Trial - Ross Harris #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Safeguard said:
He didn't forget cooper. He mis-remembered and thought he dropped him off at daycare. That is why, it makes NO difference how brief a time was between point A and Point B. In fact if it was longer, something may have shattered his mistaken memory of having dropped cooper off at daycare.
This is supported by the fact that he calls his wife and asked her what time she is picking up cooper ect...
Click to expand...

Yes because there is most certainly no way he could have lied and deliberately made the phone call to make himself look better, right? Let's not forget that we are dealing with a complete who was lying, quite convincingly I might add, to everyone in his life for some time.

My opinion on the 33 seconds is that this was his last few moments of "Am I really going through with this? There's no turning back..." thought process before he finally decided to get out of the car and proceed as planned.
 
That guy is suppose to be a credible witness? The guy that sold his story to the National Enquirer for $2000 and did not even watch the complete video for his testimony today? :thinking:
 
SuzDuJour said:
I noticed a drink in his hand when he checked in at work that morning. If that drink was from Chick-fil-a, where he was with his son a minute before, I'm DONE. He remembered his drink, but not his child. Geeez.
Click to expand...

Jumping from this post.

Where, in this kinda car, would the drink holder be?
 
arkansasmimi said:
That guy is suppose to be a credible witness? The guy that sold his story to the National Enquirer for $2000 and did not even watch the complete video for his testimony today? :thinking:
Click to expand...


I'm not sure he really needed to watch the complete video. I think the video explains itself. We can see Ross and his actions and from what I see it looks like he's very casual.
 
PaperDoll said:
I'm not sure he really needed to watch the complete video. I think the video explains itself. We can see Ross and his actions and from what I see it looks like he's very casual.
Click to expand...


I agree. And the defense had every opportunity to show on the video Ross upset- if he was.
 
ScotAng said:
Jumping from this post.

Where, in this kinda car, would the drink holder be?
Click to expand...


IIRC it's right next to him on his right side between passenger side and drivers.
 
matou said:
Well he did research "how to survive prison", didn't he?
Click to expand...

Not that I can tell from testimony. (have to refresh on Yeager testimony again) but yesterday, going over Chats with Alex, it showed that on 6/62014 and 6/7/2014 RH and Alex chatted. And Orange is the New Black was in some of the convo.

On June 6, 2014 the New Season of Orange is The New Black was released on Netflix. I provided link on page one of this thread showing that.

And again on 6/17/14 another reference in chat with Alex to that Netflix Orig Series.

JMHO could have looked up in ref to that if forensics do show a search (again I can't remb at moment) but jmho again would depend on the date and time alleged search done.
 
blue22 said:
I know that, but the defense seemed like they were trying to make a compelling point that he didn't know RH. That had already been established by the prosecution, lol.
Click to expand...


Maybe the point is that RH hated the name Justin, didn't use it, and would have told this interesting feller that if this feller called him Justin in that extended conversation he says they had?
 
I've watched orange is the new black- Doing a search for how to survive in prison would have nothing to do with that show IMO and makes no sense at all. I suspect Ross enjoyed the graphic sexual aspect of that show- MY opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
arkansasmimi said:
That guy is suppose to be a credible witness? The guy that sold his story to the National Enquirer for $2000 and did not even watch the complete video for his testimony today? :thinking:
Click to expand...

If I was on that jury, I'd find him credible. It was pretty clear he's a young guy who sold a story for a few bucks, he admitted he'd never even read the Enquirer before. He didn't give it the "hot-car death Daddy confessed to me" rap. Simply that he had regular conversation with him. The point was made. No biggie, but still made.
 
ScotAng said:
Jumping from this post.

Where, in this kinda car, would the drink holder be?
Click to expand...

In my Tuscon the drink holder was in the middle of the two seats. In front of a small console. (Basically, between the console and the shifter.) There was also a drink holder on the bottom of the door.
 
ScotAng said:
If I was on that jury, I'd find him credible. It was pretty clear he's a young guy who sold a story for a few bucks, he admitted he'd never even read the Enquirer before. He didn't give it the "hot-car death Daddy confessed to me" rap. Simply that he had regular conversation with him. The point was made. No biggie, but still made.
Click to expand...

I agree. I was expecting that to be a disaster. IMO, he came across as a young dude that happened to encounter RH, and made a bit of easy money to one news outlet. He didn't come across as particularly invested or concerned with being involved in the trial. I fully expected him to be one of those guys that wanted to have the sensational information. He really doesn't seem like it.

And the defense pointing out that he doesn't know how he acted on the phone, but didn't show any evidence of him having been upset on the phone. This witness was a surprisingly kind of bad moment for the defense and pretty good for the prosecution. IMO.
 
jamiect said:
The defense pointed out that Wilson did not graduate from college. Wilson said he dropped out and started a business.
Click to expand...

I am not sure exactly what this statement from the defense is supposed to indicate. Because the guy didn't finish college his testimony isn't believable? So that would mean they are insinuating that one's actions help define their character? Gee...that's not at all how their opening statements sounded when they said his deviant sexual behavior had no bearing on this case. Doesn't that also mean their client, a self admitted pervert who was having sex with underage girls, is not to be trusted either? Hell, if I was on the jury I think I would find the DUI more credible than the guy sneaking around his wife to sleep with teenagers and prostitutes in seedy motels.
 
arkansasmimi said:
That guy is suppose to be a credible witness? The guy that sold his story to the National Enquirer for $2000 and did not even watch the complete video for his testimony today? :thinking:
Click to expand...


Why not be credible? Just because he got 2000 bucks doesn't mean he is not telling the truth... There can be both
 
Would Ross' demeanor in the holding arena have been allowed in without this guys testimony?
 
Before I sign off for the day.. I don't think the DEF did a good job today.. I think their battering of the witness' on the stand did them no good... To me it seemed like they were trying to make them all look they are incompetent... Especially the guy that does security... Asking over and over if he raised his right hand and swore to tell the truth.. I think that guy was really trying to do the best he could ...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 163 more.
Total: 383 (members: 164, guests: 219)

Online statistics

Members online
164
Guests online
219
Total visitors
383
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,929
Messages
18,247,727
Members
234,505
Latest member
sandra.gionest76
Back
Top