State v Bradley Cooper 3-21-2011

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually, I think one witness specifically said no necklace, no bracelets, but yes to earrings. RT if I'm not mistaken.
 
I bet there is going to be "mud" evidence. They keep talking about it too much...I still think the mud on his shoes is the reason for going back to the home and putting on flip flops as seen in the HT video. JMO
 
I'm pretty sure they have it, just looking for confirmation.
Click to expand...

CPD has it, they collected it in one of the later SWs (circa Aug '08).
 
WARNING: There is some sneaky stuff going on in this thread and it won't be tolerated. Never is it okay to quote someone and then change what they said. That's not a quote - it is your own words.

It is obvious that there are different opinions here - that's okay. The rule is state the facts as you see them and let the other side do the same. No attacking, no bashing, no being snarky AND NO EDITING other posters' post.

Any questions - send one of the mods a pm.

Salem
 
Did the judge just announce the name of juror #10, is this acceptable?
 
ok - on BC and the police - a few thoughts.

I am a woman, so I likely wouldn't be looked at as the prime suspect if my husband turned up missing - so I am not sure I can relate to what he was feeling. Just like men probably can't relate to someone at the hardware store treating me like a moron.

I'd initially do whatever the police wanted. Then - if they were starting to look at me with the hairy eyeball and I was picking up vibes they were starting to build a case and not find my husband - I'd back off being as cooperative. My guess is that they were not too subtle in their suspicions.

Weird aside - when I was about 20 - I got a call from the police about money being missing from a store I used to work at. they wanted me to come in and talk. They had already spoken to my CURRENT employer and asked about my trustworthiness. I called an attorney. I was TOTALLY innocent. My attorney (friend) advised me to cooperate. I went in a talked - however, as soon as I would not comply with everything they wanted (lie detector test, videotaped interview with store people) and told them I wanted to talk to my attorney before I committed to anything they started getting aggressive. (This was state police by the way). I eventually told them I would take a lie detector if it was administered BY the state police - not some rinky dink operator that the store hired. Once word got out that this was my statement - there were TONS of people who started talking that I did it and made anything I did support that theory - I used to go to clubs so I stole money for that, or I had a nice car, or WHATEVER. then, as the lie detector time came close for the store employees that had agreed to do it - they started calling ME for advice! Suddenly, protecting your rights was not such an obvious sign of guilt. Ultimately, the store installed hidden cameras (as the thefts continued long past my employment there! no one bothered to tell me that) and they caught the middle aged woman who supported her ailing mother, stealing from the store. No apologies, no nothing - just a whole group of people who thought I did it - ONLY because I refused to walk like a sheep to slaughter.

Lastly, I went through a bad divorce. And honestly - if my ex husband had turned up missing, it would have been difficult for me to look sad. I know that isn't nice, but when you are really unhappy with someone - and they are making your like hell - and threatening you with a long drawn out divorce and trying to bankrupt you, etc - you see it would be easier for them to just disappear. Now - I would not have taken any action for that to happen - BUT - I had thought that a single car accident would make my situation a lot better.

I KNOW that is not nice - but it was a really not nice situation.

So - once again - that stuff - FOR ME - does not factor into my thoughts of ones' guilt or innocence.

(Honestly, Brad cleaning, the absence of the "sticks", the reading of emails later in the evening of 7/11, etc influence my thoughts of his guilt.)
 
I heard that too, think he thought the camera was off, but still.
 
Didn't Kurtz say in his opening that LE never collected evidence from where Nancy's body was dumped? I recall Kurtz mentioning a cigarette butt and other items. Did he say "not collected" or "not tested?" If my memory is correct on that then direct evidence of the CCBI agent contradicts Kurtz on this point, as items WERE collected. (I sure don't want to have to go back and listen to Kurtz' opening again. It was 3 times too long the first time).
 
A juror got sick looking at the photos of NC's body.
 
So it appears a juror was distressed by a photo. :( How horrible this must be for them.
 
less0305 said:
A juror got sick looking at the photos of NC's body.
Click to expand...

That's not good - I feel really sorry for that person. As if this entire thing isn't already too much... (did think it was a little early to be breaking for lunch)
 
Thanks to everyone for your up to the minute details. I can't sit and watch the trial a lot, so this is perfect.

Was the video of the crime scene part of the testimony today? If so, I presume it will be available on wral later today or tomorrow (seems to me if I miss something live, I can't go back and immediately see it, right?).

Was the picture that caused the juror to get ill shown just to the jury?
 
Does anyone know this......If Kurtz makes a claim (or even the DA) during opening statements, but never backs it up with evidence during the trial (I see this happening more with Kurtz), is the jury allowed to consider this during deliberations?
 
Yes, and the prosecutor can note it in his closing.
 
BrownRice said:
Thanks to everyone for your up to the minute details. I can't sit and watch the trial a lot, so this is perfect.

Was the video of the crime scene part of the testimony today? If so, I presume it will be available on wral later today or tomorrow (seems to me if I miss something live, I can't go back and immediately see it, right?).

Was the picture that caused the juror to get ill shown just to the jury?
Click to expand...

It was a video shown of the location where the body was found. This was the initial investigation so the body was still there. We didn't have a clear view of the video (they were showing it at an angle) but I'm presuming that Nancy's body was shown in that video.
 
Cheyenne130 said:
It was a video shown of the location where the body was found. This was the initial investigation so the body was still there. We didn't have a clear view of the video (they were showing it at an angle) but I'm presuming that Nancy's body was shown in that video.
Click to expand...

Understand her body was covered with a sheet during the video. The photos included images of her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 159 more.
Total: 2,499 (members: 160, guests: 2,339)

Online statistics

Members online
160
Guests online
2,339
Total visitors
2,499
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,519
Messages
17,970,250
Members
228,791
Latest member
fesmike
Back
Top