tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post6311118342527015161..comments2023-10-31T07:21:09.792-04:00Comments on William L. Anderson: Bradley Cooper and the case narrativeWilliam L. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01802990642236807359noreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-1672132998746960392015-10-14T15:27:52.641-04:002015-10-14T15:27:52.641-04:00*FRAMED with GOOGLE MAPS* is the name of the book....*FRAMED with GOOGLE MAPS* is the name of the book. Sorry I did not include this in the previous post. You can find it on AMAZON. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-14207964857900334062015-10-14T15:26:29.557-04:002015-10-14T15:26:29.557-04:00I just wanted to let you know that there is a good...I just wanted to let you know that there is a good book which <br />has been just released on the Brad Cooper case. Perhaps you already know about it. I would love to read your comments and input on it if and when you read it. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-43746068695959237122014-09-02T17:51:57.962-04:002014-09-02T17:51:57.962-04:00I know this is an old post and don't know if y...I know this is an old post and don't know if you will see this. However, I wanted to know if you were aware that Amy Fitzhugh has a string of cases in Durham NC where she started her prosecutorial career, that were overturned and the suspects found to be innocent b/c of her misconduct. The first case was in 2000 just a year after she became an attorney and prosecutor. A young man was wrongfully convicted of a robbery his name was Erick Daniels. He spent 7 years in prison. Ms. Fitzhugh is no longer a prosecutor but the lead attorney for the NC Board of nursing where she continues to dispense her own personal type of justice.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01935677049259519116noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-86196920038891526552012-03-13T12:32:16.090-04:002012-03-13T12:32:16.090-04:00North Carolina did it again....want to view it.......North Carolina did it again....want to view it....go to WRAL.COM and search for JASON YOUNG....I am sure that WAKE COUNTY COURTS are the subject of many LAW SCHOOLS these days....I would like to know exactly what the professors are saying about the 2nd trial of Jason Young....the state tossed out another "illusion"....the doll fantasy play....well...12 jurors fell for this....although a couple of the jurors allowed interviews....you will NOT believe what they had to say....please listen to them as they are on the WRAL site...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-25571345579753634432011-07-30T19:18:02.669-04:002011-07-30T19:18:02.669-04:00Just wanted to point out one minor flaw in your de...Just wanted to point out one minor flaw in your description (otherwise completely and totally brilliant, btw). Anyone watching that trial could see the blatant bias in the judges' decisions; I was very upset about it, and I had no personal stake in this case at all.<br /><br />Anyway, the defense produced one expert who was going to say the google map "evidence" was planted, and the judge said he was not qualified (as you said). THEN, the defense got another witness to come and tell the court (with the jury out of court) that the maps were planted. This time, the judge ruled the guy WAS an expert, BUT that he could not testify b/c the defense did not give the prosecution enough time to prepare. <br /><br />This really bothered me, as a man's life is at stake, and finding the truth should always be the goal. Instead, the judge came up with every excuse not to allow the defense to present tampering evidence. <br /><br />Love your blog, btw.mlc2005https://www.blogger.com/profile/10582050802533265284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-72442053368669910262011-07-20T08:42:44.426-04:002011-07-20T08:42:44.426-04:00It seems like "someone" has a conscience...It seems like "someone" has a conscience...and wanted to "share" with others on something that might pan out to be "IMPORTANT" in the BRAD COOPER MURDER TRIAL...<br />this was on the internet and someone shared it with me...<br /><br /><br /><br />"I'm closely connected to the BC murder trial, from the prosecution side. I can honestly say the following:<br /><br />1. The reason why the prosecution took so long with its case was to wear down the jury so that they would be too exhausted to really pay attention.<br /><br />2. A portion of the prosecution does not think he did it but were directed to win this case at all cost in order to save face for the police department. <br /><br />3. The google maps defense didn't stand a chance. The prosecution understood that, in today's climate, jurors, especially black jurors, are likely to believe in setups by the police department. This counter-evidence didn't have a chance of getting admitted. <br /><br />4. In jury selection the defense had a lot of people they liked but the prosecution asked questions about if they could participate in a "extensively lengthy trial" and this forced those that the defense liked to step down. Had the defense not excused the ones they did the jury would have had 0 men and would have been a mixture of poor black women and very wealthy white women.<br /><br />5. The defense's expert who was on the witness list and had spent thousands of dollars and countless hours trying to find the same evidence as the prosecution's expert couldn't find the google maps. He was under contract with Raleigh Police Department on some other cases and was told if he was to present said non-evidence as exculpatory then he would lose his livelihood. "Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-47598931064681599342011-07-17T07:57:36.107-04:002011-07-17T07:57:36.107-04:00sorry.....I should have proofread my comment...it ...sorry.....I should have proofread my comment...it should be trial..Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-35987244969786126112011-07-17T07:55:58.176-04:002011-07-17T07:55:58.176-04:00Mr. Anderson,
Is there anything that we can do t...Mr. Anderson, <br /><br />Is there anything that we can do to entice someone to look into this "so called trisl" that North Carolina had which railroaded this man? Again I did not understand the conviction of 1st degree murder...and the judge who conducted the trial was truly not the kind of judge a person would expect...I did not know if you could share anything at all that we, the public, could do in an effort to help this person...I think it is sad when the judicial system allows such as this to take place...this is AMERICA...and we should know better..<br /><br />Thanks for sharing your views...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-41998793707818893542011-07-15T11:14:23.093-04:002011-07-15T11:14:23.093-04:00OK, I rescind my comment about the police helping ...OK, I rescind my comment about the police helping with the deposition. I just found it odd that "Brad answered all police questions" and "The police supplied questions" were on the same list. But it is certainly well within his right not to incriminate himself. In hindsight, his lawyers really messed up by letting him do this deposition.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-83098764038986548462011-07-14T18:40:37.220-04:002011-07-14T18:40:37.220-04:00"If Brad was really fully cooperating with th..."If Brad was really fully cooperating with the police, what's the big deal about about having these questions asked at the custody hearing?"<br />Do you know anything about the Constitution? Have you heard about the 5th Amendment? You know, the one that gives you the right to remain silent? Brad Cooper was compelled to testify for the civil case, because he had to if he wanted to have any chance at keeping his children. The prosecutors and police knew this. They also knew that he probably wouldn't testify in the criminal case so they colluded with the attorneys in the civil case to effectively get him to "testify". Plus, the rights afforded in a civil case are vastly different than the ones afforded in a criminal case. Specific, pointed questions were asked in the custody deposition that had NOTHING to do with the custody hearing, and some of the questions used information privy only to someone involved in the murder investigation. Thus, you had collusion to deprive the defendant of his Constitutionally protected rights and put him in a Catch-22 situation.<br /><br />And you see nothing wrong with this? Honestly?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-37736297302582641042011-07-14T18:31:15.776-04:002011-07-14T18:31:15.776-04:00"The phone records would have shown if there ..."The phone records would have shown if there was a call."<br />Yes, they would have done that. The problem is that the police didn't tell the defense attorneys that the phone had been erased, and they didn't turn the phone over to the defense until a few days after the phone company would have deleted the records, so the defense had no way to know they needed to subpoena the phone records.<br /><br />Oddly enough, the prosecution did a similar thing with Brad's computer, not letting the defense know about certain evidence they planned to use nor giving them access to the computer until shortly after Google would delete records relating to the supposed Google Maps search.<br /><br />Those two things are entirely too coincidental to have been by chance.<br /><br />Also, the original post says that Nancy called Brad at the store from her cell phone, but I thought the call was made from the home phone, as much of the prosecution's "case" revolved around the possibility that Brad faked the phone call and made it look like she called from the home phone.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-5760569349607836242011-07-09T12:59:28.360-04:002011-07-09T12:59:28.360-04:00"Required by the Constitution as a check on j..."Required by the Constitution as a check on judicial and prosecutorial abuse, it has often been used as a tool of abuse against political dissidents. Most grand juries are mere "rubber stamps" for prosecutors, but others become "runaway" grand juries, taking the lead in investigations of official corruption and abuse."<br /><br /><br />The above information is copied from the link that you provided...<br />I guess this pretty much explains the GRAND JURY...<br /><br />I guess what IT IS SUPPOSED to do is a bit different from HOW IT IS USED or perhaps I should say ABUSED...<br /><br />Thanks for sharing...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-38680033653063815542011-07-09T10:31:10.918-04:002011-07-09T10:31:10.918-04:00Anon at 6:45,
It is not the purpose of the grand ...Anon at 6:45,<br /><br />It is not the purpose of the grand jury to "rule out costly trials", nor is anyone supposed to be "in charge" of it. It is supposed to be a bulwark of justice checking injustice perpetrated by the government. It should not be abolished. It should be released from bondage to the prosecutor. It should be used to ferret out governmental abuses as it once was.<br /><br />Jon Roland at the Constitutional Society has done good and extensive research on the history of the Grand Jury, even going to source documents in the archives.<br /><br />http://constitution.org/jury/gj/gj-us.htmJerri Lynn Wardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-36936937527615344812011-07-09T06:45:43.333-04:002011-07-09T06:45:43.333-04:00Actually, I do not think ANYONE did anything RIGHT...Actually, I do not think ANYONE did anything RIGHT in preparing for the BRAD COOPER MURDER TRIAL...to be honest with you...I am still trying to figure out how the GRAND JURY indicted this man...I think that the GRAND JURY is being "abused" by those who are in charge of it...and it should be done away with in North Carolina...there are a lot of states who NO LONGER USE THE GRAND JURY...and I can NOW understand why...if used properly...it would be a "valuable tool" to the court system that could rule out "costly trials" that have no business being in court to begin with...when there is NO EVIDENCE to begin with...I think prosecutors "pretend" that they have "EVIDENCE" so that that can "indict" a person for whatever crime they are working...and then "using this method" as a way to "force a plea deal" on the accused person...so one has to wonder...HOW LEGAL AND LAWFUL IS THIS? Sounds like "they" are taking advantage of "their power" and the system also...<br /><br />NO ONE...and I repeat...NO ONE who is not guilty of what they are being charged with should ever take a plea...but I know how the "attorneys" threaten clients that "this is the best that you will get"....better take it and save yourself from a longer jail term....Attorneys DO TAKE AN OATH...and I do not think that providing threats was a part of the oath that they take...<br /><br />Taking a plea though...is a GOOD THING for the Prosecutors...they have a "WIN" under their belt...and they did NOT have to do much for it...(not much expense for anyone)...<br /><br />THIS IS HOW THE NORTH CAROLINA JUDICIAL SYSTEM WORKS...trust me...when I say...I have been put in a situation where I have "heard and seen" just how it works...and this SHOULD BE A CRIME ITSELF...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-23813403106234855082011-07-08T14:24:35.179-04:002011-07-08T14:24:35.179-04:00Who knows if the June 23 files were planted? Or a ...Who knows if the June 23 files were planted? Or a test run for planting the July 11 files? Your FBI agents never investigated that, did they?Cnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-64479725416216940972011-07-08T14:20:37.725-04:002011-07-08T14:20:37.725-04:00"June 23 had a spike in timestamp errors.&quo..."June 23 had a spike in timestamp errors."<br />Were the June 23rd files planted?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-84118407605948352832011-07-08T13:45:02.667-04:002011-07-08T13:45:02.667-04:00Brad did not have a default install at Cisco, he w...Brad did not have a default install at Cisco, he was an alpha tester. This has been covered time and time again through all of the testimony.<br /><br />June 23 had a spike in timestamp errors. There were no other timestamp errors up until the week Nancy went missing.<br /><br />Again, please post where you're getting your incorrect information. Maybe you should go read the computer reports on file in the court house?Cnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-87889825530603404912011-07-08T13:34:03.055-04:002011-07-08T13:34:03.055-04:00"-XP was not installed on BC's computer. ..."-XP was not installed on BC's computer. It was only ever Vista. It was not an upgrade.<br />-Your amount of files tampered with are incorrect. It was 2% over the life of the computer. 85% after the July 11 (tampered files), and 100% during that one specific google search. That doesn't scream systemic to me."<br />Both of these are wrong.<br />June 23rd is the date the timestamp anomalies began. Brad's computer came with XP installed originally. Vista was never distributed as default install at Cisco.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-22035192814067549432011-07-08T11:12:59.294-04:002011-07-08T11:12:59.294-04:00It was stated that a "Google search" was...It was stated that a "Google search" was the "EVIDENCE" which convicted BRAD COOPER...and this EVIDENCE was NOT EVEN PROVED to be<br />done by BRAD COOPER....so very sad...that 12 people allowed something like this to CONVICT a man for MURDER...in 1st degree...no doubt...(as I still DO NOT GET HOW THIS HAPPENED ANYWAY)...perhaps the jurors DID NOT UNDERSTAND what they needed to do? Could this be? The head detective stated "he thought that Brad just snapped"...well...I DO NOT THINK...that BRAD COOPER murdered Nancy Cooper...and that the Killer(s) is still on the loose...yes...someone is out there and they know that BRAD COOPER got a life sentence for doing something that HE DID NOT DO...<br />I hope someone can explain to me...(perhaps one of the jurors) how the verdict of 1st degree murder was reached...I do understand that the "google search" was the so-called EVIDENCE...and this was NOT linked at all as proof that the google search was made by BRAD COOPER...but heaven help us....as a man was CONVICTED and sentenced to life in prison, without parole...and one can only hope and pray that the NC JUDICIAL SYSTEM will do what is right and reverse the conviction.....I guess time will tell....hopefully sooner than later...as there are 2 little ones who really need their daddy....MiMiAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-58850934593074618322011-07-08T10:50:52.320-04:002011-07-08T10:50:52.320-04:00I have tried to post several times, and none of my...I have tried to post several times, and none of my comments are showing up. Why is this?<br /><br />Briefly<br />-XP was not installed on BC's computer. It was only ever Vista. It was not an upgrade. <br />-Your amount of files tampered with are incorrect. It was 2% over the life of the computer. 85% after the July 11 (tampered files), and 100% during that one specific google search. That doesn't scream systemic to me.Cnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-36100532840593606092011-07-08T10:43:27.719-04:002011-07-08T10:43:27.719-04:00"How amazing. The one piece of evidence that ..."How amazing. The one piece of evidence that Kurtz wrote a letter about was the one piece of evidence that turn up blank. What did Kurtz know before the fact?"<br /><br />Maybe you need to go back through the documents where you can read the actual letter. It is common practice to issue a preservation letter when digital evidence is involved. The attorneys requested the careful handling of ALL electronic equipment, not just the phone.<br /><br />It is baffling that anyone would defend a cop who destroyed evidence before even obtaining a search warrant and then failed to even notify the defense attorneys until it was too late to request the detailed records. Yet no investigation was ever done. He is still working there and the police chief and mayor are fine with that. That is incredible.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-36288473449897312552011-07-08T10:19:51.579-04:002011-07-08T10:19:51.579-04:00"conveniently ignored a certified letter from..."conveniently ignored a certified letter from Howard Kurtz asking they preserve data."<br />How amazing. The one piece of evidence that Kurtz wrote a letter about was the one piece of evidence that turn up blank. What did Kurtz know before the fact?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-65126736975470145002011-07-08T10:17:58.599-04:002011-07-08T10:17:58.599-04:00"It was not disabled on Brad Cooper's com..."It was not disabled on Brad Cooper's computer, as evidenced by multiple other files that have an updated Last Access timestamp. This all came out in testimony, which apparently you missed."<br />The computer was upgraded from XP to Vista at some point. Perhaps June 23rd, which was the day where the witness said the timestamp anomalies started. The files from XP would have XP timestamps, and the ones after the upgrade would have Vista timestamps.<br />If only the google search files had the anomalies, that would be interesting. Since practically all files starting on June 23rd had the anomalies, the problem must have been systemic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-18164405490423468592011-07-08T09:51:03.626-04:002011-07-08T09:51:03.626-04:00"The spoilation was that the computer was lef..."The spoilation was that the computer was left turned on...snipped...the regular scheduled software update."<br /><br />-It's spoliation, not spoilation.<br />-There is no 27 hour window. The computer could have been tampered with at any point until the computer was hashed, which I believe the FBI testified was late July.<br />-The spoliation was not just the botched way in which the computer was handled, it included over 690 files that were changed after the computer was in police custody.<br />-The defense witnesses and the prosecution witnesses testified to these file changes. Prosecution couldn't explain them. The defense witness testified that the "regularly schedule update" didn't even apply to Brad Cooper's computer.<br />-And I believe Mr. Kurtz stated he didn't know who planted the files, it could have been the police, it could have been a neighbor, or it could have been someone hired by the custody attorney.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286599265273958850.post-54413681942223381562011-07-08T09:41:51.496-04:002011-07-08T09:41:51.496-04:00"Brad deleted two call records from his cell ..."Brad deleted two call records from his cell phone. Two calls, ("test calls") from his house number to his cell phone that happened before 6:40am. He left the 6:40am "alibi" call in his phone's call history. Unfortunately for him, all three calls records turned up on his phone bill. Is it OK for him to attempt to destroy evidence?"<br /><br />This is not true. A 0 second phone call from the house will not show up on a cell phone. A call directly to voicemail won't show up on a cell phone. Not a SINGLE witness (even the lying cops) got up there and said Brad deleted this calls from his cell phone call log.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com