Post verdict discussion of evidence

[macd]

Is there a public link to BC's cell phone records?

[reading]

Originally Posted by momto3kids

And you think she murdered NC?

I would like to know if sunshine thinks this as well.

[ncsu95]

Originally Posted by macd

The Gym Bag

Did anyone else notice during a cross-exam of one of BC's co-workers, Kurtz started asking about a gym bag. He had the co-worker testify that it was normal for BC to bring a gym bag to and from work.

The odd thing is that the prosecution never mentioned a gym bag.

I kept waiting for a security guy to testify and show a video of BC coming to work on Saturday with a full gym bag, and leaving with an empty gym bag. But, no such testimony came.

But... Kurtz knew that there was something about a gym bag that needed to be explained.

What do you think? Was defending the unmentioned gym bag a "tell" by Kurtz?

We know he didn't go into the office on Saturday. He didn't go in until the 17th.

[momto3kids]

Originally Posted by reading

I would like to know if sunshine thinks this as well.

I believe some think she was involved 1 way or another. Being outspoken unfortunately does at times cast a cloud over one, which happens to be JA in this particular case.

[Danielle59]

Originally Posted by DB in FV

Cisco wouldn't have a record. If Brad had a computer, the router, and an FXO card, he had all he needed to create his own home network. In order to believe that the call would show up on Cisco's logs, you'd have to believe that every customer of Cisco has to run their calls through Cisco's network.

I think he used the desktop computer that had been "totally wiped in preparation for donation", unless there is some evidence that the desktop was wiped prior to the morning of 7/12.

It was reported that that computer was donated some months before. I hearing a lot of supposition but nothing provable. Any of us could do the things you want us to believe happened.

[RaleighNC]

BC stated in the custody hearing that both children were his. If he had a reason to disagree - that would have been it. I am sure the information about JP was already being addressed with his attorneys. So - when was the lie - Brad at the deposition, or his attorneys asking for DNA testing on the kids?

Brad lied as soon as the police showed up that their marriage was in good shape and they were reconciling. VERY easy to prove was a lie. Why do it if you think your wife is only missing and expect her to come home any minute? IMO you only lie if you have something to cover up and / or you know she's not coming back. You lie if you have some NEED to make yourself look like less of a suspect - at least for a while.

I've said this before - when I was going through a divorce and if my ex came up missing - (and I didn't have anything to do with it) I might actually be doing a little internal happy dance because there would have been MANY things that would have been easier for me. Brad too - if the band of marauding whitish red driving Mexicans had killed her - he'd be the widower - with kids - a veritable chick magnet. But I know I would have told the truth - because the state of my marriage would have been a NONISSUE if he was only missing, or if I was not responsible for his untimely death. Instead - he lied right from the get go.

I totally dismissed the $300 week allowance and a host of other things brought up regarding his "behavior" leading up to the murder. I do believe the tension in that house had to be unbearable - for both of them. NC's relief valve was talking to her friends and family. She has a support system and an outlet. Brad had neither. He was obsessing about her leaving and how it was going to impact him - emotionally (failure) and economically. He "logically" tried to go through scenarios of life after divorce (the lists, the plans, the research) and he came to the "logical" conclusion that in order to stop the unbearable tension - and to "solve" the problem of a post divorce life - the solution was for her to die.

MOO MOO MOO

But I see this as a very logical and well thought out (if your mind works that way) plan and resolution. Thus my never wavering from 1st degree.

[momto3kids]

Before he opens his mouth his actions spoke louder than words.
NC is missing. BC receives a phone call he chose to ignore. He has no idea if it is someone who might have located NC or if it was NC (since her phone was @ home). IIRC he never went by WWMC to see if any unidentified person came in...a stones throw from LTF, probably even passed it to go home.

[Danielle59]

Originally Posted by RaleighNC

BC stated in the custody hearing that both children were his. If he had a reason to disagree - that would have been it. I am sure the information about JP was already being addressed with his attorneys. So - when was the lie - Brad at the deposition, or his attorneys asking for DNA testing on the kids? <snip>

I don't believe BC knew about JP until later or the possibility of the youngest being JPs until later. His attorney's many times asked for DNA and it was refused by KL. BC's relief valve I would say was his work and his exercise. Not everyone needs to embellish stories to tell the world, including the pre-school teachers and exterminator.

Why did NC have an STD test done in April if she had not been intimate with BC for more than two years?

[jrb0124]

Originally Posted by RaleighNC

BC stated in the custody hearing that both children were his. If he had a reason to disagree - that would have been it. I am sure the information about JP was already being addressed with his attorneys. So - when was the lie - Brad at the deposition, or his attorneys asking for DNA testing on the kids?

Brad lied as soon as the police showed up that their marriage was in good shape and they were reconciling. VERY easy to prove was a lie. Why do it if you think your wife is only missing and expect her to come home any minute?

As far as I know, neither BC or his attorneys had any idea re: JP parentage question prior to the depo. CPD refused to direct a DNA test, and BC couldn't as the children were out of his custody (and he was in jail).

BC said they were reconciling, and there were aitnesses who testified that the relationship was at least cordial. NC was living in the house, her separation agreement on hold, couples plans for the 12th. To assert that they were constantly fighting and not trying to reconcile is believeing only one set of witnesses (the AS-organized, coordinated affidavit group).

[jrb0124]

Originally Posted by momto3kids

Before he opens his mouth his actions spoke louder than words.
NC is missing. BC receives a phone call he chose to ignore. He has no idea if it is someone who might have located NC or if it was NC (since her phone was @ home). IIRC he never went by WWMC to see if any unidentified person came in...a stones throw from LTF, probably even passed it to go home.

You can interpret his behavior any way you want, but that doesn't make your interpretation the correct one.

I see nothing incriminating in his actions and behavior on 7/12.

[unc70]

Originally Posted by SleuthinNC

Yes CPD through Det. Thomas with CCBI had cellibrite and something else maybe FTK. They were used on the blackberry when Det. JY turned it over AFTER wiping the phone and sim.

Of course going through the timeline presented by BL it appears the sim was actually not wiped until after the forensic exam was run.

Did they use the Cellibrite on on the phones before the accidental erasure? The only explanation I can come up with for the CPD handling of NC's phone is that they had sneaked a peek at it, probably with a Cellibrite. Otherwise, they should have been getting the SW to access when she was first missing.

[Madeleine74]

Not sure why people are saying BC didn't lie, when his own attorneys said he did. Even Kurtz in opening statements admitted his client lied during his deposition. A proven liar. Called a liar even by his defense attorneys. Not disputed.

[Madeleine74]

What evidence and facts did the jury use to make their decision? They haven't told us. I hope they do.

We know they asked for the deposition tapes, the HT receipts, the BJs receipts, the cell phone records for BC, some of the crime scene photos, the reports from the Wake County first responders to Fielding Dr., pictures from inside of house (specifically MBR/MBa).

Everyone is up in arms over cell phone and computer; think the jury may have based their verdict on other items than the ones everyone is pointing to?

[ncsu95]

Originally Posted by RaleighNC

BC stated in the custody hearing that both children were his. If he had a reason to disagree - that would have been it. I am sure the information about JP was already being addressed with his attorneys. So - when was the lie - Brad at the deposition, or his attorneys asking for DNA testing on the kids?

Brad lied as soon as the police showed up that their marriage was in good shape and they were reconciling. VERY easy to prove was a lie. Why do it if you think your wife is only missing and expect her to come home any minute? IMO you only lie if you have something to cover up and / or you know she's not coming back. You lie if you have some NEED to make yourself look like less of a suspect - at least for a while.

I've said this before - when I was going through a divorce and if my ex came up missing - (and I didn't have anything to do with it) I might actually be doing a little internal happy dance because there would have been MANY things that would have been easier for me. Brad too - if the band of marauding whitish red driving Mexicans had killed her - he'd be the widower - with kids - a veritable chick magnet. But I know I would have told the truth - because the state of my marriage would have been a NONISSUE if he was only missing, or if I was not responsible for his untimely death. Instead - he lied right from the get go.

I totally dismissed the $300 week allowance and a host of other things brought up regarding his "behavior" leading up to the murder. I do believe the tension in that house had to be unbearable - for both of them. NC's relief valve was talking to her friends and family. She has a support system and an outlet. Brad had neither. He was obsessing about her leaving and how it was going to impact him - emotionally (failure) and economically. He "logically" tried to go through scenarios of life after divorce (the lists, the plans, the research) and he came to the "logical" conclusion that in order to stop the unbearable tension - and to "solve" the problem of a post divorce life - the solution was for her to die.

MOO MOO MOO

But I see this as a very logical and well thought out (if your mind works that way) plan and resolution. Thus my never wavering from 1st degree.

The youngest daughters birthday coincides with her being conceived on or about October 31st, 2005 assuming a normal length pregnancy. I think it is quite possible that JP is the father. I do not believe BC knew about that encounter when he gave his deposition. He also lied frequently in the deposition, so him saying he is the father doesn't mean a whole bunch. No guy wants to think he isn't the father of a child he has been raising as his own.

[ncsu95]

Originally Posted by Madeleine74

Not sure why people are saying BC didn't lie, when his own attorneys said he did. Even Kurtz in opening statements admitted his client lied during his deposition. A proven liar. Called a liar even by his defense attorneys. Not disputed.

Who is saying BC didn't lie? He's a lying liar that lies.

[Madeleine74]

Originally Posted by ncsu95

Who is saying BC didn't lie? He's a lying liar that lies.

I was responding to this from JBR above: "BC said they were reconciling"

They were not reconciling. BC lied.

[unc70]

Originally Posted by azwildcat

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/n...story/9435025/
This article says it was found in September of 2008.

If found that early, why did they not get the confirming records from Google while they would still have been available?

Related question, when was search evidence disclosed to defense? When did defense receive forensic copy of BC disk?

[sunshine05]

Originally Posted by unc70

Did they use the Cellibrite on on the phones before the accidental erasure? The only explanation I can come up with for the CPD handling of NC's phone is that they had sneaked a peek at it, probably with a Cellibrite. Otherwise, they should have been getting the SW to access when she was first missing.

Young said he only tried to unlock it and did not use the Cellibrite but who knows? I can't stop thinking about that recording with Dismukes and HP, when he clearly told her "yeah, we got what we needed from the phone". (He was asking her about the password to unlock it).

[sunshine05]

Originally Posted by unc70

If found that early, why did they not get the confirming records from Google while they would still have been available?

Related question, when was search evidence disclosed to defense? When did defense receive forensic copy of BC disk?

If I remember correctly, like the phone, it was 9-10 months later and too late to trace the google search to the user. Let me see if I can find the exact details though.

[sunshine05]

Originally Posted by Madeleine74

What evidence and facts did the jury use to make their decision? They haven't told us. I hope they do.

We know they asked for the deposition tapes, the HT receipts, the BJs receipts, the cell phone records for BC, some of the crime scene photos, the reports from the Wake County first responders to Fielding Dr., pictures from inside of house (specifically MBR/MBa).

Everyone is up in arms over cell phone and computer; think the jury may have based their verdict on other items than the ones everyone is pointing to?

Why so much interest still? Are you surprised at the verdict?

[Madeleine74]

Originally Posted by sunshine05

Why so much interest still? Are you surprised at the verdict?

Is it customary to immediately become uninterested in a criminal trial that one has followed, a few days after a verdict?

Since no one can foretell what a jury will decide, it's always a surprise. Well I guess not a surprise to John Gotti, who tampered with a couple of his juries, but normal non-mob juries can be fickle beasts, as I said before the verdict.

[EnvoyDriver61]

Right.....you were adamant about the 4AM bleach purchase, correct?

Why the animosity toward this poster? She reported inside info with what she had been told and it was about as early an indication of where this case might go.

If people continue to give people like her a hard time, then those types of early scoops of info won't be given.

This site isn't like a courtroom with rules of evidence and other items. It isn't bad to discuss that, don't get my message wrong. But, the amount of disdain that this one person has had to put up with for just sharing information passed on to them is kind of crazy.

[gritguy]

Originally Posted by ncsu95

Who is saying BC didn't lie? He's a lying liar that lies.

There are certainly some who have contended that, excusing any falsehood he uttered with some contrived reasoning that flies in the face of common sense.

Beyond the camp of thinkers who saw the state as having not made its case is a region populated by BII people, none of whom can know he is innocent any more than anyone can know he is guilty. Yet they are as certain of it as anyone is that he is guilty. Some of those people bend reality or leave common sense behind so as to protect the view that BC in every way and in every instance was a victim. It's a silly form of non-reasoning that was/is practiced on the BDI side through associating everything he did (Ironman for example) as somehow foreshadawing the ultimate crime.

[sunshine05]

Originally Posted by EnvoyDriver61

Why the animosity toward this poster? She reported inside info with what she had been told and it was about as early an indication of where this case might go.

If people continue to give people like her a hard time, then those types of early scoops of info won't be given.

This site isn't like a courtroom with rules of evidence and other items. It isn't bad to discuss that, don't get my message wrong. But, the amount of disdain that this one person has had to put up with for just sharing information passed on to them is kind of crazy.

That is interesting, "inside information". And we are supposed to feel comfortable chatting with people THAT close to the case? Not me.

[EnvoyDriver61]

And we are supposed to feel comfortable chatting with people THAT close to the case? Not me.

Why not?

The circumstances aren't nefarious. I won't rehash them as the poster isn't commenting on it and I happen to remember why so I'll just respect their wishes.

I think I understand what you think posting about these cases should be about, at least on some level, and your rationale is just as good as anyone elses. Why not afford her the same opportunity?