Opening Statements

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just the Fax said:
Maybe? Like I said, i'm sure we will find out many details about all 3 phones.
Like SG said, making such an effort to track down the phone before a quick trip to pick up milk seems very suspect. I think we will find out that was a 'test' from the VOIP to the cell before his trip to the store.
Click to expand...

I'm eager to hear testimony about the home phone (VOIP or landline).
 
Cheyenne130 said:
The store must be pretty close to their house. He walked out of HT at 6:25 a.m. with the milk and walked back in at 6:42 to get the detergent and juice.
Click to expand...

It's as little as 2 mi or as much as 2.4 mi, depending on which route taken.
 
SleuthyGal said:
It's as little as 2 mi or as much as 2.4 mi, depending on which route taken.
Click to expand...

So it's close enough that even without any equipment or VoIP, he could have put the home phone on speaker, hit redial and run out to the car and begin the drive to HT and answer the phone "away" from the house.
 
I doubt that's how he would have attempted it. He was 45 seconds from HT (according to defense opening). So he was likely right near or at the entrance to HT. It would take him 5 min to get from his house to HT. In the time it would take for him to hit redial on the home phone, get to the car, drive to within 45 seconds of HT, his cell phone VM would have picked up the call if he didn't answer it.
 
It will be very interesting when they get to the phone testimony. Well, it will be boring too because they put in WAY more stuff than we really need to hear but the actual evidence part will be interesting!
 
I did a quick Google search on Cisco VOIP controlling a phone. There are soft clients out there that allow a person who has access to a web connection to institute a call, making it come from one phone to another phone.

http://www.voipintegration.com/Software-Phone-Remote.aspx

This particular method requires a Cisco phone, so I'm not saying this system was used by BC, but depending on the equipment he had, the system he had, the phones he had, it could be possible to initiate a call from his cell phone and make it look like it's coming from the landline at home.

ETA: The defense keeps mentioning 'Vtech' for the home phone. Vtech is not a phone software system...they are manufacturers of corded and cordless phones.
 
SleuthyGal said:
I did a quick Google search on Cisco VOIP controlling a phone. There are soft clients out there that allow a person who has access to a web connection to institute a call, making it come from one phone to another phone.

http://www.voipintegration.com/Software-Phone-Remote.aspx

This particular method requires a Cisco phone, so I'm not saying this system was used by BC, but depending on the equipment he had, the system he had, the phones he had, it could be possible to initiate a call from his cell phone and make it look like it's coming from the landline at home.

ETA: The defense keeps mentioning 'Vtech' for the home phone. Vtech is not a phone software system...they are manufacturers of corded and cordless phones.
Click to expand...

Yes, and this is what the cops believe he did (per SW).
Brad said he installed a commercial grade Cisco VOIP phone system in the home because he was testing it for work. He admitted in the deposition it was possible to place a call remotely. Nancy wanted the VOIP taken out because he was intercepting her calls with the software. He then bought a simple VTECH cordless home phone. All he had to do that Saturday am was simply plug the Cisco VOIP hardware back into the internet router and boom, that system is back up and running.
 
Just the Fax said:
Yes, and this is what the cops believe he did (per SW).
Brad said he installed a commercial grade Cisco VOIP phone system in the home because he was testing it for work. He admitted in the deposition it was possible to place a call remotely. Nancy wanted the VOIP taken out because he was intercepting her calls with the software. He then bought a simple VTECH cordless home phone. All he had to do that Saturday am was simply plug the Cisco VOIP hardware back into the internet router and boom, that system is back up and running.
Click to expand...

Would that register the same home phone number? I thought usually you had to have your landline number ported over to the VOIP system.
 
carolinalady said:
Would that register the same home phone number? I thought usually you had to have your landline number ported over to the VOIP system.
Click to expand...

I could appear as the home phone, and may have, in fact come from the home phone. You could program the VOIP to call the home phone, then had call forwarding send it to the cell number. Maybe not, but it is possible.

I would also doubt that he called the phone before leaving. The cell system would be able to track the location of the phone. Now, I have been talking to my wife on the cell when I was pulling in to the driveway, and she has called me shortly after leaving while I was still in sight of my house, but not answering the call until you got close to HT would not look right if the phone was ringing as you were leaving.
 
CyberPro said:
I could appear as the home phone, and may have, in fact come from the home phone. You could program the VOIP to call the home phone, then had call forwarding send it to the cell number. Maybe not, but it is possible.

I would also doubt that he called the phone before leaving. The cell system would be able to track the location of the phone. Now, I have been talking to my wife on the cell when I was pulling in to the driveway, and she has called me shortly after leaving while I was still in sight of my house, but not answering the call until you got close to HT would not look right if the phone was ringing as you were leaving.
Click to expand...

Back in 2008, we tracked the AT&T towers to check the triangulation of the cell coverage, and thus tracking capability. The HT , the vacant lot where body was dumped and the home were close enough that he was on the same tower the whole time. I bet he was smart enough to disable the GPS tracking that AM and thus the tracking would be within a large 3-4 mile area, not right to his home.
 
Here's part of Mr. Kurtz's opening statement I'm having trouble with. Almost at the very end he talks quickly about a tarp. IIRC he says BC bought it at Nancy's request the day before she went missing. He said Nancy called him and requested he pickup a tarp for the painting she was doing at Jessica's, and that we will see video of him buying the tarp and a photo of the unopened tarp.

SERIOUSLY?! BC went out of his way to pick up a tarp for work Nancy was doing at Jessica's?!

I recall during the custody depos he said he left work and the only place he stopped was Lowe's Food for beer and then went straight to the Duncan's.

Interesting, no?
 
SERIOUSLY?! BC went out of his way to pick up a tarp for work Nancy was doing at Jessica's?!
Click to expand...

I know. He buys a tarp for a job in which Jessica already had all the supplies purchased.

A tarp for a job in which he was angry that Nancy was doing in the first place.

A tarp when he had instead informed Nancy that he wouldn't be giving her the weekly allowance because she was already earning some money at Jessica's.

And a tarp at Nancy's request *instead* of giving Nancy the only thing she wanted or needed from him -- her $300 allowance.

Yeah right.
 
Found ANOTHER inconsistency regarding the tarp!

In listening to (Part 2) of Kurtz' opening, he claims no one knew Nancy had plans to paint at Jessica's, because Nancy had planned to take a run and then watch the girls while Brad played tennis with Mike Hiller @ 9:30am, so Nancy going over to JA's house wouldn't have made any sense. Plus he says JA didn't have the painting plans in her calender. So Kurtz is trying to claim that JA made this up in some way since other people thought Nancy would be running/exercising then watching the kids.

Hokay....

Then why again was Brad buying a TARP the night before? Supposedly he doesn't know about these painting plans. Kurtz claims the tarp is for Nancy to use when painting (at JA's house). Nancy wasn't painting at her own house. She didn't need a tarp. All supplies had already been purchased by JA.

Well you can't have it both ways...

Did Brad buy the tarp for Nancy or not? (NOT).

Did Brad know Nancy had plans to paint at JA's house? (I suspect he did not).

Was Brad okay with Nancy painting over at JA's house the few days before to earn some money? (He was NOT! In fact he refused to give her the weekly allowance because she already had earned some money).

Then why again would Brad purchase a tarp for Nancy for a painting job he didn't KNOW about and wouldn't approve of if he had known? (ummm....)

LIES LIES LIES by the defense.
 
You are absolutely correct. Inconsistencies seem to be giving credence to a lot of the circumstantial evidence in this case.
 
Oh, those details given by the defense -- the more they give, the more they will have to explain... And the devil is in 'em, folks. Sometimes simple is good -- like the opening statement.

(And they say they've subpoenaed D.D. for the defense...which she said she hasn't received yet...)

I know it's too early to bet, but what are the odds of Brad taking the stand??
 
I have been wondering that myself. That should make for some interesting fodder. I would say 100-to-1 No Brad Testimony
 
Yes, it's in the details!

And think about this: WHY does the defense bring up certain things? Because they know there will be issues with some of the evidence and they are trying to explain it away with a story before it comes out.

- The tarp purchased the day before the murder

- The phone call to 'find' the cell phone before leaving for HT at 6:15am

- The phone call from the house to Brad's cell phone telling him to pick up green juice.

- All the pictures of detectives not wearing booties in the house (this is because they likely found some debri or straw or hay or something that can be traced to the dump site and they're going to assert that it was carried into the house on the feet of one of the detectives).

- The cleaning of the cars and the "gasoline spill" in the trunk.

- The 'stain' on a dress that no one else saw, and the fact that Brad washed his wife's dress!

- Usage of Brad's computers (allegedly when Brad was gone from the house during the search warrant execution). I bet there are searches that will show he was looking for a place to dump her body!

- Trying to pin this whole fiasco on J.A. by claiming she accused Brad of murder within the first 30 seconds of the call to the non-emergency police number (this is a complete lie, btw).

The list goes on and on and on.
 
I was actually just thinking of asking you to create a thread with a list just like this! It would be great to have it all on one place!
 
SleuthyGal said:
Yes, it's in the details!

And think about this: WHY does the defense bring up certain things? Because they know there will be issues with some of the evidence and they are trying to explain it away with a story before it comes out.

- The tarp purchased the day before the murder - Brad is being a nice guy -- otherwise I have no ideas here other than a body wrap, as has been mentioned...
- The phone call to 'find' the cell phone before leaving for HT at 6:15am - Brad is just that obsessive -- he wants the phone just in case an emergency occurs & NC needs him and he's such a caring parent/partner...

- The phone call from the house to Brad's cell phone telling him to pick up green juice. Well, sure. NC knows she can count on him since he's such a good guy

- All the pictures of detectives not wearing booties in the house (this is because they likely found some debri or straw or hay or something that can be traced to the dump site and they're going to assert that it was carried into the house on the feet of one of the detectives). Now this is a problem for CPD -- was it the same detectives at both sites? They're not gonna clean off their shoes before they get into their police vehicles??

- The cleaning of the cars and the "gasoline spill" in the trunk. A toughie for Brad -- unless he is innocent & being a good husband -- this wouldn't look good, IMO, for the neighbors to see, however...

- The 'stain' on a dress that no one else saw, and the fact that Brad washed his wife's dress! Another toughie here. She wouldn't wash his clothes, but obviously, he's the better person. Or was it blood? I do think there may have been some from scratches or the corner of a counter, etc.
- Usage of Brad's computers (allegedly when Brad was gone from the house during the search warrant execution). I bet there are searches that will show he was looking for a place to dump her body! Ooh, nasty thought, SG -- creepy. Or he may have been looking for places to search -- to find her body, not dump it... or not
- Trying to pin this whole fiasco on J.A. by claiming she accused Brad of murder within the first 30 seconds of the call to the non-emergency police number (this is a complete lie, btw). This may be quite a sticky wicket for the defense -- be careful of the web you weave when first ... and all that...

The list goes on and on and on.
Click to expand...

Really, now, SG, you're just not interested in giving him the benefit of the doubt, now are you??!! So unfair... Part of some of these problems is that I think BC is a narcissist and a sociopath (MHO only) and he thinks he is so much smarter than everyone else, and he has no insight for the consequences of some of his decisions/actions....

But I'm still struggling with the 2 items that separate 1st Degree from 2nd Degree: Premeditation and Deliberation (cool-headedness) -- but when you think about strangulation taking much longer than firing a gun (less than a second for "bang, bang," and minutes for strangling until death -- several minutes and you can stop, well it just might be there, after all.) Thoughts?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 98 more.
Total: 4,044 (members: 99, guests: 3,945)

Online statistics

Members online
99
Guests online
3,945
Total visitors
4,044
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,673
Messages
17,957,324
Members
228,584
Latest member
Vjeanine
Back
Top