State v Bradley Cooper 3-17-2011

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hello Ms. Jilly - hope you are well :seeya:

Just have to open mouth on this as I don't find it all that unusual seeing as how it came from an officer who was not in charge of the case and was assigned specific duties that may be limited to certain things. Dismukes is not the lead on the case. We know he testified, it is unclear to me what others may have testified if any at this point. This was demonstrated earlier by Deputy Harper of WCSO - she collected and managed certain shoes associated with EMS personnel that had entered the area where Nancy was found. She recollected other shoes were collected by other officers but could not testify to anything else about them as she simply did not know - she took care of her assignment and stayed out of the others. Also with tweets and some articles, it is difficult to ascertain the extent of Dismukes' testimony, since we are getting one liners and a few paragraphs out of a day and a half of testimony. The jury heard it all, that's all that matters.

bbm

True!

Greetings RC - Iam well, thank you and hope you are too!:)

I understand what you are saying but Deputy Harper's opinion doesn't seem to be based on what I would call speculation as it seems to be from the policeman. I mean his conclusion about the license plate?:thud:

You have to be right about the tweets. Not so sure I'm liking the format with these reporters unlike other cases I've followed which are very detailed. I was starting to think that AL might be leaving out the nitty gritty so as to pad another book! j/k:crazy::D
 
True. If the cops saw the marks but didn't ask him for an examination, he might have been totally oblivious.

In one of the search warrants or legal docs there is a statement in the doc saying that Daniels noticed red marks and mentioned them to BC but that BC said nothing (i.e. had no response). That document is somewhere in our document stockpile up above in the sticky section.
 
I don't know if A.L. tweets directly (she was unaware when we spoke this morning that Twitter was down for much of yesterday). I think she said she sends updates to her colleagues at WRAL and they post the stuff. She was in the courtroom for most of the afternoon, but she wasn't there all the way through to the end. I mentioned when we spoke that the combo of no filming in the courtroom combined with Twitter being down yesterday caused lots of angst amongst us sleuthers.
 
Did you see the red marks the cops saw ?
Do you know if they were low or just below his hairline?
What was he wearing when they noticed them? A t-shirt or collared shirt?

Bottom line is the cops noticed red marks on the back of his neck and did not photograph them. Shame on them, cause Kurtz is now able to apply doubt with a blurry photo.

And neither have any of us on here...but it hasn't stopped people from using it to declare his guilt. Heck, very few (if any of us) have seen any of the evidence other than affidavits, but we take them as fact and declare his guilt. I mean, it's not like cops would lie in affidavits, right? It's not like they would swear one out to look at a phone that they already know had its data erased because they erased it. Right? This is why I have remained squarely on the fence from the beginning. BC probably murdered her. I can admit that with ease. The spouse is the usual person to do so. But all I've scene/heard so far in this trial is a bunch of "I think", "I feel", "I know it in my gut", Brad wasn't acting "Natural", his behavior was "Fake", etc. etc. etc.. Yet I keep hoping that the prosecution is going to bring out some real evidence that doesn't involve someone elses interpretation or feeling of what happened.

Yet some real evidence (and we've all seen the video) was brought out today showing Brad in HT. People talk about how Brad should have been acting with his wife missing....but tell me how someone that just killed his Wife and the mother of his kids should have been acting? Would they be calm and nonchalant? Yet he appears that way in the HT video. Not fidgeting, not rushed, not acting strange. Just like a guy going to the store to get some milk and then back to get some other items. So I'm to believe that Brad was not a good actor when searching for her or hearing her body was found....but was an unbelievable actor when going to the store to get some milk so he could cover the crime...and acting the same way after disposing of the body and coming back to HT for another alibi.

Man I hope this guy is guilty and I hope they can prove it. But all I've seen so far is a bunch of feelings.
 
I looked for an open Wifi signal (just for the heck of it) while I was in the courtroom. My iPod Touch saw 4 wifi signals but they were all locked. One was named "KB Backoffice" (obviously used by Kurtz et al).

How tempted was I to walk over and ask them for their wifi password so I could get online?

TEMPTED!
 
In one of the search warrants or legal docs there is a statement in the doc saying that Daniels noticed red marks and mentioned them to BC but that BC said nothing (i.e. had no response). That document is somewhere in our document stockpile up above in the sticky section.

I'm dumbfounded they didn't take pictures of them. Honestly dumbfounded.
 
In one of the search warrants or legal docs there is a statement in the doc saying that Daniels noticed red marks and mentioned them to BC but that BC said nothing (i.e. had no response). That document is somewhere in our document stockpile up above in the sticky section.

All I can say is Detective Daniels blew that big time.
If Cooper said nothing and he did not probe further, well.....
 
I'm dumbfounded they didn't take pictures of them. Honestly dumbfounded.

Yeah it's a big loss for the prosecution. There's nothing like a picture to help tell the story. I don't know if they needed his permission or a search warrant or what to get pics of his neck and bandaged finger... they noticed what they noticed on 7/12 but didn't photograph it.
 
Ok, then NCSU95, maybe the jury would stay awake better if you'd address those "feelings" the CPD is having.

You could dress in a mint green polyester leisure suit and white patent leather loafers, and of course a gold chain-to sing "FEELings" every time someone is basing something on feelings!

OK, come on out and cyberslap me now.:rocker:
 
Remember the photo of OJ's cut finger?
Very powerful (except for that stupid jury)
 
All I can say is Detective Daniels blew that big time.
If Cooper said nothing and he did not probe further, well.....

Also, not following up with potential eye witnesses for 2 months is ridiculous. What the heck did he expect to learn 2 months later? At that point, BC was the only suspect (he was the only suspect from the beginning). But I think you have a responsibility to follow up on these. It's only 16....not hundreds.

Add to that Bozeman holding regular press conferences and giving information she should not have given and it's easy to see that CPD was not well equipped to handle a murder investigation.
 
Remember the photo of OJ's cut finger?
Very powerful (except for that stupid jury)

The prosecution didn't help in that case either. But that was the biggest case of jury nullification in the history of juries in my opinion.
 
Yeah it's a big loss for the prosecution. There's nothing like a picture to help tell the story. I don't know if they needed his permission or a search warrant or what to get pics of his neck and bandaged finger... they noticed what they noticed on 7/12 but didn't photograph it.

If he refused to be examined or photographed, that in itself would be very telling.
Like Jason Young, all they needed was a non testimonial order and he would be compelled.
 
Oh, one small item I made note of: When they were showing pictures of the 2 cars side-by-side, in one photo you can see BC sitting on the curb outside, in the background. The defense points this out to Dismukes and has Dismukes confirm that BC is wearing short sleeved Tshirt, shorts, and sandals and does not appear to be trying to 'hide' or 'obscure' his neck. Dismukes conceded that was true but BC is shown from the side and the photo quality that distance is fuzzy so you can't tell if he had any marks on him.

Defense kept grilling Dismukes on why he didn't take pics of BC neck since he'd taken pictures at other crime scenes both with and without a subject's knowledge. Dismukes just says he didn't (take pics of BC that day). No real reason, just didn't do it. Daniels is the one who noticed marks on BC neck...Dismukes hadn't seen or noted them until it was mentioned to him by Daniels.

ETA: I have no idea what date the car pics were taken. If on 7/12/08 that means BC changed out of his jeans and long sleeve shirt and pullover and into shorts and a Tshirt. But I don't know if that's the day of the pics or not....it might not be.

bbm & ulbm

Unreal.
 
Ok, then NCSU95, maybe the jury would stay awake better if you'd address those "feelings" the CPD is having.

You could dress in a mint green polyester leisure suit and white patent leather loafers, and of course a gold chain-to sing "FEELings" every time someone is basing something on feelings!

OK, come on out and cyberslap me now.:rocker:


Like this:

[video=youtube;lf3BNRF9ICc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lf3BNRF9ICc[/video]

:great:

By the way, that is Otto coming out to tell the court gallery to be quiet.
 
bbm

True!

Greetings RC - Iam well, thank you and hope you are too!:)

I understand what you are saying but Deputy Harper's opinion doesn't seem to be based on what I would call speculation as it seems to be from the policeman. I mean his conclusion about the license plate?:thud:

You have to be right about the tweets. Not so sure I'm liking the format with these reporters unlike other cases I've followed which are very detailed. I was starting to think that AL might be leaving out the nitty gritty so as to pad another book! j/k:crazy::D


Jilly if you want to do an experiment with license plates, of course I have one. :D Dunno if you have ever looked behind your plates, but you might be surprised at what you find. And if you take one off and don't get it back just so, what you find behind it might just show up. One other point, with plates, unless your province or state requires a different plate every year, a fair amount of rust can accumulate on the bolts, and when you unscrew them, well, that rust breaks. There are ways to tell other than a screw gun laying in the laundry room and a loose tag...just saying.
 
Yeah it's not just the bandaged finger, but what was *under* that bandage and how bad was it? We'll never know.

They better have some (other) physical or strong circumstantial evidence tying BC to the murder or he's not going to get convicted.

They must. I mean, they've just GOT TO. I can't believe Willoughby would take this case if there wasn't something more compelling than what has been testified to so far.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed for sure.
 
Dismuskes did testify that he wasn't particularly LOOKING for scratches or even at BC's neck. He was investigating a missing person case at that point. I don't know if he noticed the bandaged finger on his own or not, but he did not notice BC's neck until Daniels mentioned it. Then he said he did see red marks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
165
Guests online
1,725
Total visitors
1,890

Forum statistics

Threads
589,948
Messages
17,928,063
Members
228,011
Latest member
legalpyro74
Back
Top