Letter from Jury Foreman

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
ncsu95 said:
I would have expected this site to have a much higher percentage than 57%. This is very different from most forums. The people that participate on here generally follow lots of trials and are overwhelmingly on here in support of the victims. Not saying that is wrong, but is what it is. The fact that only 57% voted guilty on here says a whole lot.
Click to expand...

BBM

nscu95. We would not be wrong to state 57% does not include the total universe of W/S posters. If every member posted, the % would be higher. We may all assume that safely enough. Fact is, they didn't all vote - so it actually says nothing to me; it's a "spoiled" sample.

But, to usurp your own words ... we all know that ... 100% of the jury voted that Bradley Cooper is guilty - basis exacting evidence and testimony - and that, IMHO says a whole lot more.
 
I have to agree with NCSU that I would have expected a larger percentage of WS posters to have voted guilty, and calling this a "spoiled" sample by anyone is like calling an election with few voters a spoiled election. It only becomes useful to say that if you feel defensive over the outcome in WS or you want to continue to debate. Personally all of us know that none of this matters for BC. It is how the jury voted that matters and on what they based their opinions. Now we know that it was not 100 percent in the beginning but a slow movement to unanimously guilty. I would expect some jurors were upset over not hearing all of the computer evidence. It might not have mattered, but some probably won't like it. I, for one, am proud that they have done the best that they could with the evidence presented to them. I suspect we will hear from others. I would never want to answer questions to the media. They so frequently distort it or take everything out of context.
 
where is that poll? (I looked & can't find it)

am I remembering correctly that there were three options?
guilty/not guilty/unsure

if I'm remembering the right poll, I think I voted unsure b/c I didn't have enough info at the time
 
ncsu95 said:
They are 6 or 7 threads below this one.

Bradley Cooper-Guilty or Not Guilty NO DISCUSSION - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Did the State prove their case? LIST ONLY - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community
Click to expand...

So 70% of voters believed Brad Cooper to be guilty. I'm basically new here, not sure how many of the people who joined during the Cooper case, if any, had/have agenda's. Is it common for there to be numerous posters with strong opinions to join and make first posts on cases such as this one? Me personally, I never doubted Coopers guilt. Far FAR too many coincidences, circumstantial evidence, for anything else. The Cooper case was/is a text-book case for spousal murder. Much like the Ann Miller case. Once her numerous boyfriends were exposed, it followed the predictable course IMO.
 
ncsu95 said:
I would have expected this site to have a much higher percentage than 57%. This is very different from most forums. The people that participate on here generally follow lots of trials and are overwhelmingly on here in support of the victims. Not saying that is wrong, but is what it is. The fact that only 57% voted guilty on here says a whole lot.
Click to expand...

cody & ncsu95

Oh deary, deary me! The bold above is mine and *that's* where ncsu95 skewed the template. ncsu's post clearly stated THIS SITE whereas, in actual fact, this site has well over 4000 members. A fraction of that sample voted. The full W/S universe was most definitely not involved. So, it is .... a spoiled or untrue or unrecognized ... sample.

Had ncsu stated the posters on "this thread" ... aha! ... that's very different story. However, it appears ncsu swept the 57% across Websleuths site.

I agree, that if we're desperate - we may prefer to believe this "site" offered 57% guilty, despite the 100% guilty as proved beyond reasonable doubt, in a court of law. Justice was served. Cooper is where he belongs (and that sentence wasn't fast enough for some of us).

Just sayin ... if one wishes to shred a point ... all salient and distinguishing factors ought to be considered. My take, and I may be wrong, is that the message conveyed was a simple "57% was a mild win by Websleuths...".

That's incorrect.
 
I didn't skew anything. I said this site referring to websleuths versus other forums. Of course all 4000 ws members didn't vote. And I was specifically talking about the people that participated in the Nancy Cooper forum on websleuths. I would have expected a much higher guilty percentage in this forum (the Nancy Cooper forum on websleuths) than what we actually got.
 
I do believe NCSU has you on this one, my dear PSA. I do believe that 72 voters voted GUILTY out of 126. I believe that is 57 or so per cent. That represented the results out of the forum here. I have no idea why the others did not vote, but the results are correct and his statement is correct IMO. There is no way you can add in other votes not knowing their outcome. And if we put the 72 voters and compare that to the 4000, well, you don't want to do that either. NCSU skewed nothing IMO.
 
cody100 said:
I do believe NCSU has you on this one, my dear PSA. I do believe that 72 voters voted GUILTY out of 126. I believe that is 57 or so per cent. That represented the results out of the forum here. I have no idea why the others did not vote, but the results are correct and his statement is correct IMO. There is no way you can add in other votes not knowing their outcome. And if we put the 72 voters and compare that to the 4000, well, you don't want to do that either. NCSU skewed nothing IMO.
Click to expand...

Not only that, but I didn't bring up the 57% in the first place. I simply said I would have thought it would have been much higher than 57%. So if you want to accuse someone of "skewing" something, how about accusing the person that posted it in the first place.

Here's a recap:

Me: In a couple other forums I participate in, the overwhelming majority feel he is not guilty.

JTF: Remember the poll here...57% say guilty as charged

Me: I would have expected a lot higher percentage in this forum

You: NCSU95 is skewing numbers/data

Me: :waitasec:
 
Guess the point is 100% of the jury voted guilty as charged. The judge told them not to second guess after reading blogs and boards with another opinion. I hope they took that advise.
 
ncsu95 said:
Not only that, but I didn't bring up the 57% in the first place. I simply said I would have thought it would have been much higher than 57%. So if you want to accuse someone of "skewing" something, how about accusing the person that posted it in the first place.

Here's a recap:

Me: In a couple other forums I participate in, the overwhelming majority feel he is not guilty.

JTF: Remember the poll here...57% say guilty as charged

Me: I would have expected a lot higher percentage in this forum

You: NCSU95 is skewing numbers/data

Me: :waitasec:
Click to expand...


Hopefully that will give dear brad *comfort* over there in the *big house* while he's enjoying fine cuisine and participating in their version of *ironman*.

:floorlaugh:

:great:

:behindbar:

:laughcry:

:party:
 
In a 'fair world', Brad Cooper and Jason Young will eventually become *roomies* one day.
 
That is right NCSU. I forgot it was not you but JTF that brought up the 57 percent which is of course correct. That is hilarious. Guess PSA needs to take her complaint up with JTF. You were falsely accused.
 
Just the Fax said:
Guess the point is 100% of the jury voted guilty as charged. The judge told them not to second guess after reading blogs and boards with another opinion. I hope they took that advise.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree with this. That's why I told my neighbor not to second guess her vote.
 
You can never second guess your vote. However, I understand why it would be human nature to do just that, particularly when you read what things were not presented.
 
Madeleine74 said:
I respect his position and understand his reticence.

We have to remember there are people out there who are not of sound mind, and who believe the whole justice system (including any jury members) are hellbent on throwing innocent people into prison, just because they feel like it.

Some people threatened to 'out' the jury after the verdict, some talked openly of wanting to do screen captures off of the media feed, when the jury was seen leaving the courthouse, and plaster those pics on the Internet. Some are now trying to prove juror misconduct because this particular juror happened to be at a hockey game the same night as the victim's parents. :rolleyes:

The vitriol spewed towards this jury through social media sites has been sickening, and it continues to this day. Fortunately none of that nonsense is allowed on WS.

I hope the jury members will all be safe from the 'crazies' out there. I also hope they'll feel comfortable, as time goes on, sharing what this process was like for them and what evidence made the most impact.
Click to expand...

Madeleine, I have to say ... I really enjoy some of your comments ... such as "We have to remember there are people out there who are not of sound mind, and who believe the whole justice system (including any jury members) are hellbent on throwing innocent people into prison, just because they feel like it." That is such a refreshing perspective, particularly when discussing cases where people firmly believe that a conviction is the result of a huge conspiracy.

My understanding of the case was limited to what I was able to read and view through online media and, given the blackouts, I was of the opinion that Cooper would be found not guilty. I tend to trust a jury that heard all the evidence and whose sole objective it was to evaluate that evidence. Much as I believe that computer rebuttal witnesses should have been heard, unless there is a reversal of verdict on appeal I am adjusting my thinking to understand that Cooper is guilty of murder.
 
I don't believe in huge conspiracies in general, and in this particular case, I didn't see any conspiracy. I did see mistakes made and those should never happen again, but most of the mistakes ended up in the defendant's favor. The cell phone data deletion didn't appear to favor either side since whatever evidence may have been on that phone was gone and no one could use anything. The state couldn't use it either. It was a terrible mistake and it must never happen again, but a conspiracy? I don't see that.

What I found interesting is how some people went from thinking BC's guilt wasn't proved by the state, which is certainly a valid and fair interpretation, to full tilt conspiracy involving just about everyone, which makes one wonder what drug they've taken, or haven't taken but should have, what voices they may be hearing, and hoping no one is bent towards violence.

I can't help but think of my favorite quote, "When you see crazy coming, cross the street!"
 
I don't know if any of you are watching the Casey Anthony murder trial (I am catching bits here and there), but the judge in that case (who everyone seems to like a lot), has been denying the defense from presenting lots of things they want. Most of what the defense asks for is denied. Objections by the state are often sustained.

Further, the judge allowed very incriminating video to come in from the state simply because the defense did not get their motion to suppress in on time. This is a huge problem for the defendant, and it could have been prevented! The defense tried at the last minute to keep it out, but the judge said 'too late--you had a deadline and you missed it!'

And to my knowledge, no one is screaming "UNFAIR JUDGE...that judge is biased towards the state of FL!" But that judge is making some very similar calls as Gessner, all based on rules of evidence and rules of the court.
 
Madeleine74 said:
I don't believe in huge conspiracies in general, and in this particular case, I didn't see any conspiracy. I did see mistakes made and those should never happen again, but most of the mistakes ended up in the defendant's favor. The cell phone data deletion didn't appear to favor either side since whatever evidence may have been on that phone was gone and no one could use anything. The state couldn't use it either. It was a terrible mistake and it must never happen again, but a conspiracy? I don't see that.

What I found interesting is how some people went from thinking BC's guilt wasn't proved by the state, which is certainly a valid and fair interpretation, to full tilt conspiracy involving just about everyone, which makes one wonder what drug they've taken, or haven't taken but should have, what voices they may be hearing, and hoping no one is bent towards violence.

I can't help but think of my favorite quote, "When you see crazy coming, cross the street!"
Click to expand...

The "full tilt" conspiracy thinking seems to happen when people are unable to accept a verdict - for whatever reason (eg: the convict is too pretty to murder). It's happened in a few cases over the years. I'm not a full tilt conspiracy thinker, but in this particular case I found that I had to rethink some things - realizing that perhaps I misunderstood what I heard and believed. There were several blackout days of information critical to the jury's decision and, as trial by media observers, we absolutely don't have all the facts.
 
Madeleine74 said:
I don't know if any of you are watching the Casey Anthony murder trial (I am catching bits here and there), but the judge in that case (who everyone seems to like a lot), has been denying the defense from presenting lots of things they want. Most of what the defense asks for is denied. Objections by the state are often sustained.

Further, the judge allowed very incriminating video to come in from the state simply because the defense did not get their motion to suppress in on time. This is a huge problem for the defendant, and it could have been prevented! The defense tried at the last minute to keep it out, but the judge said 'too late--you had a deadline and you missed it!'

And to my knowledge, no one is screaming "UNFAIR JUDGE...that judge is biased towards the state of FL!" But that judge is making some very similar calls as Gessner, all based on rules of evidence and rules of the court.
Click to expand...

No kidding, Jose Baez appears to be a true example of an ineffective defense counsel. Perhaps the BC is innocent crew should invade the Anthony camp. I think she is guilty, but her defense is quite inexperienced IMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 109 more.
Total: 3,842 (members: 110, guests: 3,732)

Online statistics

Members online
110
Guests online
3,732
Total visitors
3,842
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,528
Messages
17,953,915
Members
228,522
Latest member
Cabinsleuth
Back
Top