I was not shocked by the decision, but I do think it was a horrendous one.

I guess you need to be around the system a while to fully comprehend just how retarded your average juror is.

5/5/2011 5:40:08 PM

Quote :

"But Boz, he knows the whole story, he has to know in his heart that there isn't enough evidence to convict, yet he leads the charge to put away BC for life. Ridiculous..."

it's his job to be a zealous advocate for the state, as long as it's not an unethical prosecution... and all that requires is that he believes there to be probable cause that he did it. PC isn't that high of a standard. i wouldn't hate boz as much as i'd hate detective daniels right now; just sayin'.

5/5/2011 5:44:54 PM

i hear they dont like to pick people to be jurors that are too smart.

5/5/2011 5:45:06 PM

^^Prosecution should seek justice, not a conviction, under NC Rules of Professional Conduct, right?

[Edited on May 5, 2011 at 5:45 PM. Reason : ?]

5/5/2011 5:45:25 PM

Those dumbass websloths must feel real smart.

5/5/2011 5:47:15 PM

Quote :

"^^Prosecution should seek justice, not a conviction, under NC Rules of Professional Conduct, right?"

absolutely.

the standard i gave is the ethical prosecution standard under the NCPC. it's basically just a "belief in the PC" standard, which obviously existed here.

don't get me wrong, i believed the jury should have rendered a not guilty verdict, but there was certainly enough circumstantial evidence for the ethical standard to prosecute. (and, he's not the first man to be convicted on circumstantial evidence alone; there isn't always a smoking gun).

[Edited on May 5, 2011 at 5:50 PM. Reason : .]

5/5/2011 5:49:46 PM

Boz is just there to present the state's case and the facts seem to support that CPD messed up. You can't fault him for playing the cards he was dealt and the jury is supposed to be the ultimate decider of what facts do and do not become the "truth".

I don't fault the prosecution UNLESS they presented evidence in a way that would materially misrepresent what was actually discovered (for example saying that BC google mapped the park when he actually just google mapped an area including the park)

5/5/2011 5:51:43 PM

which is what happened.

5/5/2011 5:53:58 PM

^^I can blame him for being an unethical lying bastard.

[Edited on May 5, 2011 at 5:54 PM. Reason : fucker]

5/5/2011 5:54:00 PM

Quote :

"it's his job to be a zealous advocate for the state, as long as it's not an unethical prosecution... and all that requires is that he believes there to be probable cause that he did it. PC isn't that high of a standard. i wouldn't hate boz as much as i'd hate detective daniels right now; just sayin'."

Can't blame the SS soliders who ushered Jews into gas chambers either I guess...
I'm not saying he's the only party at fault here by any means.

BTW where did you find that article posted from the TOC?

*Yes I played the Nazi/Hitler card

5/5/2011 6:12:01 PM

Quote :

"Just trying to think... if I were on the jury and I had 11 people against me, and some even obnoxious and belligerent toward me, how long would I stand my ground. Hopefully ∞"

I've thought about this before as well. I would hope that would be able to hold out and not allow the peer pressure to sway my opinion...but that would be damn hard. Hopefully I'd be even more obnoxious and belligerent toward them

5/5/2011 6:14:55 PM

I'm just disgusted, still.

5/5/2011 6:19:19 PM

Quote :

" Can't blame the SS soliders who ushered Jews into gas chambers either I guess..."

dear god.

5/5/2011 6:22:13 PM

well, it took almost 3 years, and 136 pages... that's probably a record of some sort?

[Edited on May 5, 2011 at 6:26 PM. Reason : .]

5/5/2011 6:25:49 PM

kinda had a feeling this would happen... absolutely no evidence but the jury is like, c'mon, we know you did it

5/5/2011 6:28:06 PM

I want the book/movie rights to: How to accidentally the whole murder case and win.

5/5/2011 6:30:10 PM

i just read this on GOLO, it was a pretty interesting thought:

Quote :

"The jury was so heavily weighted with women because they were the only ones with the free time. Mainly because many of them probably had husbands who were working their tail off supporting them. In other words, Nancy Cooper is your typical juror. "

that's the sad thing about this whole situation -- i've been keeping an open mind and watching the trial unfold the whole time, but since the very first time I heard there were 10 female jurors, i knew in my heart what the outcome would be.

i love me some women, and i'll fuck a motherfucker up who hurts one -- but those of you ladies who can't seem to get over this "it was the husband -- it's ALWAYS the husband" bullshit really need to start some intensive counseling.

more like, "it's ALWAYS the husband" (who goes to jail for it.)

it's totally understandable to want to rule out those closest to the victim -- which leaves the husband 3 choices:

1. just talk to them candidly


2. talk to an attorney first, then talk to the cops with him/her present


3. refuse to talk to them

5/5/2011 6:30:37 PM

I still want to know why everyone in this thread is so convinced he's NOT guilty. I know there wasn't any evidence but it's not like there was a ton of evidence that he didn't do it.

5/5/2011 6:39:29 PM

Quote :

"I still want to know why everyone in this thread is so convinced he's NOT guilty. I know there wasn't any evidence but it's not like there was a ton of evidence that he didn't do it."

Because you're innocent until proven guilty.

5/5/2011 6:43:32 PM

^

and there was no proof beyond reasonable doubt that he was guilty.

these "gut feelings" that people have about him being guilty was all they really could've went off when reaching a verdict

5/5/2011 6:45:47 PM

born2matter A big FUCK YOU to all the jurors on the #coopertrial. U just sent an innocent man to jail. I hope you rot in hell for not paying attention.
19 minutes ago



Oh snap. Oh and here's a poll

http://www.learnmyself.com/personality.asp?p=poll-results&qp=61510xbaD84608

5/5/2011 6:51:56 PM

This verdict in this case reminds me of what the 4th Circuit said in U.S. v. FOSTER

Quote :

"“[w]e also note our concern about the inclination of the Government toward using whatever facts are present, no matter how innocent, as indicia of suspicious activity” and “we are deeply troubled by the way in which the Government attempts to spin these largely mundane acts into a web of deception.”"

5/5/2011 6:54:06 PM

Quote :

" it's not like there was a ton of evidence that he didn't do it."

Wow.

5/5/2011 6:55:27 PM

"Special" on WRAL right now about the trial...including NC's family.

5/5/2011 7:04:34 PM

Quote :

"but since the very first time I heard there were 10 female jurors, i knew in my heart what the outcome would be."

same

5/5/2011 7:31:12 PM

I had hoped.

5/5/2011 7:31:39 PM

Hey Beethoven, if you wanna discuss your ummm "legal" briefs, holla at your boy!

5/5/2011 7:33:15 PM

Too sad for internet humor.

5/5/2011 7:36:36 PM

tried to tell yall...

SMH

5/5/2011 7:36:39 PM

buy lysol, chlorox makes you look guilty

5/5/2011 7:45:02 PM

Quote :

"it's not like there was a ton of evidence that he didn't do it"

wow.

[Edited on May 5, 2011 at 7:47 PM. Reason : lol. i see your with me A Tanzarian]

5/5/2011 7:46:57 PM

So the jury was able to convict him and then sneak out the back entrance? Feel like if you convict a guy to life in prison you should have the balls to stay in the courtroom for a while.

[Edited on May 5, 2011 at 7:48 PM. Reason : ]

5/5/2011 7:47:41 PM

I want a motherfucking reason. Don't just come out and say "guilty" and not tell me why.

When did Nancy die? Where? How did she die? What car was used to take her to Fielding Drive? When? Because you know what--the prosecution never freaking answered that, so I'd like to know from someone.

5/5/2011 7:49:45 PM

Quote :

"buy lysol, chlorox makes you look guilty "

It was even chlorox without bleach.

5/5/2011 7:50:24 PM

cleanliness is next to gultiness

5/5/2011 7:51:57 PM

I also hate how much conjecture was introduced in the closing statements. This canoe and wheelbase stuff. Can you really just add crap into the closing argument without having brought it up previously? I would think any ideas the prosecution have should be required to be brought up in the course of the trial and not just thrown into the closing.

5/5/2011 7:52:12 PM

^^^^
all valid questions, hopefully they'll come up in the appeal after they finish discussing the prosecution's failure to provide evidence of BCs guilt

[Edited on May 5, 2011 at 7:53 PM. Reason : ^s]

5/5/2011 7:52:43 PM

Is there a high profile case where so much hear say and circumstantial evidence got someone convicted of first degree murder? With no physical evidence?


I mean. I know thats happened 50+ years ago. But in recent memory.

5/5/2011 7:55:51 PM

Quote :

"It was even chlorox without bleach"

I did not realize it was clorox without bleach...ouch.

Was anything of value said on the WRAL special? I was unable to watch...

5/5/2011 8:05:28 PM

Google michelle harris Owego, NY

5/5/2011 8:09:37 PM

Nevermind. Sounds earily similar.

[Edited on May 5, 2011 at 8:17 PM. Reason : .]

5/5/2011 8:12:15 PM

similar case, similar lack of evidence (except the police did find her blood in the house in that case)

the guy was convicted of 2nd degree murder, he appealed, was convicted again and sentenced to 25 years to life

5/5/2011 8:15:07 PM

also he wasnt convicted for 6 years

5/5/2011 8:15:56 PM

Other than the finding her blood in the house thing.

I mean. There is NO forensic evidence linking him to this. NONE. All actual evidence points away from him.

5/5/2011 8:17:54 PM

If that had happened here the CPD would've ignored the blood.

5/5/2011 8:20:02 PM

^It would have been thought of as red paint...probably something to do with the drop cloth Brad Cooper bought.

5/5/2011 8:23:48 PM

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/video/9557183/#/vid9557183

Cummings admits he doesn't understand the computer forensics testimony. Hard to hear what Boz is saying but he says the closest thing to a smoking gun is the Google search. This is video just continues to show how poor their case was against BC, that they had to make up evidence to convict him.

5/5/2011 8:24:58 PM

If the prosecutor doesn't even bother to figure out the computer testimony, how can you expect the jury to?

5/5/2011 8:40:20 PM

^Not to mention, stands in the way of computer forensics by the defense, then states in his closing "they never put up a witness to testify about tampering."

5/5/2011 8:41:53 PM

So if Cummings didn't understand it, Boz clearly didn't understand any of it and the chick didn't question anyone in relation to computers (at least I don't think). Paints a picture that none of them knew what was going on with computer forensics but that was the key "evidence" they came up with at the end. Boz couldn't figure out the difference between securing a wireless router and securing a facebook account.

5/5/2011 8:46:05 PM