State v Bradley Cooper 4-13-11

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok. Do we know the ages of jurors and their professions. I know there are only two men.
 
...Also Brad accessed the bank account that had no online access for 2 years...maybe to make it look like Nancy accessed it!!

I think you're reading too much into his access of that bank account.

We know from several pieces of testimony that he was putting together a list of all of their assets, which is not unusual for someone who is heading towards a divorce. So he could have simply been checking the latest balance in the account as part of totaling all of their assets.
 
I bought my friend an ipad 2 it gets delivered today

Well HELLO FRIEND!!! :great: :seeya:

Do you need me to PM you my address so you can be sure to get my iPad 2 delivered correctly??

:woohoo: :tyou:
 
I don't believe it was about money. It was about control and abandonment. She was really going to leave. And it was going to 'cost' him - he didn't like it - but not that it was really a money thing. I see very little evidence that HE loved money all that much. His car was older / less expensive, his yard and home did not reflect the illusion of wealth, he personally had few trappings of wealth.

He couldn't control her. He's lose control of his financial destiny, not necessarily the money itself. And it's not that he wanted her to stay, either - just control and if she left - it should be on HIS TERMS.

He determined it was either her or him that had to die. Ultimately, his self love and arrogance told him he was more worthy to live and she needed to go. (And he figured with his superior intellect, he'd get away with it)
 
IIRC..All these items were obtained from Nancy's computer yesterday , Yes? No? I seem to recall from another witness (notblacked out) that Brad's Blackjack Phone had been either wiped, or been reset to indicate was it 31 hours, or 31 days...Of course he did have that phone until Oct.-8 and Nancy's computer was handed over on the 15/16th....Her phone seemed to have been worked on first. IF Brad could sign on her acct. on her computer, surely he could have signed on her phone too??..Then locked it pasword protected...Voila.Det. McDreamy ended up deleting data :banghead:

I agree, I tend to think Brad's plan backfired..He was not prepared for such a quick alert of her being missing...He had to go into high gear to unload more stuff. BTW..Did I hear from that security guy that Brad went to office on that Sat. July 12th?..IF so, what did he return to his office? and What time of day was that?..

Never mind, I have so many things rolling around in my head..Some things are clear as day, and others are abut murky..


IIRC, he went to his office at Cisco on July 17th. That was also the day his badge was deactivated.
 
I seem to recall from another witness (notblacked out) that Brad's Blackjack Phone had been either wiped, or been reset to indicate was it 31 hours, or 31 days...

I edited your post to just this one point I want to comment on. I can't find it on my current phone, but my old phone, which I can't recall was, started with an "M," listed the total minutes/hours of usage of the phone from the time it was put into service. I was wondering if that was what they were discussing. If it was a work cell phone, he may have mainly used it for work. I am not sure how long he had the phone from the time he initially got it. I really was confused by the tweets on that issue.
 
Ok. Do we know the ages of jurors and their professions. I know there are only two men.

I do not know anything about them, have been trying to find out. Knowing the make up of the jury--ages, socio-economic background (the apparent looks of either dirt poor or getting by nicely), education, etc. would perhaps help me get a glimpse into their minds.
 
IIRC, he went to his office at Cisco on July 17th. That was also the day his badge was deactivated.

I remember that date as well, regarding 17th, but his badge was deactivated because Cicsco had been served some sort of S/W and Brad's Office was suppose to be secured..BUT, somewhere in the recesses of my muddled brain, I recall the 12th date too..Also recall questions about what he wore, and what type of bag he had, what was usual atire for him and others, whether Backpacks, or duffle bags were normal??..That line of questionings..
Maybe he did pop by, short visit..and being a Saturday, only ones that knew he had been there was that security had records of badge usage?..Maybe I am barking up the wrong tree??..Maybe I will try and go back and find that testimony...Anyone remember the date of Security from Cisco testimony?
 
I don't believe it was about money. It was about control and abandonment. She was really going to leave. And it was going to 'cost' him - he didn't like it - but not that it was really a money thing. I see very little evidence that HE loved money all that much. His car was older / less expensive, his yard and home did not reflect the illusion of wealth, he personally had few trappings of wealth.

He couldn't control her. He's lose control of his financial destiny, not necessarily the money itself. And it's not that he wanted her to stay, either - just control and if she left - it should be on HIS TERMS.

He determined it was either her or him that had to die. Ultimately, his self love and arrogance told him he was more worthy to live and she needed to go. (And he figured with his superior intellect, he'd get away with it)

I can buy that, but it contradicts the fact that he was very willing to let her go for a period of time. I don't think he cared if she left, just don't leave and make him barely scrape by for a living.

Another thing that gets forgotten is I haven't heard if NC tried to make revisions (what were they) to the sep. agreement and if he just rejected all of them.
 
LIKE BEING on Trial for murder isn't Negative!!!
wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Defense attorney Howard Kurtz: "This is simply a way of making Brad appear in the most negative light possible." #coopertrial
12 Apr
WRAL NEWS in NC
wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Defense attorney Howard Kurtz objects & says: "Suicide has no relevance in a homicide case." #coopertrial
 
I think those arguments at the preschool were beginning to show the 'other side of Brad'. He could get very angry, very quickly. And his previous girlfriend show's he had an extremely huge vindictive side to him also. MOO
 
LIKE BEING on Trial for murder isn't Negative!!!
wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Defense attorney Howard Kurtz: "This is simply a way of making Brad appear in the most negative light possible." #coopertrial
12 Apr
WRAL NEWS in NC
wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Defense attorney Howard Kurtz objects & says: "Suicide has no relevance in a homicide case." #coopertrial

I would like to see/hear the pros. revisit that judges ruling. Taking into account what Garry Rentz stated, 'brad dreaming about seeing three bodies..." along with the suicide site, I think that should be allowed for the jury to consider. MOO
 
I think those arguments at the preschool were beginning to show the 'other side of Brad'. He could get very angry, very quickly. And his previous girlfriend show's he had an extremely huge vindictive side to him also. MOO

This again is contradictory though. You have that argument at the preschool, but then on July 11th she rips into him and yet he didn't yell at her.

I agree that he could get angry, but maybe when with only certain subjects (such as the kids).
 
I would like to see/hear the pros. revisit that judges ruling. Taking into account what Garry Rentz stated, 'brad dreaming about seeing three bodies..." along with the suicide site, I think that should be allowed for the jury to consider. MOO

It's not going to happen. This was discussed when it came up (I was surprised it was sustained) but if you look at it a certain way, it is prejudicial. The site was about suicide, and the judge didn't want the jury to assume just because he was looking up suicide that should translate into him looking at ways to kill her.
 
I can buy that, but it contradicts the fact that he was very willing to let her go for a period of time. I don't think he cared if she left, just don't leave and make him barely scrape by for a living.

Another thing that gets forgotten is I haven't heard if NC tried to make revisions (what were they) to the sep. agreement and if he just rejected all of them.

I dont believe there was any revisions, as Brad's lawyers never were on board> since Brad's check bounced..Brad never did come to the table on that..and dont believe he ever did have any legal council in regards to separation, divorce or custody of kids until after he was charged for murder.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but that is how it seems to have gone down from the testimony I have heard and some of the reports Web Sleuthers posted here :waitasec:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
186
Guests online
2,192
Total visitors
2,378

Forum statistics

Threads
589,954
Messages
17,928,223
Members
228,016
Latest member
ignoreme123
Back
Top