Attorney's and HHJBP back 3:55
SIDEBAR (Jury not present) (3:55-4:10)
Jury back at 4:10
JB and LDB are trying to come to agreement as to what pages of the report will be entered into evidence.
DIRECT EXAMINATION OF DETECTIVE STINGER BY JB - continued
He has reviewed Defense Exhibit DK. LDB does not object to the relevant parts as being moved into evidence (tabbed pages). His Honor told JB to remove the tabbed pages so that they can be marked into evidence.
Item DK (tabbed pages only) marked as Defense Exhibit 45.
This is a report of the deleted Firefox internet history using a program called Net Analysis. A competing software to Cache Back? Yes. Report run before having Cache Back? Yes.
He met Mr. Bradley in December of 2009.
Did you advise Mr. Bradley you had problems with his software?
OBJECTION - leading - SUSTAINED
He asked Mr. Bradley if he could use his tool to examine the items he had found in the unallocated space. They had encountered a problem with Net Analysis due to dates and times not being displayed properly because the time period included daylight savings time change.
Cache Back recover more files? He did not know. He did not know if they recovered the same number of files. Mr. Bradley needed some time to fix the issue - it was at least a day.
Did he have to rewrite the software?
OBJECTION - personal knowledge - SUSTAINED
Did you receive a report that you utilized that indicated he had to rewrite his software?
OBJECTION - SUSTAINED - same question
He was directed to the entry at 3/21/08 - 14:16:34. The website addressed was www.sci-spot.com/chemistry/chloroform.htm
- 1 visit.
State's evidence #166 - same website at 15:16:13 - this is the Cache Back report and showed the website was visited 84 times. He agreed there was a difference between the two softwares.
14:16:13 on Net Analysis report - 4 websites with that time. First one- www.myspace.com
- (report says website was typed in) 84 visits. He did not see an entry around the same time in the Cache Back report for My Space.
JB - could your Honor publish? I'm having technical issues again.
Net Analysis showed 1 visit for chloroform and MySpace was visited 84 times.
3/20/08 at 13:39:23 - myspace typed in again - 83 visits.
3/19/08 at 08:36:24 - myspace typed in browser - 82 visits.
3/13/08 at 10:37: - witness said he had no March 13 dates. JB then showed him his copy and the witness said he saw it. 3/13/08 - myspace typed entry - 81 visits.
You would not see these Cache Back report because the Cache Back report was for the one single day of the 21st. It did not include the myspace that was visited 84 times, which was two columns down on the Net Analysis report showing Chloroform visited 84 times. The Net Analysis report was having problems with date and time.
Because it was just an hour off?
OBJECTION - SUSTAINED
They were having problems with the dates and times.
Now you know that the Net Analysis report came up with more internet history? The reports ARE different.
He created the Cache Back report. He did not testify about that report.
State's Exhibit 165 - he prepared this report - a Cache Back report for 3/17. He did not testify about this report. He understands Mr. Bradley did.
Do you know why Mr. Bradley testified about his report?
OBJECTION - SUSTAINED - witness is not competent to answer that.
Have you ever had another computer expert testify about your reports?
OBJECTION - relevance - SUSTAINED
No further questions by JB
CROSS EXAMINATION BY LDB
You printed out the Cache Back report, but Mr. Bradley collected the data?
OBJECTION - hearsay - SUSTAINED
He had access to the developer to examine it - so he asked him to do it.
He was shown page 1 of Defense Exhibit 45. Do you see any of the Google searches done on 3/21/08? 8 rows above is a Google search. The Google search for How to Make Chloroform would be in the expanded Column H right above the myspace. Chloroform was spelled with and "A"
OBJECTION - outside of scope - OVERRULED
When you type a search into Google, you will see the results of the words you typed in the bar and that includes all the words that you actually typed into the search - HOW TO MAKE CHLORAFORM were entered. It would not appear that way if someone typed in how to make CHLOROPHYLL.
Do you have confidence that the dates and times on the Net Analysis report are correct, or would you rely on the Cache Back report for dates and times for the internet searches in the history? The dates and times on the two different reports appear to be accurate. He can't speak to how they were interpreted because he did not write the code for either program.
14:16:34 displayed the search for chloroform.
Even in the Net Analysis and the myspace.com and the how to make chloroform at 20 seconds apart.
No further questions.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY JB
The visits for chloroform on the Net Analysis report show that on 3/21/08 were the first time they were visited - one time - right? According to the Net Analysis report, correct.
The total amount of time spent on those websites - looking at chloroform - before moving on? Approximately 3 minutes.
Cache Back was purchased after the Net Analysis software and it doesn't have certain items that the Net Analysis does.
Not going to get your cash back?
Move to Strike sarcastic comment - SUSTAINED
RECROSS BY LDB
Even if it shows it was done in a 3 minute timespan, it does not negate that the user could be opening up more pages. Each tab could be opened for minutes or hours until the user decides to close the tab. The report does not tell how long the person spent reading or whether they printed the item.
REDIRECT EXAM BY LDB
The report doesn't give any info about the tabs. He does not know if that ever happened.
No one has told him that any pages were printed out about chloroform.
Witness was excused at 4:46