State v. Bradley Cooper 4-12-2011

[Palomine]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
2 Cary police & 2 FBI agents can't be shown. After this FBI agent, we have 1 more. RT @Fromageball how many more witnesses can't be shown?

 

[lib's mom]

Boy, this black out is infuriating! This is like starving to death while someone tweets you about the incrediable restaurant they're at and the fabulous meal they're having there.

 

[Cheyenne130]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
2 Cary police & 2 FBI agents can't be shown. After this FBI agent, we have 1 more. RT @Fromageball how many more witnesses can't be shown?

That is sort of good news. That means that Det. Daniels can be shown.

 

[Palomine]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
Four witnesses can't be shown: 2 Cary police (already testified) & 2 FBI agents (one on the stand now, one to follow). #coopertrial

 

[snowshuze]

Blackouts sure make it hard to discuss all the facts of the case. We don't GET all the facts of the case.

 

[cityslick]

Boy, this black out is infuriating! This is like starving to death while someone tweets you about the incrediable restaurant they're at and the fabulous meal they're having there.

I agree, since there are these large gaps in info that we are getting and you just want to know what's going on during that time, interesting or not.

 

[Albert]

Since we have a blackout I am going to repost a post I made late last night:

What if we already have our smoking gun and it was presented by the AT*T guy. Remember how he explained seizure time as the total ringing time. That is, the time from locating the cell phone within the network till the time the cell phone was answered. I know we have heard different opinions on the meaning of seizure time on this forum but let's imagine the AT&T guy is correct. During his testimony he identified seizure times from 0-21 seconds in the detailed records. We heard on cross examination that there was nothing unusual about these seizure times. We did not, however, hear during cross exam that the defense team doubted the AT&T's definition of seizure time. So unless the defense is waiting till they call their expert and offer a different definition then perhaps the AT&T guy is correct. It would seem more effective to discredit the AT&T guy during this testimony but I am not a lawyer and therefore what do I know.

Anyway, BC mentioned that he placed a call from the home phone to his cell phone in order to locate the cell phone. We know he had his cell phone on the first trip to HT. So we therefore have 2 possibilities of which time that call from home was made to locate the phone. Either 6:05am or 6:34am. If this call occurred at 6:34am then we are to believe that BC misplaced his phone after returning from HT on his 1st trip. If this is the case then the 6:05am call has not been explained. Therefore I must assume the call to locate the phone occurred at 6:05am.

If the call at 6:05am was for the purpose of locating the phone we know that this call terminated at voicemail if the phone was truly misplaced. The duration of this call was 23 seconds with a seizure time of 1 second. I have a problem with this 1 second duration as this implies 1 of 2 things to me. Either BC had this phone in his hand and answered the call immediately when it stated to ring which would imply the phone is not misplaced. Or, the phone was powered off and the call went immediately to voicemail or the phone was set to call forward all to voicemail. If the call was forwarded immediately to voicemail then the cell phone did not ring and therefore the phone would still be misplaced.

I only think these questions will be answered when and if BC takes the stand. The defense team indicated the call was to locate the phone and now we will need to understand if the call indeed helped locate the phone.

(What I realized after posting this was that the 6:05am call indeed went to voice mail. This is known because the billing record does not show this call. This call is only seen on the detailed records)

 

[snowshuze]

Since we have a blackout I am going to repost a post I made late last night:

What if we already have our smoking gun and it was presented by the AT*T guy. Remember how he explained seizure time as the total ringing time. That is, the time from locating the cell phone within the network till the time the cell phone was answered. I know we have heard different opinions on the meaning of seizure time on this forum but let's imagine the AT&T guy is correct. During his testimony he identified seizure times from 0-21 seconds in the detailed records. We heard on cross examination that there was nothing unusual about these seizure times. We did not, however, hear during cross exam that the defense team doubted the AT&T's definition of seizure time. So unless the defense is waiting till they call their expert and offer a different definition then perhaps the AT&T guy is correct. It would seem more effective to discredit the AT&T guy during this testimony but I am not a lawyer and therefore what do I know.

Anyway, BC mentioned that he placed a call from the home phone to his cell phone in order to locate the cell phone. We know he had his cell phone on the first trip to HT. So we therefore have 2 possibilities of which time that call from home was made to locate the phone. Either 6:05am or 6:34am. If this call occurred at 6:34am then we are to believe that BC misplaced his phone after returning from HT on his 1st trip. If this is the case then the 6:05am call has not been explained. Therefore I must assume the call to locate the phone occurred at 6:05am.

If the call at 6:05am was for the purpose of locating the phone we know that this call terminated at voicemail if the phone was truly misplaced. The duration of this call was 23 seconds with a seizure time of 1 second. I have a problem with this 1 second duration as this implies 1 of 2 things to me. Either BC had this phone in his hand and answered the call immediately when it stated to ring which would imply the phone is not misplaced. Or, the phone was powered off and the call went immediately to voicemail or the phone was set to call forward all to voicemail. If the call was forwarded immediately to voicemail then the cell phone did not ring and therefore the phone would still be misplaced.

I only think these questions will be answered when and if BC takes the stand. The defense team indicated the call was to locate the phone and now we will need to understand if the call indeed helped locate the phone.

(What I realized after posting this was that the 6:05am call indeed went to voice mail. This is known because the billing record does not show this call. This call is only seen on the detailed records)

If Brad takes the stand in his own defense, I'll eat my keyboard. Without condiments.

 

[less0305]

Albert - I would like to throw this in also. If he claims that he looked and had to call his cell phone during the two trips why did he not testify to this while being questioned by AS. She asked him pointedly what he did during the two trips. She asked him more than once, I believe, what all he did when he returned home on the first trip before leaving out the second trip. He did not mention that he lost his phone and had to call it to find it. Please correct me if I'm wrong - but why wouldn't he have disclosed that when asked by AS about his actions. Again, I think she gave him PLENTY of room to explain his actions then and he did not. He's lying through his teeth and all with a smirk on his face.

 

[Palomine]

Gribble took the stand anything is possible...Brad may take the stand just so they can explain his bland, no emotion personality

 

[lib's mom]

I agree, since there are these large gaps in info that we are getting and you just want to know what's going on during that time, interesting or not.

I don't see why the witnesses couldn't just wear one of those Darth Vadar voice changing masks! It would hide their face, change their voice and be most entertaining through all the boring bits. Plus, think how awesome that would look on camera!

I think I'll email this suggestion to the judge.

 

[less0305]

:laughcry:

If Brad takes the stand in his own defense, I'll eat my keyboard. Without condiments.

 

[cody100]

If Brad takes the stand in his own defense, I'll eat my keyboard. Without condiments.

Now, I would like to see that. :great:

 

[SleuthinNC]

I am now getting irritated with the lack of tweets about anything being said. Fine WRAL, no camera but if you say you are going to tweet about it then do give us the scoop on what is going on.

 

[less0305]

Ha!!!!! Do a search on Twitter of #websleuths. You'll get a kick out of that! :floorlaugh:

 

[Cheyenne130]

I am now getting irritated with the lack of tweets about anything being said. Fine WRAL, no camera but if you say you are going to tweet about it then do give us the scoop on what is going on.

Or even what is NOT going on. Say that the state is still doing direct or that cross has begun. Anything to let us know that they are still reporting!

On the other side of it, those following WRAL on twitter but not following the cooper trial are getting irritated at the number of "tweets" they are getting that aren't regular news.

 

[snowshuze]

Gribble took the stand anything is possible...Brad may take the stand just so they can explain his bland, no emotion personality

Palomine, the defense admitted in opening statements Brad has lied. The jury has already watched his SWORN deposition. Brad has LIED UNDER OATH. If defense puts him on the stand, they KNOW prosecution will have him up there for DAYS nailing him on every single lie he has told. His sworn deposition vs evidence already presented. He won't take the stand, not in a million years.

 

[Just the Fax]

wral WRAL NEWS in NC
2 Cary police & 2 FBI agents can't be shown. After this FBI agent, we have 1 more. RT @Fromageball how many more witnesses can't be shown?

at courthouse....we know there another fbi agent that looked at the macbbook

usb thumb drive testimony now...programs can be run direct from usb.

 

[borndem]

If Brad takes the stand in his own defense, I'll eat my keyboard. Without condiments.

:lol:

And in case you change your mind, remember -- "A spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down...." So here are some go-with's, but I don't think you'll get the chance to need them.


:sundae: :martini: opcorn: :chili: :drink:

 

[Palomine]

I don't understand why they don't tweet more frequently? tweeting and blogs is all we get in Canadian Trial...if they didn't tweet for 20 minutes I would be peeved