Post verdict discussion of evidence

[jumpstreet]

Has anyone followed a case in the past where a defendant was found guilty, gone to jail, and then has had such a vigorous defense continue by posters/trial watchers continue after the verdict? If so who is/was the defendant? And then has that defendant ever won an appeal?

Greg Taylor comes to mind...
... in fact, there's several recent cases in N.C where the original rulings have been overturned (or at least brought into serious question) based on questionable evidence processing...

 

[momto3kids]

I know you think he did it, but is it really a funny thing for a man to be in jail for the remainder of his life? I find it quite disturbing that people think this is a funny situation.

What I find funny is he thought he was smarter and could beat the system, as so many do.

When an intelligent adult has a choice, but choses to act in a selfish way, they get the consequence they deserve. BC choice was to not stop for 3 minutes until death finally occurred. BTW, I feel very different about self-defense and/or juveniles. A pretty picture has never been painted about prison, but again it’s his choice to call prison his new home.

As for life? He will have it much better than many Americans currently do, especially medical care, hot meals, and a place to lay his head.

 

[Madeleine74]

ETA further: I heard a theory last night at dinner, when this was being discussed. I'm not sure if it sprang from the dad's rights groups or if they latched onto it, but what is floating around as "fact" among what seems to be a large number of people, is that NC was trying to set BC up to take a fall for domestic violence to gain leverage in her divorce. She was assisted by friends, it went horribly wrong and she is actually responsible for her own death - the friends who helped are now trying to cover it up and have a vested interest in BC taking the fall.

From a sociological standpoint I am amused watching people contort themselves into coming up with some other reason for the murder, other than the obvious one (you know, that BC actually did it).

There's the "he's really smart and that Google search on his work computer was a dumb thing to do, so he couldn't have been that stupid, and thus he couldn't have done that search" reason folks. That pisses some people off that a smart guy could leave any evidence of his activities, and they can't be pissed at BC, so it had to have been planted.

There's the "Okay maybe he did that Google search but 41 seconds wasn't long enough to prove anything, so even though it's actually real, it doesn't mean he killed her" folks. And when you ask, "well how long is long enough?" they don't have an answer to that. Whatever the magic amount of time is, it cannot implicate Brad. A few folks think BC did Google the area, but he was mistaken about where he was looking so it was a mistake that he ended up zooming into Brittaby Ct where his wife's body was dumped the next day. He was really just looking for his own house and (oops), he got it wrong.

There's the "wild conspiracy" folks in which Brad was setup by <pick one or maybe pick two> the government, NC's friends, van-driving-hispanics, a guy she had a one night stand with 3 yrs before, law enforcement, a former girlfriend, NC's family. The conspiracy can never include the option that Brad committed a murder.

Yes, NC's phone got erased. That means LE didn't get any info off her phone either. Whatever information they got is from AT&T records. Don't you think LE would have wanted the phone info as well? Doh! They screwed that one up. It's something that should not have happened. But why does that mean Brad is automatically innocent and he should go free because a piece of evidence isn't available for anyone? It doesn't work that way.

 

[ncsu95]

I find the concept of life without parole - no hope for any type of rehabilitation - to be very disturbing. It gives the impression that professionals lack the skills to work with criminals, to try to put them on the right path. I'm obviously not an advocate of the death penalty, and always have hope that most of those people that make tremendous mistakes in their lives can become better people at some point before they are dead. Certainly some people are hopeless, but I see them as a minority requiring psychiatric care due to severe psychological disturbance.

I don't. Some people simply don't deserve to be free. But as for rehabilitation, there are plenty of people that spent most or all of their adult lives in jail that have made a tremendous impact on people. Brad, or anyone else, can make an impact on the people in jail. He doesn't have to be free to contribute in some way.

 

[macd]

Question for the BDI: if you see concrete evidence the google search was planted, would you believe he is innocent?

I'd be convinced that he did it, even without the google search evidence.

If it was shown that the evidence was planted after the body was found, that would not change my mind.
If it was shown that the evidence was planted before the body was found, that would change my mind.
If it was shown that the evidence was planted, but it was unknown when it was planted, that not change my mind.

 

[momto3kids]

Or teach class 101-Voice over Internet Protocol (VOIP)

 

[jrb0124]

From a sociological standpoint I am amused watching people contort themselves into coming up with some other reason for the murder, other than the obvious one (you know, that BC actually did it)

Were you also amused when Todd Willingham (later proven innocent) was convicted of murdering his 3 children and executed?

Were you amused by the way "arson investigation experts and advances in fire science, demonstrated that, contrary to the claims of the prosecution, there was no evidence that the house fire was intentionally set, and that the State of Texas executed an innocent man."

Amusing that some consider any theory other than BDI as a contortioned wild conspiracy, when the State's case (BDI) requires quite a few contortions. :waitasec:

Amusing that some think LE would never intentionally destroy or tamper with exculpatory evidence.

Amusing that some chose to ignore all evidence (presented, or untested, or not followed-up on) that does or may point to his innocence.

Amusing that some probably wouldn't want someone who thinks the way they do on their own jury if wrongfully indicted and tried for a felony. :bang:

 

[jrb0124]

That does not pertain to the line of thinking that the state made a poor case or cpd investigated poorly. In fact, I personally have those opinions. Therefore, suggestions of evidence he is innocent are interesting as well as spoliation of evidence. The ideas that he was the victim of a vast conspiracy (sorry some do allege it) or he never did anything reproachful just lack in logic and common sense, IMO.

Thanks for clarifying. I do think those so blindly convinced of his guilt from day one due to vicarious reasons, and/or a naive idealistic regard of State/LE outnumber those who have suggested 'vast conspiracies' about 20:1.

Then there are those of us somewhere in between the two...and that's where the interesting discussion lies.

 

[jrb0124]

What I find funny is he thought he was smarter and could beat the system, as so many do.

What I find funny tragic is he thought he was smarter and could beat trust the system, as so many do

 

[Danielle59]

I think there is a good chance that BC did not do this. I don't think there was evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that he did.

 

[Danielle59]

Why is it that people think that only woman can suffer from DV and not be abusers themselves?

 

[Danielle59]

I don't think life is prison is a better option for many people in today's world. I don't believe that giving up your freedom to be able to have hot meals and a pillow are viable alternatives to each other.

 

[Madeleine74]

Using Todd Willingham's arson case in TX as some kind of argument for Brad Cooper's strangulation case in NC is disingenuous, at best.

Unless you are alleging a mysterious pink/white/maroon/red van of Hispanics drove to TX first, set T.W. house on fire, then hung out somewhere until 2008, at which time they came to Cary, NC to steal BC's wifi, plant a Google search, and then murder BC's estranged wife?

Otherwise? No connection.

 

[Danielle59]

I would think that if the evidence, even circumstantial in this case was so good that the DA and CPD should have been able to pick one theory of the case and stuck to it, I don't think it should have been multiple choice.

1. He snapped and murdered her in a rage
2. He planned it since January
3. The Separation Agreement in April caused him to snap and he planned it after that
4. It happened in the foyer when she walked in that is why the ducks are gone, ignore that we can't explain her emtpy stomach or low BAC

Things to ignore:

1. Her low BAC
2. No one knowing of plans with JA
3. Her empty stomach
4. The ducks not being missing
5. The necklace that she always wore being proven that she didn't always wear it
6. That the DA/CPD are saying it was premeditated but that he snapped that evening because he couldn't take the public berating any longer (Det. D.)
7. That there is no proof of a spoofed call
8. That the cell phone was erased
9. That the computer evidence is questionable
10. That protocols were not followed
11. That affidavits were coordinated
12. That other suspects were not ruled out
13. Recent communications with JP and the issue of paternity that is in question
14. etc, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

 

[gracielee]

I know you think he did it, but is it really a funny thing for a man to be in jail for the remainder of his life? I find it quite disturbing that people think this is a funny situation.

I find it quite disturbing that Brad Cooper strangled the mother of his children, and discarded her naked body, face down in a drainage ditch, like yesterday's garbage.

 

[Danielle59]

I think there is a big difference between a case like this and one where there is a hardened criminal that regularly attacks the public. I find it barbaric to laugh at life in prison or the death penalthy at any time, but especially in a case like this where the trial was such a travesty in and of itself in regard to being just.

 

[gracielee]

In one of the earlier trial day threads (I can't remember which, I think it was the same day the google search evidence was put in, or the day after) I commented that he is likely to try for a transfer. In Canada, a "life" sentence is 25 years and then you are eligible for parole. If he serves good time, he'd be out in 25 years for sure, and there is what is called the "faint hope" clause where you can apply to court to get parole in less than 25 years. He will have to wait until the appeal process is complete, and then he will have to convince both the NC government and the Canadian government to allow the transfer.

My understanding is that jails in the US are harsher than Canada, but I have no information to back that statement up.

Does this mean that paul bernardo will be elegible for parole after 25 years? Just curious as to the canadian system.

 

[momto3kids]

I don't think life is prison is a better option than many people in today's world. I don't believe that giving up your freedom to be able to have hot meals and a pillow are viable alternatives to each other.

I agree, but it was his choice to lose his freedom. Many don't have a choice as they freeze in winters, starve daily, or die from an illness with no medical care...this will not be the case for BC. I'm in no way saying people will commit a crime to have a new residence called prison. They will endure the daily struggle and move on, but some don't want to deal with the situation and take the situation in their own hands.

 

[gritguy]

Thanks for clarifying. I do think those so blindly convinced of his guilt from day one due to vicarious reasons, and/or a naive idealistic regard of State/LE outnumber those who have suggested 'vast conspiracies' about 20:1.

Then there are those of us somewhere in between the two...and that's where the interesting discussion lies.

I agree there were (are) many blindly assuming guilt, but I think that ratio has probably flipped in terms of who is vocal now across the digital spectrum. Unfortunately for those offering solid reasons why the case may have been flawed, they are contending with the noise of those who are blindly convinced of innocence (rather than the possibility of it) and who are willing to throw out any silly reason in support of it.

I never saw it as a good idea to put a halo over NC to bolster the belief of BC's involvement in the crime, and I think it more absurd those who excuse anything BC has done to essentially put a halo over his head.

As NCSU95 has said many times, BC lied. About a lot, IMO. If that cannot be conceded, I can't get beyond that to take the person doing the denying seriously about anything else. Being a liar doesn't make one a murderer (if it did, there was more than one murderer testifying in that trial), so to me denying that BC obviously lied is a failure to rationally consider the case on the whole.

I went quite wobbly not at the google search framing concept, but rather the JP concept. I certainly could have seen the jury returning a NG verdict, and I can certainly understand people believing they should have, on the basis of the evidence and the investigation and the rulings in the trial. I will be interested in the CoA approach to the whole expert issue and testimony re: the MFT; surely that will be discussed as the major feature on appeal.

For all the theories put out there, BC is the most likely culprit, IMO. The jury having concluded he did the crime, I'm not outraged at the verdict. If the trial was unfair in how it was conducted, then I'm sympathetic to that or to any evidence that shows actual innonence. Of course we know those are basically the only things that would persuade an appellate court to discard the jury verdict anyway.

 

[momto3kids]

I think there is a big difference between a case like this and one where there is a hardened criminal that regularly attacks the public. I find it barbaric to laugh at life in prison or the death penalthy at any time, but especially in a case like this where the trial was such a travesty in and of itself in regard to being just.

IIRC 2nd degree was also placed on the table by the so called "bias" judge. The jury said no for some reason to that verdict.