded in an Excel workbook embedded in a Word document. And on and on.
For this example, suppose you are browsing your favorite real crime site, searching other sites to look at related topics, and one of these sites displays images hosted by a hacked site. That SWF is really a program that executes unseen within your browser session, able to "browse" the web exactly as if done by you but without displaying anything.
Suppose this program downloaded kiddie porn, maybe found and used your credit card info to sign you up for special services, and even used the laptop camera to take the picture of you in your underwear propped up in bed. (Don't worry, your security settings will be set back just like they were.)
If we were a juror, would we have any doubt of the defendant's guilt?
If we were the defendant, could any of us prove that we were innocent?
I think they proved their case completely.The google map isn't the only thing that shows Brad did it to me.
It appears this case will be a close call. Interesting.
I voted guilty, but the state did not prove their case. 60% of me thinks he's guilty largely because of the statistical evidence detailed by unc70,and the lack of viable alternatives, but I would need to be far more certain than 60% to return a guilty verdict. The state didn't prove their case, in small part because of their own ineptitude (inexplicably not securing the PCs, cellphones, etc..as evidence), but mostly because the physical evidence was just not there, something for which no one is really to blame.
I need more concrete evidence before I would vote to send a person to prison for the rest of his life; or even 25 to 30 years! I concede that he 'likely' did it, but the State failed miserably in proving he did it.
Guilty and Proven beyond a reasonable doubt!
Google search doesn't matter whether real or planted because he did not spoof the phone call and NC went running that morning.
Hoisted with his own Petard
Not Guilty. The instructions to the jury stated that, for a Guilty vote, one needed to be "entirely convinced" that the defendant did the crime. I am not. And since our system presumes innocence until proven guilty, I voted BC is innocent.
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw