State v Bradley Cooper 5-3-11

[RaleighNative]

Shall we make a running list of lies told in the prosecution closing arguments? I'll just put in the first bullet, and let everyone else add:

1) BC was one of 157 VoIP experts in the world

 

[SleuthSayer]

BTW, for those who want a do-over, a new trial with new prosecutors, consider that the evidence is not going to change.

NC's phone is not going to magically regain all the lost data. That 3825 router? Not going to be found. Brad's shoes from 7/12/08 HT trip #1? Still discarded wherever he threw them. There isn't going to be any additional physical evidence on NC's body, there isn't going to be a different cause of death, nor a different time estimate of death. That Google search on Brad's computer? That's not going away either. Brad's lies? Will stay lies in perpetuity on that video depo. Rosemary Zednick will still be a woman who thought she saw Nancy wearing an iPod and thought Nancy was hit by a car and discarded off of Fielding Dr.

It is what it is. The evidence is what it is. It's not going to change.

Understood. However, I think that the case can be far more focused and streamlined. I thought from the beginning that all of the hearsay evidence from the neighbors was far too repetitive and I suspect just eventually annoyed the jury.

Reminds me of this exchange from A Few Good Men:

DEFENSE. Please the Court, I understand Lt. Ross is planning on calling all the other members of Rifle Security Company Windward to testify.

PROSECUTOR In light of the defense that Lt. Kaffee is planning to mount, the explicit instructions of the platoon leader seems particularly relevant testimony.

DEFENSE. The defense is willing to concede that all 23 witnesses will testify substantially as Corporal Hammaker did, if the Government is willing to concede that none of them were in Dawson and Downey's room at 16:20 on August 6th.

JUDGE. Lieutenant?

PROSECUTOR. The Government will agree to the stipulation, sir.

I was hoping that Howie would stand up and say "The defense is willing to concede that every one of NC's friends will testify that NC told them that BC is an a-hole if the prosecution is willing to concede that none of NC's friends eye-witnessed NC's murder."

Also, many of the other witnesses were just a waste of the court/jury's time and didn't provide any useful information. Then technical people were put up on the stand to demonstrate that they are very technical, but probably just made the juror's heads spin. They needed experts who could explain things in simple language.

 

[sunshine05]

But he wasn't a plumber. He did have the knowledge and equipment to automate a call. And any murder is risky.

But it shouldn't be assumed that he did it just because he did VOIP. Engineers don't fake phone calls as part of their job. It is not part of their training to learn how to fake phone calls without leaving a trace.

Nothing was found on the Cisco records.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Shall we make a running list of lies told in the prosecution closing arguments? I'll just put in the first bullet, and let everyone else add:

1) BC was one of 157 VoIP experts in the world

Not significant. Who cares if it was 157, 1570 or 15,700. He was an expert in a field where there are not that many like him worldwide.

 

[Madflava]

In a word, Yes.

Well, if you had an IT background you'd feel differently. Look at people who release viruses into the wild like the Melissa virus. The guy went to all kinds of extremes to cover his tracks and he still got caught with DIGITAL FORENSICS.. the guy that leaked The Hulk movie to the Internet before it was even in the theater, caught using DIGITAL FORENSICS.

They have ZERO forensics that he did this. NOTHING. No server log entries, nothing. Maybe they waited too long to pursue it and the logs were gone.. I dont know. It just doesnt sit right with me because this is the kind of stuff I do every day and there is always a trail without going through a TON of cleanup, more than Im fairly certain most of you realize.

I just dont believe the guy is smart enough to pull that off and leave a Google search result on his PC.

 

[otto]

BTW, for those who want a do-over, a new trial with new prosecutors, consider that the evidence is not going to change.

NC's phone is not going to magically regain all the lost data. That 3825 router? Not going to be found. Brad's shoes from 7/12/08 HT trip #1? Still discarded wherever he threw them. There isn't going to be any additional physical evidence on NC's body, there isn't going to be a different cause of death, nor a different time estimate of death. That Google search on Brad's computer? That's not going away either. Brad's lies? Will stay lies in perpetuity on that video depo. Rosemary Zednick will still be a woman who thought she saw Nancy wearing an iPod and thought Nancy was hit by a car and discarded off of Fielding Dr.

It is what it is. The evidence is what it is. It's not going to change.

I think a re-trial would probably end with a guilty verdict because each party knows the other's strategy. The prosecution would be better prepared, and would, I think, strip down the neighborhood gossip, shorten the trial length and present a more effective case.

 

[Cheyenne130]

But it shouldn't be assumed that he did it just because he did VOIP. Engineers don't fake phone calls as part of their job. It is not part of their training to learn how to fake phone calls without leaving a trace.

Nothing was found on the Cisco records.

The call did not go through the Cisco network. What happened to that router that was in his house? What was taken off of the shelf that left dust around a bare spot?

 

[sunshine05]

No intention here to you Cheyenne but Brad ISN"T a plumber in the present tense and neither was NC in the past tense.

Cheyenne was referring to the time of the murder, not present time.

 

[RR0004]

We were talking about THE call, the 6:40 call from the Cooper home to BC's cell phone. Phone records on both ends confirm the call was made. Everyone assumes since he did VOIP that he had to have faked the call. I don't think he did.

No, I understand that...but why do they assume that it was one person calling another person...vs. one person calling their cell phone from the house phone. I know this is late to be asking this question...but would appreciate if anyone can share. TIA

 

[lib's mom]

I thought he looked like he could barely hold his eyes open. If they had him medicated for court, he got a tish too much this a.m. Or maybe his neighbor screamed all night and kept him awake, I don't know. Anybody else see this?

 

[otto]

It's the same smirk he's had the whole trial. Not sure what people saw that was so different about it.

I guess I don't see him as smirking. He seemed to me to have a static expression throughout, and today he looked like he was on some kind of medication that kept him calm.

 

[sunshine05]

The call did not go through the Cisco network. What happened to that router that was in his house? What was taken off of the shelf that left dust around a bare spot?

We have been in circles about this. The call was too long for it to have been generated through the router.

The length of the call meant it had to have gone through the Cisco IT managed system.

There is no way he would have taken that enormous industrial size router home when he could have picked up a non-traceable, much smaller router from the Cisco repo-depot and then just pitched it. It's not logical.

 

[SleuthSayer]

And there's no proof she wasnt either except that there is ZERO proof the call was spoofed. Do you really believe Brad had full access to every piece of equipment that he needed to spoof that call? Do you REALLY think he had time to go through and delete all traces in between the cleaning, going to HT and all the other stuff he supposedly was doing? Its not as simple as "delete call trace" and hit enter. Tossing the router doesnt get rid of the evidence either. There are always traces.

If they had offered a shred of evidence that he spoofed that call, I would be driving the guilty bandwagon but I just dont see how it would have been done without leaving a log entry or something SOMEWHERE.

Like where?

 

[kljohnson0458]

I thought he looked like he could barely hold his eyes open. If they had him medicated for court, he got a tish too much this a.m. Or maybe his neighbor screamed all night and kept him awake, I don't know. Anybody else see this?

Yes Libs. I said he was probably medicated to keep him from jumping up scream I'm innocent and I want to testify. Only in jest. He was for sure going to sleep but then again, he probably isn't sleeping. JMPO

 

[Madflava]

But it shouldn't be assumed that he did it just because he did VOIP. Engineers don't fake phone calls as part of their job. It is not part of their training to learn how to fake phone calls without leaving a trace.

Nothing was found on the Cisco records.

Seems like you and I are on the same page. There is SOOOOO much that would have had to have been cleaned up and then you'd have to cover the tracks of your cleanup too. We're not dealing with Windows where you just hit a "Delete All" button.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Well, if you had an IT background you'd feel differently. Look at people who release viruses into the wild like the Melissa virus. The guy went to all kinds of extremes to cover his tracks and he still got caught with DIGITAL FORENSICS.. the guy that leaked The Hulk movie to the Internet before it was even in the theater, caught using DIGITAL FORENSICS.

They have ZERO forensics that he did this. NOTHING. No server log entries, nothing. Maybe they waited too long to pursue it and the logs were gone.. I dont know. It just doesnt sit right with me because this is the kind of stuff I do every day and there is always a trail without going through a TON of cleanup, more than Im fairly certain most of you realize.

I just dont believe the guy is smart enough to pull that off and leave a Google search result on his PC.

I do have an IT background. I understand the singular mindset and skillset of those who unleash viruses. This wasn't a virus. It was a single instance of an automated phone call. It was not sent out over the WWW. There wasn't much to erase. MOO

 

[less0305]

Wow, you did not just go there! Completely out of line, IMO.

Wow - huh? I just mean that all murderers come to justice at some point - it might take years, but it all comes home to them - this life or the next.

 

[cassius]

I guess I don't see him as smirking. He seemed to me to have a static expression throughout, and today he looked like he was on some kind of medication that kept him calm.

I shoulda wrote it as "smirk" since that's how others are describing it. To me he's had the same or similar expression throughout the trial. But people see what they wanna see and hear what they wanna hear, on both sides of the fence.

 

[RaleighNative]

Not significant. Who cares if it was 157, 1570 or 15,700. He was an expert in a field where there are not that many like him worldwide.

It's very significant. There are a hundreds of people in RTP who have the EXACT knowledge and specialty that BC did. I personally hired 40 VoIP experts for one company in RTP...ten years ago!

Boz was trying to say BC had such an extremely rare skillset that only he could know how to fake a call and not leave any trace of it.

This simply is not true. BC's skillset is certainly specialized and worth a high salary, but it's not that rare.

 

[Madflava]

The call did not go through the Cisco network. What happened to that router that was in his house? What was taken off of the shelf that left dust around a bare spot?

Where did the call go then? Through two tin cans and a string? If it went through the internet, there are traces and not going through Cisco's network would make it IMPOSSIBLE for him to cover his tracks. Im sure he doesnt have access to Time Warner or ATT or whoever his ISP was's logs.