There are online tools to decode mac addresses.
Defense (and us sleuths) have access to that.
And how to fake them. Probably not relevant at this point.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There are online tools to decode mac addresses.
Defense (and us sleuths) have access to that.
Anyone want to talk on a hypothetical?
Let's say that the log on the laptop indicates that a Cisco 3825 was in BC's house on July 11 at 10:30pm. Remembering that a 3825 would support an FXO port that could be used to spoof a call.
Would this move anyone to the G side of the fence?
Is Greg M "suspiciously thirsty guy?" If so, the court will need a brief recess to bring in extra water.
Has the prosecution released information as to exactly what date they requested this information from Cisco?
That would determine which side was dragging their feet.
Anyone want to talk on a hypothetical?
Let's say that the log on the laptop indicates that a Cisco 3825 was in BC's house on July 11 at 10:30pm. Remembering that a 3825 would support an FXO port that could be used to spoof a call.
Would this move anyone to the G side of the fence?
I'm just a layperson when it comes to computer technology, but by that same token, so are probably many of the jurors. My understanding is, Cisco is just now releasing this to the prosecution. This fault lies in Cisco dragging their feet, what has taken them this long to cough up this stuff?
Not sure if Greg M is this guy or not...
Hypothetical, but no, that would not move me to the guilty side of the fence. I would need information that the call WAS spoofed, not "could be used to spoof a call".
I can still change my mind and hop over the fence. But that would not be enough for me. JMO
I'm just a layperson when it comes to computer technology, but by that same token, so are probably many of the jurors. My understanding is, Cisco is just now releasing this to the prosecution. This fault lies in Cisco dragging their feet, what has taken them this long to cough up this stuff?
Question - if the judge had granted that motion, would the state be able to retry BC later, or would it have meant acquittal?
When were the pictures taken of the home office, in which there is no 3825 router to be seen? How long after July 11?
Hypothetical, but no, that would not move me to the guilty side of the fence. I would need information that the call WAS spoofed, not "could be used to spoof a call".
I can still change my mind and hop over the fence. But that would not be enough for me. JMO
Hypothetical, but no, that would not move me to the guilty side of the fence. I would need information that the call WAS spoofed, not "could be used to spoof a call".
I can still change my mind and hop over the fence. But that would not be enough for me. JMO
Anyone want to talk on a hypothetical?
Let's say that the log on the laptop indicates that a Cisco 3825 was in BC's house on July 11 at 10:30pm. Remembering that a 3825 would support an FXO port that could be used to spoof a call.
Would this move anyone to the G side of the fence?
My laymans interpretation of the defense expert, was that he was basing much of his *opinions* on the work product of JWard. JW, IMO, was discredited as an expert, and his work product was derived by means not determined to be accurate. Had this new expert been hired and given the material right from the start, I wouldn't have a problem hearing from him. As a lay person, I don't trust the work product of JWard, and in his posting here at WS, he himself stated 'he told the defense he wasn't an expert in forensic examination of computers.' IMO, that tells me the defense should have politiely thanked him and moved along to find an expert who was tenured as such. MOO Attempting to bring in the new expert, who is basing much of his opinions on the work product of someone who admitted to NOT being a forensic computer expert, rubs me the wrong way and IMO open's up a whole new can of worms. MOO
What would your explanation be for where the router went, and was nowhere to be found in the house?