State v Bradley Cooper 4-28-2011

Status
Not open for further replies.

Danielle59

New Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
878
Reaction score
0
I was wondering about that, too. I think it was okay to point out about the cash since so much testimony has gone on about that. As far as asking about timing a drive to Fielding Dr. or sitting out there, it seemed out of the scope of testimony. I'm not an attorney and have never closely followed a case, so I have absolutely no basis for my opinion, but it just seemed outside the scope to me. Gritguy, can you weigh in? :)

That was my exact reason for wondering too.
 

ncsu95

Active Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2008
Messages
3,436
Reaction score
1
This is concerning. They have stated in writing they are impatient and want their lives back (understandable, but this is life, deal with it). Hopefully they are not going to get into the deliberation room and make a decision within a couple of hours. Regardless of the verdict.

I wonder if comments like this could be used on appeal if he was found guilty.
 

RoughlyCollie

New Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
1,072
Reaction score
0
This leads me to believe that perhaps NC stopped buying food in protest of only being allocated $300/week.

She had $150-$200 a week for things other than food. I think she had a generous allowance at BC's salary level.
 

ncsu95

Active Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2008
Messages
3,436
Reaction score
1
I (and a few others) lost my feed about this. I have the feed up now. Could you please elaborate on your post? Thanks in advance!:seeya:

There was a note from a juror that said they want the attornies to use their time better because the jury would like their life back. The judge pointed out (jury wasn't present) that no court this afternoon and tomorrow afternoon was to accomodate the jury so "whatever" (yes, he did say "whatever").
 

zenreaper

New Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2011
Messages
269
Reaction score
0
On a few issues:

JP and the baby.

While it would be damaging to his lifestyle and rep, many are right, the baby is BC's, financially, because he is the "presumed father" and sufficient time has passed that a DNA test would make no difference. But as to why it woulc cause financial hardship or a confrontation, is that it is proof of an affair by NC, and would be a reason, in North Carolina, to refuse her alimony.

On the necklace.

ONE photo of her with out it (I am under the impression that there are few photos of her without out but that is moot) and any testimony that she NEVER took it off goes out the window.

As for the milk thing, NC and BC were "perfectionist" of sorts. She goes with a vehicle at ALL until she can get the one she wants? Why would it be out of the realm of possibility that they would NOT give the child the wrong kind of milk when all that was required for the right stuff was a trip to the store?
 

Maja

Seeker of Truth
Joined
Oct 14, 2008
Messages
679
Reaction score
1
Jury position possibilities:

1) Following what Det D said about all computer, phone, etc evidence, bottom line: Anger got to BC, he lost it, and killed his wife.

2) Too confusing, too much extraneous, irrelevant, data - lost us weeks ago.

3) Lack of evidence - we are not at a place of "beyond a reasonable doubt" and don't see us getting there.
 

Danielle59

New Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
878
Reaction score
0
So the necklace doesn't matter? It's all about the earrings now? Can you say stretch?

The ducks don't matter, the necklace doesn't matter, all that matters is that he supposedly murdered her and so what if all the witnesses for the State are not being discredited one after another and there is no other evidence. <sarcasm off>
 

LyndyLoo

Active Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2010
Messages
3,993
Reaction score
3
Do you think Nancy was naked when he left that morning?

I happen to believe she was removed from her house naked, and jogging bra half on..so yes was naked. I do also think as an experienced jogger and marathoner she would NOT go out half naked, wearing 2 left shoes...I think that sticking point is going to be what most jurors will grasp onto..that the 2 left shoes were missing, and their mates still in her closet or where ever..as I speculate that Brad grabbed them not realizing he grabbed wrong shoes....

I am just answering your question..yes she was naked..and NOT alive when she left her house...and who knows what hour Brad removed her???

You would be amazed what some jurors grasp onto when they deliberate.so guess we will see just what they do..
 

cityslick

New Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
7,227
Reaction score
8
I happen to believe she was removed from her house naked, and jogging bra half on..so yes was naked. I do also think as an experienced jogger and marathoner she would NOT go out half naked, wearing 2 left shoes...I think that sticking point is going to be what most jurors will grasp onto..that the 2 left shoes were missing, and their mates still in her closet or where ever..as I speculate that Brad grabbed them not realizing he grabbed wrong shoes....

I am just answering your question..yes she was naked..and NOT alive when she left her house...and who knows what hour Brad removed her???

You would be amazed what some jurors grasp onto when they deliberate.so guess we will see just what they do..

I believe he was referring to July 11th, not the 12th.
 

ncsu95

Active Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2008
Messages
3,436
Reaction score
1
I happen to believe she was removed from her house naked, and jogging bra half on..so yes was naked. I do also think as an experienced jogger and marathoner she would NOT go out half naked, wearing 2 left shoes...I think that sticking point is going to be what most jurors will grasp onto..that the 2 left shoes were missing, and their mates still in her closet or where ever..as I speculate that Brad grabbed them not realizing he grabbed wrong shoes....

I am just answering your question..yes she was naked..and NOT alive when she left her house...and who knows what hour Brad removed her???

You would be amazed what some jurors grasp onto when they deliberate.so guess we will see just what they do..

I'm talking about the morning of the 11th. You said Brad wouldn't know what she was wearing that afternoon. I'm saying he obviously saw her that morning, so he would know what she was wearing then.
 

fran

Former Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2003
Messages
32,578
Reaction score
168
Website
Visit site
Wait a minute, should their client, Brad cupper, know what data is on his computer? Perhaps he should clue them in as to what he'd been doing on said computer.

IMHO, I believe that MAY be the problem. Mr. Cooper DOES KNOW what's on the puter. After all, it was HIS and he WORKED for Cisco. He knows what they're doing.

JMHO
fran
 

garner_nc

New Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
147
Reaction score
0
They can't introduce new evidence in rebuttal unless it directly rebutts something brought in by the defense.

From yesterday - there was some discussion about CISCO VPN logs from a router that is missing that took an FXO card.

To me that is new evidence and I have not heard the defense mention what model routers he had or did not have when presenting their case.
 

Danielle59

New Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
878
Reaction score
0
I happen to believe she was removed from her house naked, and jogging bra half on..so yes was naked. I do also think as an experienced jogger and marathoner she would NOT go out half naked, wearing 2 left shoes...I think that sticking point is going to be what most jurors will grasp onto..that the 2 left shoes were missing, and their mates still in her closet or where ever..as I speculate that Brad grabbed them not realizing he grabbed wrong shoes....

I am just answering your question..yes she was naked..and NOT alive when she left her house...and who knows what hour Brad removed her???

You would be amazed what some jurors grasp onto when they deliberate.so guess we will see just what they do..

The discussion was about Friday the 11th and what she was wearing that day during the day. The possibility that BC saw her in the black dress in the monring before work was being offered as consideration. The current conversation had nothing to do with Saturday the 12th.
 

cassius

New Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
170
Reaction score
0
Jury sent a note to the judge basically stating (paraphrasing) that they would like the lawyers to get their act together and make it so the trial is more speedy because they are tired of being there and want their lives back.

Juries are a fickle animal and very difficult to read at times. But the fact that they actually sent a note during the trial asking it to be over tells me 1) that some or all of them are discussing the case in some form and 2) they've probably already decided that the defense has established reasonable doubt. Just my take on it...flame away.
 

unc70

New Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2011
Messages
299
Reaction score
0
I don't think the times line up at all. The FL guy says he clocked in @ 7:24, and the spot where he claims he saw NC was > 5 miles away from his store, IIRC.

RZ says she's sure it was 7:10, and 7:10 is the absolute latest FL guy could have seen here to have any shot of a 7:24 clock in.

Our friend Google Maps shows the FL guy as 3.4 miles, 7 minutes with traffic from his store. So roughly 8-10 minutes earlier puts him there closer to 7:15.

YMMV
 

yeknomaras

New Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
1
So the necklace doesn't matter? It's all about the earrings now? Can you say stretch?

the only point I'll make about the necklace/earrings is that if she wasn't wearing the necklace OR earrings, but was found WITH at least one earring, that means she probably put her jewelry back on. now, that doesn't mean she would put it ALL back on, but I know personally that if I take off my jewelry to go swimming, I will put it all back on again after. even the things I wear *always* .... you don't know what chlorine will do to your jewelry, ya know? but anyway
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top