were these emails found on his work computer or on their home computer?

4/11/2011 5:17:12 PM

my wife uses my work laptop to check her personal mail all the time.

4/11/2011 6:24:00 PM

yea but it said that he had a program to forward every email she sent or receieved unknowingly to brad so he could read it...which then brought to light the fact that she had been emailing her ex bf alot.

still no evidence of murder though.

4/11/2011 6:49:11 PM

When did that start? Because, if i thought my wife was going to abscond with my kids, to a foreign country, I'd do the same damn thing.

4/11/2011 6:54:31 PM

i dont remember when they said the program was installed or if that was EVER said.

maybe the defense will be able to tell, i may look at the video later and see if I can find it on there.

Lots of people track emails, thats nothing new.

this webslueths is funny..these people are getting REALLY worked up over me quoting evidence that is contrary to their belief that he is guilty.

4/11/2011 7:00:36 PM

Lol, link?

4/11/2011 7:08:58 PM

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132980&page=28

4/11/2011 7:10:43 PM

Quote :

"plus there was a fundamental lack of understanding on the prosecution (and the FBI agent's) part about how enterprise mobility products work"

so this was a work phone then?

does this fundamental misunderstanding about 'enterprise mobility products' speak towards why the text messages were there but the call logs were gone? If so how? Or since it sounds like you're an expert on these things can 2 years of power loss (if that even happened) explain that?

Quote :

"even if he did delete it, that's still not any proof of wrong doing."

Obviously...

Quote :

"just painting their picture with half truths and bullshit."

So you think he didn't do it? (Outside of the fact of whether he should be convicted, because that's obviously not going to happen)

Quote :

"more suspect that she's EMAILING HER FUCKING EX BF"

Whats suspect about that? They were both cheaters...

4/11/2011 7:28:54 PM

^ suspect that the prosecution and everyone else is glossing over that fact

websloths

[Edited on April 11, 2011 at 7:40 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2011 7:35:57 PM

Quote :

"suspect that the prosecution and everyone else is glossing over that fact"

Have no fear, I'm sure the defense will bring it up.

^What about the phone questions? Sounds like you have some experience on these issues...

4/11/2011 7:42:55 PM

the problem with that and that line of thought here is that Nancy isnt on trial so all her misconduct cannot be used against her for anything.

its brad on trial.

4/11/2011 7:43:20 PM

Quote :

"According to a numbe3r's episode, with voip, both initiating and receiving of a call with voip can't be traced. I don't know what all of it means, but thought I throw it in. moo"

:carlfuckingfacepalm:

4/11/2011 7:44:27 PM

Nothing like mooing to add credibility

4/11/2011 7:46:09 PM

Quote :

" It has likely been ruled as inadmissable due to Highly prejugudial ..which would have been a defense motion to keep OUT of Court???...Maybe someone who knows how to surf thru the documents can find that item?? I suck at that kind of stuff..Sorry... Prosecution would have brought it out regardless of what it said.. Id bet Defense will NOT touch that with a ten foot poll, or else will/could open that door for publication of it..Thats what I think it means"

From websloths. Emphasis not mine, but fucking hilarious.

4/11/2011 7:46:14 PM

Quote :

"so this was a work phone then? does this fundamental misunderstanding about 'enterprise mobility products' speak towards why the text messages were there but the call logs were gone? If so how? Or since it sounds like you're an expert on these things can 2 years of power loss (if that even happened) explain that?"

sorry, didn't see this part before



it is a bit strange that the call history was gone, but that could have happened at any point in the two year period of storage if the sim card was removed and then replaced in the phone (according to the FBI guy - I don't believe that to be the case, though). Text messages, call history, images, etc would all be stored in the phone's memory, and not on the SIM itself. They wouldn't be subject to any sort of deletion just because the battery ran out. As far as I can remember with WM 6 devices, you also can't just selectively wipe portions of memory - it's either all or nothing. I may be wrong on that.

Solutions like Good's (the security solution Cisco uses) could potentially be set up to automatically eliminate certain types of data and certain phones connection authorization after periods of inactivity on their network, but without knowing their policies that's just a guess. One thing that's for sure is that Brad probably wouldn't be able to remote wipe the device on his own.

The fact that the FBI guy didn't know anything of the solution - an industry standard and one I had to comply with on several cellphone features when I was a part of the industry - tells me that he was way out of his depth during testimony today. Not only that, but things like the contact list being blank on a WM phone immediately indicate to me that it was connected to an Exchange server and that Brad probably managed his contacts via Outlook (which is not out of the ordinary at all at the enterprise level). Chances are that Cisco's internal mobility policy is to kill open connections to devices that haven't "checked in" in a while in order to maintain security.

4/11/2011 8:18:09 PM

thats exactly what my phone does and its a WM6 phone.

4/11/2011 8:37:25 PM

You killed Nancy!!

4/11/2011 8:44:15 PM

Quote :

"According to a numbe3r's episode, with voip, both initiating and receiving of a call with voip can't be traced. I don't know what all of it means, but thought I throw it in. moo"

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAASNORTSNORTHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

EVERYTHING YOU SEE ON TV IS TRUE.

ESPECIALLY CRIME DRAMAS.

4/11/2011 8:46:18 PM

Quote :

"As far as I can remember with WM 6 devices, you also can't just selectively wipe portions of memory"

A small amount of googling makes it appear that you could delete your call list with the Blackjack (thats the phone we're talking about right?)

Quote :

"kill open connections to devices that haven't "checked in" in a while in order to maintain security."

Maybe Cisco had some policy on the device that wiped itself after a period of not connecting to the server, in which case I could easily see it clearing email/contacts, but if it's gonna go deeper than that then why would the software wipe the call list and leave texts? If anything I would assume it would take RIM's approach and wipe the entire phone.

Or maybe another explanation is Brad simply deleted his call list

4/11/2011 9:06:12 PM

wral FBI agent: Brad e-mailed Nancy on July 14, 2008, two days after she went missing. (Text of email not disclosed in court). #coopertrial


My dearest Nancy,

Git yo ass home! Damn kids be driving me nuts.

Yours forever, Brad

4/11/2011 9:34:53 PM

So I just read through all the pages on websleuths that were posted today. There were one or two posts talking about people not believing Brad to be guilty on a webpage they aren't allowed to name. Would that be us? And why aren't they allowed to say the name?

[Edited on April 11, 2011 at 11:46 PM. Reason : stuff]

4/11/2011 11:45:33 PM

First rule of tww is you don't talk about tww.

4/11/2011 11:50:19 PM

I got banned from posting there for a week.

not even a whole day registered and Im banned.

great.

4/12/2011 12:00:46 AM

Quote :

"Have no fear, I'm sure the defense will bring it up."

I would think that the defense would want to gloss over her cheating as well. It would only serve to establish motive - ie he killer her because he lost it after hearing about yet another affair all while she was living the high life to his financial ruin.

4/12/2011 7:27:52 AM

^^ i read through most of your posts and didn't see anything out of line. why did they ban you.


^ I get you and ^^ confused a lot.

[Edited on April 12, 2011 at 8:43 AM. Reason : oops]

4/12/2011 8:14:25 AM

Quote :

"^^ i read through most of your posts and didn't see anything out of line. why did they band you. "

Not sure either. Although they did seem to get kinda angry that he wasn't quoting whoever he was responding to. Lots of times he did use carrots to indicate, but in my experience on other forums, most people don't understand that ^ = first post above, ^^ = second post above, etc. This has been the only place that I frequent that uses that.

4/12/2011 8:24:33 AM

Quote :

"There were one or two posts talking about people not believing Brad to be guilty on a webpage they aren't allowed to name."

evidently there is this huge rivalry between websleuths and GOLO. in fact each side is planning on attending the trial to support either Brad or the prosecution. i think brads side is supposed to wear blue shirts and the prosecutions side pink.

4/12/2011 8:30:48 AM

Fur page 66
http://www.wral.com/news/video/9247382/#/vid9247382

4/12/2011 8:31:03 AM

^^ I would love to see a picture of that if anyone has the time to go do it.

4/12/2011 8:47:18 AM

I'm surprised the golo comments seem to be mostly in favor of Brad.

^ If I had any idea what time that was happening I'd go during my lunch break. Apparently today is more black out time so maybe I'll stop by on my way to the post office.

4/12/2011 9:16:59 AM

^ditto about GOLO

but if I recall, the majority of them throughout this whole deal since she went missing were pretty much saying he's been railroaded

[Edited on April 12, 2011 at 9:25 AM. Reason : the hurricane]

4/12/2011 9:24:49 AM

Are we still working with a witness that can't be taped?

4/12/2011 9:36:27 AM

For the morning session yes.

4/12/2011 9:37:26 AM

yes

4/12/2011 9:37:32 AM

Quote :

"evidently there is this huge rivalry between websleuths and GOLO. in fact each side is planning on attending the trial to support either Brad or the prosecution. i think brads side is supposed to wear blue shirts and the prosecutions side pink."

This just illustrates how unbelievably stupid people are. It shouldn't be about "brad's side" vs. the prosecutions side. It should be about whether there is sufficient evidence to conclude that Brad killed Nancy. So far that evidence does not exist, but that doesn't mean I'm on "brad's side."

All these chucklefucks basically have already decided if he's innocent or guilty and rather than looking at the testimony unfold, they'll simply cherry pick parts of the testimony that help their 'team'.

fuck that.

4/12/2011 9:58:00 AM

^this. If he did kill his wife, the prosecution is doing her family a huge disservice with the way they've handled this case...If he didn't, they've wasted alot of time and money trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

4/12/2011 10:03:18 AM

^ and we'll probably never know which one of those scenarios is true

4/12/2011 11:09:36 AM

well, if he's acquitted, it will open the door for the cpd to atleast entertain other possibilities, which it appears they went to great lengths to ignore thusfar.

if he's convicted based on the info presented (assuming nothing earth shattering comes out). I've lost all faith in the law enforcement/court systems.

but you're right, I could see this being an acquital in criminal court and a liable verdict in civil court (but personally I don't even think that ruilng would be warranted in civil court at this point)...and shrouded in ambiguity forever.


[Edited on April 12, 2011 at 11:58 AM. Reason : .]

4/12/2011 11:56:28 AM

It's been 3 years. If he's found not guilty it will most likely never be solved with how they mishandled evidence/etc.

4/12/2011 12:01:58 PM

They'll find a way.

4/12/2011 12:27:38 PM

It will end in a hung jury and the prosecution will start all over again with Brad as the only suspect. If at first you don't convict, try, try again.

4/12/2011 12:52:18 PM

i thought he can't be tried again due to double jeopardy

4/12/2011 12:59:01 PM

I'm not a lawyer, but I believe that if there is a hung jury then it is considered a mistrial. Double Jeopardy applies when found not guilty.

4/12/2011 1:00:44 PM

He can't be tried again if he's found not guilty.

4/12/2011 1:01:00 PM

I think that's only if there is an acquittal.

a mistrial, hung jury, etc, means the prosecution gets another turn.

4/12/2011 1:01:01 PM

ah gotcha

4/12/2011 1:18:52 PM

Double jeopardy also applies if you're found guilty btw.

You can't be judged guilty, serve your time, and then be found guilty at a second trial.

4/12/2011 1:20:45 PM

Still no video feed?

4/12/2011 1:27:11 PM

Quote :

"Kurtz also claims that their client's computer was tampered and that the Internet history files were changed after Cary police seized it."

lI'm no computer forensics expert, but I've read a few things, and it seems like taking an image of the hard drive is always the first step. Also is Kurtz trying to say CPD/FBI planted some browsing history on the dudes computer?

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/nancycooper/story/9426892/

4/12/2011 1:38:51 PM

I knew about Double Jeopardy years before law school:

4/12/2011 1:39:17 PM