Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is consistently stated as evidence of guilt by the public in many such cases (when people refuse a lire detector). The reality is, whether you committed the crime or not, being under the scrutiny of the police and the public anyone would be nervous. When faced with this, most people would object to the validity of taking such a test and I'd have to believe any lawyer would as well. Nothing substantially great will come of it. If you fail it's bad; if you pass people just say "Oh well it's easy to fool those things".
Many of his claims are able to be substaniated. Nancy called him to get juice in addition to laundry detergent: call logs can verify that. Also points to the fact that Nancy was alive around 6AM.
When the police get access to the call logs, can they hear the audio or do they just see that a call was placed from one phone to another? Is it possible that he himself called his cell phone from Nancy's cell phone or from the home phone?
When the police get access to the call logs, can they hear the audio or do they just see that a call was placed from one phone to another? Is it possible that he himself called his cell phone from Nancy's cell phone or from the home phone?
Im not sure if they can do that (not even sure if the technology is available for that) but if they could, they would most likely need a warrant because phonecalls are private.
When the police get access to the call logs, can they hear the audio or do they just see that a call was placed from one phone to another? Is it possible that he himself called his cell phone from Nancy's cell phone or from the home phone?
They can tell location from which cell tower picked up the call. So if he had both her cell phone with him and his and he used her phone to call his they would see that both came from the same cell tower.
Im not sure if they can do that (not even sure if the technology is available for that) but if they could, they would most likely need a warrant because phonecalls are private.
Raise your hand if you were shouting "Innocent until proven guilty" in the Eve Carson case.
And where are the posts calling this guy an animal, a thug, a mutt, and wishing to do bodily harm to him, pulling the switch on him themselves?
Just wondering.
RIP Nancy.
DCgirl,
Not sure about that case, but EVERYONE is innocent until proven guilty. I have an opinion and I have stated it as such; I believe that he is involved, but he is innocent until proven guilty. He deserves the same rights as everyone else until it is proven that he committed a crime that would warrant the suspension of those rights. There is a huge difference between stating an opinion as such and flat out accusing someone of a crime without any evidence or proof.
They can tell location from which cell tower picked up the call. So if he had both her cell phone with him and his and he used her phone to call his they would see that both came from the same cell tower.
But she could have called him from 3 miles away and still been within range of the same cell tower. Depends on how the network was set up. What they can do is compare the signal strength from 2 other neighboring towers and use that to triangulate on a more precise location.
DCgirl,
Not sure about that case, but EVERYONE is innocent until proven guilty. I have an opinion and I have stated it as such; I believe that he is involved, but he is innocent until proven guilty. He deserves the same rights as everyone else until it is proven that he committed a crime that would warrant the suspension of those rights. There is a huge difference between stating an opinion as such and flat out accusing someone of a crime without any evidence or proof.
Alright, so it's just in... there is now an agreement between Brad Copper & Nancy's parents that Nancy's parents will have the kids until October. Why would he agree to that??? He only gets 4 calls a week & two supervised visits between now & October. Why should he be supervised? & Why didn't he fight for more? Why is he letting his kids be taken out of the country etc.?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
