State v Bradley Cooper 4-28-2011

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.

otto

Verified Expert
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
40,959
Reaction score
106,140
This article gives a good overview of defense witnesses before Wednesday. The reasons that JP is an alternate theory is because of the similar circumstances. I did a 40 week count, out of curiosity, and it's off by 2 weeks.

"They met in a downtown coffee shop to discuss a lawsuit his former wife, Kinde Rawlins, had filed against Heather MeTour, with whom Pearson and Brad Cooper had extramarital affairs."

http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/04/27/1156207/cooper-trial-exposes-more-tales.html

I wonder what JP was telling Nancy in the context of his wife suing HM? Was he advising Nancy to do the same, in case she needed money? Was there something more to the conversation?

(should names in quotations be abbreviated?)
 
Does anyone have a map of the area including drainage, golf course, home, stores? I looked on the Map Thread and they all seemed to be deleted. If someone has a map, I'll keep checking the map thread. Thx
 
It looks like JP had a tryst with Nancy, and he had a tryst with HM. SH, the husband of HM, understood BC's reasons for having a "closet" tryst wtih HM, and it was not about SH. It was about JP, the guy that may had gotten his wife pregnant. Brad's revenge may have included sleeping with JP's secret "across the street" girlfriend when they were both married, but I think he meant no ill will towards the husband SH.

A day behind and a dollar short ... and now we're going to hear arguments about the router log that will keep the jury in for an extra week? ... or will the Judge rule that the prosecution has rested and that's that.
 
I did a 40 week count, out of curiosity, and it's off by 2 weeks.


No its not, its dead on. 2 weeks are added to length of pregnancy as a standard to date it back to last missed period.

Go here: http://www.babycenter.com/pregnancy-due-date-calculator

Enter 10/31 using the date of conception calculator.

I got:

"Congratulations! Your baby is due on or around:
Monday, July 23, 2012"
 
Id like to take an informal poll of BDIers. Not those who know BC or NC first or second hand and not those who are long-term WSers who generally believe a defendant is guilty. But is there anyone else not in those groups who has independently watched this trial unbiased and come to the conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt he is guilty? I'd like to hear from someone like that.

I don't blame someone for being BDI if they were friends or neighbors or family of NC. You'd better believe I'd be the same way if it happened to someone I know. But I want to hear from anyone else.

Thank you.
 
Given all the evidence and testimony to date, if BC did not kill NC, I think JP is the best alternative suspect. NC was seeking additional sources of $$$. If there was discussions between NC and JP regarding 'obligations' (child support), I can easily see those escalating into heated arguments given the circumstances and dispositions of both.

Its quite possible JP had more motives than BC: not just the $$$, but 'protecting his family/livelihood' (which he told the CPD was his motivation for lying about the affair).

Perhaps he had already been paying something to NC? sure sounded like there was more to the story, and he lied about the extent of communications with NC after 5/8/08.

If you listen to the second interview tape with CPD and ask yourself if this is someone both desparately trying to deflect attention from himself, and align himself with the LE 'team'.
 
Given all the evidence and testimony to date, if BC did not kill NC, I think JP is the best alternative suspect. NC was seeking additional sources of $$$. If there was discussions between NC and JP regarding 'obligations' (child support), I can easily see those escalating into heated arguments given the circumstances and dispositions of both.

Its quite possible JP had more motives than BC: not just the $$$, but 'protecting his family/livelihood' (which he told the CPD was his motivation for lying about the affair).

Perhaps he had already been paying something to NC? sure sounded like there was more to the story, and he lied about the extent of communications with NC after 5/8/08.

If you listen to the second interview tape with CPD and ask yourself if this is someone both desparately trying to deflect attention from himself, and align himself with the LE 'team'.


Say JP is the person who should be on trial, and the evidence is as simple and basic as you've laid out. Is there any logical valid reason LE would have a motive to throw BC under the bus instead of someone who clearly (according to your post) is the better suspect?

I think all this JP stuff is kind of loopy, as nobody really knows that he wasn't ruled out in terms of his alibi. It wasn't testified to by LE on the stand because he's not on trial, but that doesn't mean they didn't rule him out.

In defense of the BDI'ers (of which I am one) - this is a bit lame but I feel sorta obligated to point out that BC is on trial for murder. It's elementary - the State feels he did it, the officers investigating believe he did it, friends and neighbors believe he did it, and his mother in law, father in law, and sister in law believe he did it. It's not like BDI'ers have picked a minor player and decided on a whim he was guilty. (Which is what is happening with JP. The whole crux of JP being guilty is that NC was going to hit him up for money, but that theory hinges on the child being his, 100% without question, which is also a theory. A theory built on a theory. Shaky.)

That theory also makes NC into a secretive, shify, untruthful person. Which would be okay, except it's her husband who is known to be secretive and untruthful.
 
Given all the evidence and testimony to date, if BC did not kill NC, I think JP is the best alternative suspect. NC was seeking additional sources of $$$. If there was discussions between NC and JP regarding 'obligations' (child support), I can easily see those escalating into heated arguments given the circumstances and dispositions of both.

Its quite possible JP had more motives than BC: not just the $$$, but 'protecting his family/livelihood' (which he told the CPD was his motivation for lying about the affair).

Perhaps he had already been paying something to NC? sure sounded like there was more to the story, and he lied about the extent of communications with NC after 5/8/08.

If you listen to the second interview tape with CPD and ask yourself if this is someone both desparately trying to deflect attention from himself, and align himself with the LE 'team'.

That's exactly what I said. But JP is just a wild card suspect for me.
 
Say JP is the person who should be on trial, and the evidence is as simple and basic as you've laid out. Is there any logical valid reason LE would have a motive to throw BC under the bus instead of someone who clearly (according to your post) is the better suspect?

I think all this JP stuff is kind of loopy, as nobody really knows that he wasn't ruled out in terms of his alibi. It wasn't testified to by LE on the stand because he's not on trial, but that doesn't mean they didn't rule him out.

In defense of the BDI'ers (of which I am one) - this is a bit lame but I feel sorta obligated to point out that BC is on trial for murder. It's elementary - the State feels he did it, the officers investigating believe he did it, friends and neighbors believe he did it, and his mother in law, father in law, and sister in law believe he did it. It's not like BDI'ers have picked a minor player and decided on a whim he was guilty. (Which is what is happening with JP. The whole crux of JP being guilty is that NC was going to hit him up for money, but that theory hinges on the child being his, 100% without question, which is also a theory. A theory built on a theory. Shaky.)

That theory also makes NC into a secretive, shify, untruthful person. Which would be okay, except it's her husband who is known to be secretive and untruthful.

Hi Bottlecap,

That's a well thought reply.

To answer some of issues you have pointed out - I agree BDI'ers have not picked a minor player, they picked the most common culprit (DH/SO). I actually was a BDI before this trial started.

you ask, "Is there any logical valid reason LE would have a motive to throw BC under the bus instead of someone who clearly (according to your post) is the better suspect?"

Unfortuneately there are many, many cases where the wrong suspect was indicted, tried, convicted and jailed....only to be freed later (DNA or otherwise). Its unusual, but it happens. The fact that the State has decided BC is their man does not make BC guilty. The fact that the State has decided BC is their man definitely makes JP not their man. They would never go to trial suggesting the possibility of an alternative suspect. I have no idea what CPD really thinks of JP - and none of us will as long as BC is on trial for murder.

Pressure from family and friends to make an arrest is a real influence. If I was a family member of NC or one of her friends from that certain group - with that mindset, maybe I would be the one on the phone to the CPD/DA every day.
 
Let's see what's up with this router deal, and what the defense has for their last few witnesses (the state, IMO, saved its best for last for instance). The fence will probably become less crowded at that point.

I can agree that DY destroyed evidence and that that should be held against the state's case. I can agree the investigation was not done well. I can agree the state has stretched its theory to allege facts that have no evidence or have been proven wrong.

I am not convinced though that BC's computer was hacked on the search. All the stuff about WEP hacking to me was a major smokescreen, designed to obscure a damning piece of evidence. The only relevance that could have had, as I understood it, was someone tapping into BC's home network and planting the search. I don't buy that at all. That'd be as likely as if someone had seen his car on Fielding at 6:45 am that day saying well probably somebody hotwired it and it wasn't him.

But as far as cases go, this one is weak. If someone decides the search evidence is invalid based on the technical problems raised about it by the defense, I would think at this point it would be a big leap to say he's proven guilty of murder beyond a reasonable doubt - I don't think I would. Beyond the affairs and missteps, the is the final lynchpin if you are on the BDI side, as far as evidence goes, and it is crucial. Does the jury buy it? I don't know.
 
jrb,

the short answer on your question above - agree. If BC had been out of town that weekend, yeah I'd say I'd have been crawling all over JP's alibi if I were the PD.
 
Id like to take an informal poll of BDIers. Not those who know BC or NC first or second hand and not those who are long-term WSers who generally believe a defendant is guilty. But is there anyone else not in those groups who has independently watched this trial unbiased and come to the conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt he is guilty? I'd like to hear from someone like that.

I don't blame someone for being BDI if they were friends or neighbors or family of NC. You'd better believe I'd be the same way if it happened to someone I know. But I want to hear from anyone else.

Thank you.

I believe he is guilty, but I don't think anyone would mistake me as a charter member of the BDI club. I came into this unbiased, stayed on the fence for the longest time. The google search really just is damning to me. That's the evidence to me that puts the glue to all the other CE. This is how it looked to me..

You have all this CE. Think of them as basically pieces of paper spread out. Some make sense, some don't. Some you can get an explanation for, some you can't. But there is not a whole lot that links them together, they are just kind of out there on their own, like islands. Then you get the google search testimony. Now all of a sudden you start putting it all together, knowing in the back of your mind he searched the dump site the day before. Now a lot of that CE has links to them. Some of the CE makes sense when used in a certain context. The story becomes a little clearer.

That being said, I believe there has been many mistakes made in this investigation and trial. I do believe that a number of NC's friends believed from day one that he was guilty and made sure they were going to do anything in their power to cast him in a negative light, regardless of the truth unless someone else confessed. I do believe that CPD focused on him from the beginning, in part because of these stories by the neighbors. I also believe that because of those two points I just listed, at first glance you look at this case and you see someone who's an introvert and was in a bad marriage and it feels like he's getting railroaded because some people just don't like him (for various reasons). It feels like he's getting railroaded to the casual observer because it happened in Cary and Lord help us if we have a random murder happen in Cary.

I hope that answers your question.
 
Wonder if Cummings is going to do any questioning today. He lost it more than once yesterday and became "gansta howard". I'd imagine Colon Willoughby is not happy right now.
 
Say JP is the person who should be on trial, and the evidence is as simple and basic as you've laid out. Is there any logical valid reason LE would have a motive to throw BC under the bus instead of someone who clearly (according to your post) is the better suspect?

I think all this JP stuff is kind of loopy, as nobody really knows that he wasn't ruled out in terms of his alibi. It wasn't testified to by LE on the stand because he's not on trial, but that doesn't mean they didn't rule him out.

In defense of the BDI'ers (of which I am one) - this is a bit lame but I feel sorta obligated to point out that BC is on trial for murder. It's elementary - the State feels he did it, the officers investigating believe he did it, friends and neighbors believe he did it, and his mother in law, father in law, and sister in law believe he did it. It's not like BDI'ers have picked a minor player and decided on a whim he was guilty. (Which is what is happening with JP. The whole crux of JP being guilty is that NC was going to hit him up for money, but that theory hinges on the child being his, 100% without question, which is also a theory. A theory built on a theory. Shaky.)

That theory also makes NC into a secretive, shify, untruthful person. Which would be okay, except it's her husband who is known to be secretive and untruthful.

BBM

I just want to address the specific point that I bolded, but there are some in the BDI came that yes, did decide on a whim that he was guilty when she went missing. They are probably right, but it's inaccurate to say that everyone who thinks he's guilty didn't form that opinion before he was arrested or even when any evidence came to light.
 
You realize it's only a matter of time until the female contingent of WS is paraded onto the witness stand, one at a time, and grilled, "Ms ______, do you refer to Det Young as "McDreamy?"

<head bowed, "yes sir">

followed by...

"... and have you no shame..no shame at all? "

< "apparently not, sir">
 
You realize it's only a matter of time until the female contingent of WS is paraded onto the witness stand, one at a time, and grilled, "Ms ______, do you refer to Det Young as "McDreamy?"

<head bowed, "yes sir">

followed by...

"... and have you no shame..no shame at all? "

< "apparently not, sir">

We should get DD a nickname too.

Either McTeddy or McNugget.
 
I don't know anyone in the trial, in court, in Cary, any of the family. I would not be able to sit on this jury because I have an identical twin, and identify too closely with KL's loss. Since this is the first trial I have watched in entirety, and I am a W/S newbie, I can say I have learned quite a bit about what reasonable doubt is and how important it is to hold that option in the case of a trial that is based on circumstantial evidence.
I believe BDI, for the reasons that have been clearly outlined including his lies, his cleaning frenzy, their relationship that was at boiling point, his previous relationship hx of stalking that resulted in a no contact order in Canada, Nancy's risk because she was at the point of wanting separation, the google search ( and I am not a techie) and that I do not believe that most of the state's witnesses including law enforcement could realistically be in collusion to frame brad at their own personal risk of perjury. ( and this list is not all inclusive.....the short version)
 
Agreed that the router deal is critical. THE only thing that really could matter at this point - which is why I was scratching my head somewhat over the whole duck palaver yesterday. IMHO, that didn't prove anyone lied, only that they were saying what they thought to be true at the time and in the context give; it didn't prove a duck wasn't a murder weapon or was; it didn't do anything.

From MH's testimony, I could only conclude that he did get the ME letters mixed up, confusing mechanical engineer with medical examiner. I feel certain the prosecution let him go on as long as he did in order to make him look foolish. If his body language was any indication, he knew he looked foolish. I believe the prosecution wanted a physical embodiment of the SODDI'ers that are crawling out of the woodwork: someone unqualified to make an opinion, someone with a personal bias, someone who was quite vocal behind the anonymity of a computer monitor but squirming in public. To think the jury is blissfully ignorant of abundant theories is to live in an alternate universe.

I don't feel I'm in a place to second-guess Cummings either, or assume he's idiotic. I think he wanted to the jury to feel some irritation at the defense for what might be perceived at wasting the jury's time by being less interested in getting at the truth (which should not be something dodged by the defense, if their client is innocent) than in legal maneuverings.

The router is about all there is left of anything that isn't tainted with utter idiocy, gossip, posturing, and movie-of-the-week theories.
 
Pressure from family and friends to make an arrest is a real influence. If I was a family member of NC or one of her friends from that certain group - with that mindset, maybe I would be the one on the phone to the CPD/DA every day.

Really? How do you explain the 3+ yrs it took for Jason Young to be arrested? Or the 5+ years it took for Ann Miller to be arrested? Or the 2 - 3 yrs it took for that Aboroa guy to be arrested?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
57
Guests online
2,545
Total visitors
2,602

Forum statistics

Threads
600,471
Messages
18,109,102
Members
230,991
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top