GA - Suspicion over heat death of Cooper, 22 mo., Cobb County, June 2014, #11

[Sonya610]

(a) potentially he's done that before because he's a doofus and she's so tired of talking to him about it or,
(b) he's threatened to do it
(c) ((horrible thought)) she knew he would do it

Regarding B, if he threatened to do it and she didn't grab that child and leave him IMMEDIATELY she is still complicit imo.

And I think she knew he would do it, she may not have know it would be that day, but I think they had discussed it and come to an agreement.

 

[Nore]

This is exactly what convinced me. It will convict him. JMO

--------
This guy is sick or has a heart like a rock.:facepalm:

 

[believe09]

There is little that would justify her statement at the daycare. If she believed that she should have immediately driven to the HD PL, found her husbands car and rescued her son. It would still have been too late according to the named TOD, but it would have been something.

God, I hate this case.

 

[SCHMAE]

The attorney latches onto the one thing that Ross told the truth about.

Dad treated him to the ' last supper' . It's true !

 

[SStarr33]

That was a few days ago. I read about it in a news article and joined. That's where I got my avatar from.

The owner of that page posted yesterday afternoon that JVM wanted to do a phone interview her.

Do you have a link? The one I found was just started yesterday. I would like to follow both.

 

[Lovejac]

This happened right around the corner from me. I do not believe Cooper's death was premeditated by either of his parents, but I am open to considering other information the detectives may have. This is a heart-breaking case.

:slap: :argue: illowfight:

Might I direct you to the video of the hearing?

 

[SCHMAE]

The problem with that theory is one side of the car is WIDE open to the parking lot. That increases the number of people who could have seen Cooper in the car. This will be a problem for the prosecution trying to prove premeditation.

You just made me wonder two things. Did Ross park where he normally parked daily ? Any deviation in his parking ? Do they have assigned lots or spaces to park in ? Second, does the HD office have 'shifts' where possibly another ' batch' of workers comes in noon to 8 pm or is the entire building on a set ' office hours' type schedule , which would be 8 or 9 am to 4 or 5 pm ? Does anyone know or has it been stated? TIA

 

[gritguy]

The problem with that theory is one side of the car is WIDE open to the parking lot. That increases the number of people who could have seen Cooper in the car. This will be a problem for the prosecution trying to prove premeditation.

I was surprised at the space too. While I lean heavily toward guilt, that space looks suboptimal to me from a risk standpoint. Of course, if he came late, it might have been the best of a bad lot for a bad purpose. Still, I would have wanted the car with the least visibility to potential pedestrians and it looks like that space wasn't it.

I still think he did it, but if he did do it on purpose not every action was the perfect move to make and it's fair to examine that certainly in light of the intent issue (to me the space is suboptimal, cussing at the police and then talking to them increased his risk of getting charged, entering the car during lunch unless certain the deed was done and revealing it then was also a bad move. Those things are very dumb or go away from intent, IMO).

 

[SStarr33]

No Ma'am: Because of the dimensions of the Hyundai Tuscson, a small SUV, the top of the car seat was only about six inches from Ross Harris' head, and protruded in between the two front seats, the detective said.

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2014/07/justin_ross_harris_hearing_bri.html

Stoddard said Cooper was "several inches" too big for the car cradle, positioned in the middle of the back seat, and testified the child's head would've been visible.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/manawatu-sta...e-key-evidence-in-case-of-toddler-left-in-car

It protruded??? I don't recall hearing that.

Here is the testimony:

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1407/03/wolf.02.html

UNIDENTIFIED PROSECUTOR: And that rear-facing child seat, was that behind the passengers' side, behind the driver's side or in the middle of the backseat?

STODDARD: It was in the middle of the backseat.

UNIDENTIFIED PROSECUTOR: How far or how close -- what was the distance between the driver's seat approximately and the head area end of the car seat?

STODDARD: Six inches at the most.

 

[kimi_SFC]

There is little that would justify her statement at the daycare. If she believed that she should have immediately driven to the HD PL, found her husbands car and rescued her son. It would still have been too late according to the named TOD, but it would have been something.

God, I hate this case.

A million times this (BBM), believe09! I have typed and and deleted so many posts on this case, but yours just resonates to the point of bringing me to tears!

So many questions unanswered, so many things that just don't reconcile, and frankly flat-out baffle me. The threads move like lightning, and in my heart, I feel this is a reflection of just how much this case means to everyone here at WS! :moo:

I hope the light of truth and justice reveals all that happened on that fateful day, as well as the events leading up. This beautiful child deserves to have his full story told, no matter how much it hurts. :twocents:

Thank you all for making sure Cooper has a voice.

:heartluv:

:tears: for Cooper!

:rose:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rob]

--------
This guy is sick or has a heart like a rock.:facepalm:

I prefer self-centered and evil.
JMO

 

[SStarr33]

There is a possibility that the video of RH &LH could be favorable to the defense. I keep thinking that, of whatever was said between them, in the hearing Thursday they kept going back to two statements. "Did you say too much" and "I dreaded looking at him." I think there's a possibility the defense will introduce the video into evidence. Especially if it explains the context of, "did you say too much."

I just can't believe at a probable cause hearing the prosecution is allowed to present evidence that does not show the context of the conversation. Very unfair.

 

[SStarr33]

I was surprised at the space too. While I lean heavily toward guilt, that space looks suboptimal to me from a risk standpoint. Of course, if he came late, it might have been the best of a bad lot for a bad purpose. Still, I would have wanted the car with the least visibility to potential pedestrians and it looks like that space wasn't it.

I still think he did it, but if he did do it on purpose not every action was the perfect move to make and it's fair to examine that certainly in light of the intent issue (to me the space is suboptimal, cussing at the police and then talking to them increased his risk of getting charged, entering the car during lunch unless certain the deed was done and revealing it then was also a bad move. Those things are very dumb or go away from intent, IMO).

Agree. I think the jury will totally understand him telling the police to F off.

Plus, there are more things that go away from intent one being an IT guy and not at least trying to hide your tracks.

At this point, I'm not seeing a plan and can't see them giving him the DP.

 

[SStarr33]

I think Kilgore was so blindsided by the sexting revelations that he didn't do as good a job as he could have. The CNN link only has the prosecution's direct. I'm looking for a transcript of redirect. Does anyone have one? Someone also mentioned reading a full transcript that was 17 pages long. Does anyone have a link to it? I looked in the media thread where the CNN links are, but couldn't find the full thing and I can't watch the video right now.

Also, there's a big difference in probable cause hearing and the redirect that would take place in a trial...

I'm not sure he was blindsided by it at all. Why do you think that? He went along with the questioning until they tried to talk about the 16 yo

 

[believe09]

The threshold is pretty low I believe-the DA is simply trying to give enough evidence to justify the charges and ultimately justify the request for low bond. The DT seemed way more focused on the sexting as an issue and unfortunately for the DT, I think the character witnesses backfired when the DA managed to show how little they knew the defendant. The defense was absolutely in the position to bring up the context of the conversation if it differed substantially from the spin the prosecutor was giving it.

I just can't believe at a probable cause hearing the prosecution is allowed to present evidence that does not show the context of the conversation. Very unfair.

 

[buttonbaby]

Do we know who *started* the "round of applause" at the funeral? I can see people going along with it to avoid looking like jerks to a "grieving father" even if privately they found it rather unseemly.

IMO, "applause" at a funeral, ESPECIALLY this one, is extremely inappropriate- it simply stuns me that anyone would have started it and others joined in. WHAT??? Are you kidding me??? Come on.

There is a time and a place for everything and a funeral certainly is not the place for a "round of applause" under ANY circumstances. Again, IMOO, even though it is a completely different and happy event, I am one of the folks who find a "round of applause" at a wedding extremely annoying- it grates on my last nerve. I can't count the number of times, even after a very, very formal church ceremony, that guests begin applauding after the officiate pronounces a couple husband and wife. It's supposed to be a ceremony of love and lifelong commitment, not a concert performance encore. Sorry, but if people must clap, it can wait until the reception where there is a "party/lively celebration" atmosphere. My apologies....back OT.

Who ARE the people who were "applauding" at precious little Cooper's funeral??? Was it mostly their church "family"? I just don't understand this AT ALL and actually find it quite DISTURBING. Of course, the funeral was held on 6/28 and the probable cause/bond hearing was several days later on 7/3. Can you imagine how they felt after finding out that RH is a narcissistic, psychopathic sexual deviant? The only applause they will be making is when he is pronounced GUILTY and sent off to prison (possibly death row) for the rest of his worthless life. Please let there be swift justice for beautiful little Cooper who was completely betrayed by the TWO people who were supposed to love him unconditionally more than anyone else on earth.

 

[newone]

I just can't believe at a probable cause hearing the prosecution is allowed to present evidence that does not show the context of the conversation. Very unfair.

I give full credit to the Detective for having it together on the stand during the hearing - he was unflappable. That being said, I would have preferred to have had the whole conversation that led up to "" well did you say to much"" so that I could determine whether or not it was truly damning. On the surface of course it is crazy but what was she referencing? ((I have said too much on this throughout the threads))

I am on the record for of course JRH is guilty......of just so many things aside from the murder of his child

 

[SStarr33]

The threshold is pretty low I believe-the DA is simply trying to give enough evidence to justify the charges and ultimately justify the request for low bond. The DT seemed way more focused on the sexting as an issue and unfortunately for the DT, I think the character witnesses backfired when the DA managed to show how little they knew the defendant. The defense was absolutely in the position to bring up the context of the conversation if it differed substantially from the spin the prosecutor was giving it.

It sure does seem the defense should have had access to the recordings.

So that makes me think it is one of two things--ineffective assistance of counsel or incriminating context.

ETA, but thinking on it more, the prosecution should NOT be allowed to mislead/spin, ever.

 

[screecher]

I just can't believe at a probable cause hearing the prosecution is allowed to present evidence that does not show the context of the conversation. Very unfair.

BBM

Context of conversation is painfully obvious, being a child was freakin' baked/boiled to death "Very unfair". Surely, you jest.

 

[believe09]

I think the sexting shows how completely unglued bio dad is as a human being. It seems that he represents what is all to typical in a case like this...no plan B. He didn't take into consideration what would happen if he epically messed this murder up-he didn't take into consideration what would happen if they didn't believe him. Well except the search on how to survive in prison perhaps.

Thank God he was too (fill in the blank) to pull this off.