State v. Bradley Cooper 4-29-2011

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
macd said:
If computer was on, VPN connected, and email program running then the .pst file would be updated every time an email was received.
Click to expand...

Generally on a corporate computer the .pst file is for your archived mail. The current mail resides on the mail server and once you have reached the company imposed server quota you must then move things to your archive folder(s) which is the .pst file. A home user using outlook express would generally keep all of their mail in the .pst file but this is not the case on a corporate computer so therefore the .pst file would not get updated every time a new message arrives.
 
FWIW, here's my take. I'm no computer expert, but I understand just enough to be dangerous. I was there for Agent J's and Det. Chappell's testimony for the State. (I have also watched every bit of testimony either online or in court, except for the blacked-out testimony in the first couple of days-CPDetectives, I think.)

For those of us who are not computer experts, there is now reasonable doubt surrounding the computer evidence. If that were the only problem with the State's case, I might just consider that "over my head" and believe the State. However, couple that doubt with the total picture. Look at the overall arc of testimony, and how the Defense illustrated time and time again that on many points that friends of Nancy were inaccurate at best, or lying at worst. To me the CPD's record keeping and testimony came off as shoddy at best, or dishonest at worst. I saw the real "tipping point" for the jury as being when Cummings asked MH about BC's tennis grip, and then got really ugly about it. The jury's reaction was one of shock and disgust. I actually wrote "tipping point for the jury" in my notes. Then came Cummings' tantrum over the ducks. The jury was trying not to laugh. It really was circus-like. I actually had a PM conversation that evening with ncsu and told him these things, and stated that IMO "the jury is OVER IT."
The next day was the note from them saying as much. Interesting timing, to be sure.
I don't claim to know what the verdict will be, but I certainly don't predict a guilty verdict after witnessing what I have in the courtroom. I wouldn't be surprised by a hung jury, or even an NG verdict at this point. MOO
 
unknown403 said:
This from WRAL- An FBI investigator testified Wednesday that he found evidence that, on the day before NC disappeared, photos of the area where her body was later found were accessed on her husband's laptop computer

and

CP (edited), a Durham police detective assigned to the FBI's Cyber Task Force, said that multiple aerial photos were accessed from Google Maps on BC's laptop computer at 1:15 p.m. on July 11, 2008, while he was at work

Look not trying to get into anything, i just wanted to point out that this guy could easily have been testifying the opposite way if nothing was found. If the FBI can trust him IMO he is a solid resource, they do not affiliate with just anyone.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they did. I was simply pointing out that he is a durham police detective, not an FBI agent.
 
FullDisclosure said:
FWIW, here's my take. I'm no computer expert, but I understand just enough to be dangerous. I was there for Agent J's and Det. Chappell's testimony for the State. (I have also watched every bit of testimony either online or in court, except for the blacked-out testimony in the first couple of days-CPDetectives, I think.)

For those of us who are not computer experts, there is now reasonable doubt surrounding the computer evidence. If that were the only problem with the State's case, I might just consider that "over my head" and believe the State. However, couple that doubt with the total picture. Look at the overall arc of testimony, and how the Defense illustrated time and time again that on many points friends of Nancy were inaccurate at best, or lying at worst. To me the CPD's record keeping and testimony came off as shoddy at best, or dishonest at worst. I saw the real "tipping point" for the jury as being when Cummings asked MH about BC's tennis grip, and then got really ugly about it. The jury's reaction was one of shock and disgust. I actually wrote "tipping point for the jury" in my notes. Then came Cummings' tantrum over the ducks. The jury was trying not to laugh. It really was circus-like. I actually had a PM conversation that evening with ncsu and told him these things, and stated that IMO "the jury is OVER IT."
The next day was the note from them saying as much. Interesting timing, to be sure.
I don't claim to know what the verdict will be, but I certainly don't predict a guilty verdict after witnessing what I have in the courtroom. I wouldn't be surprised by a hung jury, or even an NG verdict at this point. MOO
Click to expand...

Just want to say FullDisclosure, you have been awesome updating us throughout this trial. THANK YOU!!!!:rocker:
 
gracielee said:
I replied to the other post about that. Don't want to repeat it, because I don't want to get in trouble for off topic..... Read what I wrote to the OP. :seeya:
Click to expand...

I addressed the duct tape in my reply to CrimeAddict. Did you catch that one?
 
Amster said:
Bradley has nothing to whine about....after all, he was reading all of Nancys' e-mails. Probably monitoring her phone calls and text messages, also.
Click to expand...

No kidding. He had Nancy's phone, Nancy's computer, and access to ALL her personal emails. Perhaps he wants some cheese with that whine?
 
Shadow722 said:
Anybody with a laptop in range of BC's home wireless network could possibly access that computer. And that's the problem. The CPD left vital evidence BC laptop, open for manipulation/tampering.

It is far easier to ascertain spoilage/tampering on a computer than finding who did the tampering.....
Click to expand...

Since evidence shows that computer was connected to VPN, then they would not have been able to gain access to the computer by hacking into wireless network. VPN software blocks access through local networks.
 
Defense motion to dismiss "failed to produce sufficient evidence" - denied
 
Now jury knows defense had expert GM to rebut forensics that was disallowed due to pros not having enough time. (argument with jury present)

I am apparently mistaken, thought I heard judge calling jury in previously (?)
 
jrb0124 said:
Now jury knows defense had expert GM to rebut forensics that was disallowed due to pros not having enough time. (argument with jury present)
Click to expand...

Actually, I don't *think* the jury is present. Not 100% sure, though.
 
I hope Frye is admitted to testify. At least the State has the router and it shows it was in use by BC on 7/11.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 88 more.
Total: 4,282 (members: 89, guests: 4,193)

Online statistics

Members online
89
Guests online
4,193
Total visitors
4,282
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,400
Messages
17,968,406
Members
228,767
Latest member
Mona Lisa
Back
Top