State v. Bradley Cooper 5-2-2011

[jrb0124]

Why do YOU think he wiped the phone, got the search warrant and then documented that the phone had been wiped in August when it was actually wiped in September?

Why did they wait 9 months to inform defense that their important evidence was destroyed?

CPD gives BC's laptop (a critical piece of evidence) to the FBI in JUL/AUG for forensic analysis.

CPD gives NC's blackberry (a critical piece of evidence) to the FBI...wait, no...CPD sends NC's blackberry to the SBI - no, CPD sends NC's blackberry to their own lab of experts...wait, no...that's right: a detective who didn't even know what a SIM card was decided to perform the forensic examination of a piece of evidence the defense crucial enough to send a preservation letter.

For those who would reply to this "BC rigged it to wipe", how did BC know Det Young would make the unilateral decision to perform the forensic? According to the standards established here by the BDI crowd - that statement qualifies as a conspiracy theory undeserving of serious attention.

 

[gbay]

Only one claimed "tampering". The other claimed "spoilage" which he said is because the computer was not powered down in the first minute after the home was secured and before the search warrant was served. (Like they really could have gone in and touched that computer before the search warrant was served. The defense would have LOVED that because then they could have had ALL the computer evidence thrown out.)

I imagine all of this is a lot of smoke and mirrors made to confuse everyone.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Too much time elapsed to retrieve detailed phone logs. That is why they waited 9 months to tell defense about the destroyed phone. Everything point to intentional tampering. The question is - why? what is the motive?

That's not true. Too much time elapsed to recover the actual text of the text messages. Detailed phone logs are available for a long time. Heck, as the account owner Brad could go online and look at the phone records. It would give all of the info that I presented.

 

[cody100]

I would have fought to keep his testimony out as well. Even the other defense expert disagreed with his "opinion". I believe that he was directed to find certain evidence by the defense and he didn't disappoint. MOO

So, it is not unusual that both sides want to keep certain evidence out of court so they don't have to explain it. I am still upset that we never had the computer issue resolved. But, if I were a juror, I would consider the evidence obtained from the FBI analysis to be invalid because it has been significantly questioned without resolve. MOO

 

[Cheyenne130]

I imagine all of this is a lot of smoke and mirrors made to confuse everyone.

Not everyone, but it seems to be working with some. MOO

 

[Cheyenne130]

So, it is not unusual that both sides want to keep certain evidence out of court so they don't have to explain it. I am still upset that we never had the computer issue resolved. But, if I were a juror, I would consider the evidence obtained from the FBI analysis to be invalid because it has been significantly questioned without resolve. MOO

So for you, the defense tactic is a "win".

 

[cody100]

That's not true. Too much time elapsed to recover the actual text of the text messages. Detailed phone logs are available for a long time. Heck, as the account owner Brad could go online and look at the phone records. It would give all of the info that I presented.

I think the text messages would have been very interesting and perhaps very important to this case.

 

[jrb0124]

No amount of automated updates or other types of "spoilation" are going to create a file with a dump site map or a log entry with a missing router's mac addresses.

You forgot the forged Google watermark /deleted cookie. Yes, GM said it was forged - not corrupted, not spoiled, - forged. So BC did that? really? why?

 

[Maja]

But forget about the phone for a minute. Phone does not equal Google search no matter how much people would like to link the two.

McDreamy tried to unlock the phone. McDreamy did not touch that IBM laptop. Period. End of comparison.

Conspiracy theories abound with wild neighborhood wifi hackers getting into BC network, Kurtz initially claiming BC gave out his network password (hey, NO EVIDENCE of that!), CPD 'planting' something or 'changing' files. Those are some of the wild conspiracy theories that are laughable. I bet the FBI just rolled their eyes at those allegations too. Perhaps they shouldn't have dismissed it, but they testified they didn't see evidence of planting and I certainly don't see where they would put themselves on the line to protect some cop in Cary.

I think the defense spun a lot of scenarios and I think lots of people are ripe for the picking when it comes to believing scenarios. The mere possibility being suggested gets imaginations spinning.

Believe all 3 musketeers were behind the defense props.

Wonder if Kurtz & Trenkle know the truth of this murder?

 

[sunshine05]

That's not true. Too much time elapsed to recover the actual text of the text messages. Detailed phone logs are available for a long time. Heck, as the account owner Brad could go online and look at the phone records. It would give all of the info that I presented.

Cheyenne, no. Levitan himself said he could not do a complete exam of the phone because he was unable to look at the detailed records. The police got detailed records for BC's phone, NOT Nancy's. Why??? Too much time had lapsed. It was in testimony.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I think the text messages would have been very interesting and perhaps very important to this case.

How so? Did the defense bring up any text message "from/to" and indicate time/date and question the importance? *Smoke and mirrors* MOO

 

[Madeleine74]

Windows isn't supposed to crash, but it does. Especially Win Vista, I know only too well it does. I have files that are corrupt, files with incorrect date stamps, orphaned files. Is there a hacker or some policeman tampering with my computer? Nope. Thank you Microsoft for that gift. Occasionally my operating system stops functioning. Occasionally I have malware despite the fact that I run a good virus checking/removal program, system protection software, I scan the computer and check for all kinds of things...and yet, sometimes something gets through anyway. Conspiracy? Not likely.

But make no mistake, I'm so going to use this 'spoilage' theory to claim why a report can't be run promptly at work. I may also have to include the excuse that the CPD obviously did something nefarious to my computer as well. Hey, it's working in this case, it should be able to fly at work too.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Cheyenne, no. Levitan himself said he could not do a complete exam of the phone because he was unable to look at the detailed records. The police got detailed records for BC's phone, NOT Nancy's. Why??? Too much time had lapsed. It was in testimony.

Do you know that they did not get detailed records or the defense did not provide them to their expert?

 

[jrb0124]

There was no way to wipe from that phone who was called at what time and date and what number called in at what time and date. They have the duration of the calls incoming and outgoing. The have the numbers to and from for text messages. The "deletion of the phone to cover up evidence that BII" is so far out there they may as well ask Elvis what he thinks. MOO

Are we sure of that? Those (numbers to and from for text messages) do not appear on my monthly bills, and as we know the pros simply entered glorified phone bills into evidence/discovery.

If there was testimony to this, sorry - I missed that, but I have never presumed anyone had the text to and fro from NC's phone.

 

[cody100]

So for you, the defense tactic is a "win".

The fact that I couldn't get an accurate answer for the questions regarding this evidence would be enough to not consider the map evidence in my decision. I would say it was the defense and the prosecution tactics together. Both sides can share in that responsibility.

 

[sunshine05]

Do you know that they did not get detailed records or the defense did not provide them to their expert?

It was in the defense motion in February that they never got the detailed phone reports so therefore could not provide them to Levitan.

 

[gbay]

Cheyenne, no. Levitan himself said he could not do a complete exam of the phone because he was unable to look at the detailed records. The police got detailed records for BC's phone, NOT Nancy's. Why??? Too much time had lapsed. It was in testimony.

You might be right on this....I am recalling (it's a bit foggy) that they did not ask for the proper information when they requested the records for NC phone..Anyone else remember??

 

[Cheyenne130]

Are we sure of that? Those (numbers to and from for text messages) do not appear on my monthly bills, and as we know the pros simply entered glorified phone bills into evidence/discovery.

If there was testimony to this, sorry - I missed that, but I have never presumed anyone had the text to and fro from NC's phone.

Seriously? They appear on mine. I have details for phone/text/data including all the information I mentioned for all the phones on my account. (You have to click the "details" button, but it's all there.)

 

[johnfear]

Smoke and mirrors? I am totally digging the video from both sides today.

Sooooo glad that Cisco is in charge of a large majority of internet security and the consumer products affiliated with it.

This is sad. (Both ways)

What did they have to get him indicted on? (Other than Daniels sitting there reading a police report)

 

[johnfear]

Seriously? They appear on mine. I have details for phone/text/data including all the information I mentioned for all the phones on my account. (You have to click the "details" button, but it's all there.)

I don't. I can get the incoming/outgoing calls. I cannot see anything about my texts except how many they want to charge me with.