GA - Suspicion over heat death of Cooper, 22 mo., Cobb County, June 2014, #13

[otto]

Sheeesh who killed the thread? j/k

Why are people ignoring the closing comments the judge made about the possibility of the DP? hummmmmm

Is the death penalty on the table?

 

[newone]

Is the death penalty on the table?

In the video of the PCHearing, the judge was heard to say that this case will be going to the grand jury, and that bail was denied, and that the accused may be facing the death penalty. (IIRC)


I don't believe LH has been charged with anything at this point.

 

[jmcgladr]

:loveyou:

Add to all of that Leanna's behavior and it appears that she didn't love Cooper either. Either she decided that Harris was more important than her son and/or she was in on it.

MOO

I disagree. I think her behavior shows an odd (to my view) way of looking at the world, but I don't think it shows in any way that she did not love Cooper. There is no real evidence at all connecting her to this crime. Only a few odd remarks here and there, all given w/in a week or so of her child dying horribly at her husband's hands. Getting a manicure before the funeral seems pretty harmless and normal to me (I got one before my Mom's funeral, also a new dress - my family members treated me to make me feel better and so I'd look presentable when giving the eulogy).

 

[jmcgladr]

Has his wife been charged yet, or are we still tiptoeing around the comments she made to her husband ... along the lines of ... "did you say too much" and "I wouldn't bring him back even if I could with this mean world of bullying".

Those comments are odd, but the first one could be explained in other innocent ways and the second one is synonymous with her having strong religious beliefs and/or bullying experiences IMO. They are certainly no cause to charge her with anything!

 

[newone]

I disagree. I think her behavior shows an odd (to my view) way of looking at the world, but I don't think it shows in any way that she did not love Cooper. There is no real evidence at all connecting her to this crime. Only a few odd remarks here and there, all given w/in a week or so of her child dying horribly at her husband's hands. Getting a manicure before the funeral seems pretty harmless and normal to me (I got one before my Mom's funeral, also a new dress - my family members treated me to make me feel better and so I'd look presentable when giving the eulogy).

If appearing ''odd'' is a crime -- whoa Nellie....there are quite a few of us who could be in trouble

 

[jmcgladr]

Alright, this is going to be long. I'm reading some about what RD is charged with and if the DP is on the table. So, first I'm going to post some Georgia statutes.

The statute for murder, at the time of the arrest warrant, read like this:



Now, the new law that went into effect July 1st is this:



The statute for the death penalty reads as follows:



Finally, a great summary of how a GJ works here:



Ok, the murder charge in the arrest warrant is based off the first ocga murder statute listed. 16-5-1 (c) is the felony murder charge based upon the 2nd degree cruelty charge. My understanding is that felony murder, as listed in it, is not eligible for DP because in RH's case, it doesn't meet any of the criteria listed in 17-10-30 (though to me,17-10-30(7) would fit). UNLESS the 2nd degree cruelty charge is considered a capital felony. I know there is a separate statute listing sentencing for murder and felony murder is a mandatory life sentence with parole eligible at 30 years. If you have no prior felony convictions. I can't find it now, I'm exhausted, but I'll edit this to include it when I do find it.

However, I believe the grand jury indictment replaces the arrest warrant. And since that would be after July 1st (obviously), the new laws apply. So if the first charge remains 2nd degree cruelty to children, the Grand jury would have to use this new murder charge (16-5-1 (d) which has its own sentencing defined in 16-5-1 (e)(2) as a possible sentence of 10 to 30 years). So, I think if the DA presents a 2nd cruelty to children case to the Grand Jury, their hands are tied on the lack of a stiff murder charge.

And, I threw in the info out Gran Juries for good measure.

I'm exhausted and dunno if I explained this well. I reserve the right to edit it more. But, for now, I'm done...

Are there any Georgia lawyers in the building? I've got a paralegal cert but, obviously, I'm still learning

OK, forgive me if this is a dumb question, but does anyone know why did this change in statute come about? Was it coming down the pike for a long time, or was it prompted by public interest/pressure about this case (especially initially, when many people thought RH was being overzealously charged)? It seems to me (with no law degree/experience, just reading it) that it allows RH to get a much shorter sentence than he previously would have received, if the crime is determined to be 2nd degree. It's just odd, the timing of this new law - especially when one of the clauses specifically mentions "the commission of cruelty to children in the 2nd degree."

 

[newone]

OK, forgive me if this is a dumb question, but does anyone know why did this change in statute come about? Was it coming down the pike for a long time, or was it prompted by public interest/pressure about this case (especially initially, when many people thought RH was being overzealously charged)? It seems to me (with no law degree/experience, just reading it) that it allows RH to get a much shorter sentence than he previously would have received, if the crime is determined to be 2nd degree. It's just odd, the timing of this new law - especially when one of the clauses specifically mentions "the commission of cruelty to children in the 2nd degree."

The two events are independent of each other.....law was in process .....
had nothing to do with this case JMO

 

[jmcgladr]

The two events are independent of each other.....law was in process .....
had nothing to do with this case JMO

Thanks, that's kind of what I thought, but strange coincidence nonetheless. I wonder if RH new that a new (potentially much more lenient) law was coming? Or had researched GA laws before committing this crime? I wouldn't be surprised, given how he researched everything else about his (alleged) crime.

 

[newone]

Thanks, that's kind of what I thought, but strange coincidence nonetheless. I wonder if RH new that a new (potentially much more lenient) law was coming? Or had researched GA laws before committing this crime? I wouldn't be surprised, given how he researched everything else about his (alleged) crime.

Truthfully, I don't think (MOO) that he expected to be charged with anything given that so many of the tragedies were never prosecuted and considered accidents. He was banking on sympathetic LE and the public at large (again JMO)

 

[Sonya610]

In thinking more about LRH's personality type, I'm wondering how he can be a sociopath or psychopath. He has (or had) two or three long-term relationships with his college buddies which followed through to working at HD together and starting a business together. I'd heard it was difficult for people with psychotic tendencies to form long-term relationships. They tend to form short-term relationships to use people, then discard them when they are no longer useful.

Many of the most infamous sociopaths in history had long term relationships (though many do tend to be promiscuous whether they are in a LTR or not).

 

[gngr~snap]

A Sweet angel...

All posts are MOO. Sent via Insignia Flex Tablet.

 

[BrownRice]

I can't remember on which thread it was said that JRH called his landlord. That makes you go hmmm, could there of been a call saying you'll have your rent by the first?

What was the reason he took over the finances?

Maybe this was in the beginning when he was looking for LH? I don't even know if he was, but you would assume, right?

 

[BrownRice]

as evidenced by him playing on his phone when he was watching someone walk past the car at lunchtime - but the phone recorded no activity. He knew how to make it look like he was on the phone without actually using it.

how did i miss this??????

 

[BrownRice]

I did read Gitana's post. I guess I just am not meant to understand this case. I am not generally dense. I would just really need to know if this man left his baby to die on purpose...not through neglect, etc...but literally, purposefully, on purpose. Jmo

But my understanding is if we were on the jury, we would not be allowed to use this thought process in determining his guilt or innocence. Right?

 

[CHERIE.T]

how did i miss this??????

BR I wish I knew which threaD THAT WAS DISCUSSED ON. But yes it was said JH walked away from his car, stopped and held his phone like he having a convo so he could watch someone who supposedly got too close to his car.

 

[CHERIE.T]

A Sweet angel...

All posts are MOO. Sent via Insignia Flex Tablet.

Sweet angel is right. RIP Cooper. :tears:

 

[BrownRice]

Why kiss him at Chik Fil? JRH would be bringing him to daycare where they could say goodbye. Or did the loving JRH kiss CH every time he strapped CH into the car?

I thought he said (don't have a link) that he kissed CH every time they got into the car in case they got into a car accident and CH died. It was so stupid and ridiculous I remember it.

 

[Sonya610]

By knowing he was covering his tracks it makes him seem even more guilty to me. If it ain't no big deal then why delete it? JH makes it seem like these are normal actions. That everyone does this crazy stuff. I've looked at some sick stuff before but nothing ever as weird or crazy as all the things he checked out all together.

Well "covering his tracks" could mean he had his browser settings adjusted to automatically wipe out history etc... We know he was messing around on dating sites so it would make sense for him to do that (and with modern browsers it is super easy, since so many have the need for extra privacy).

Course those settings only protect you from your spouse or others that share your computer. Google will save all search data regardless.

 

[NancyA]

I was exactly the same. My sons were exactly 2 years apart, so I would haul the infant and toddler everywhere - I never would have considered leaving them alone in the car for even a minute.

As far as forgetting your small child is in the car - I can say for certainty that it would never have happened on my watch because I continually drove myself nuts by mentally checking and rechecking that the kids were taken care of and that I had not forgotten anything. This mental meta-cognitive thinking persisted through when my sons were in middle school, and I would ruminate over whether homework was completed, lunches were made, uniforms cleaned and pressed, permission slips signed, etc etc. But if that is what it takes to make sure you're not neglecting your kids then that is what it takes!

That is exactly why it was so stunning to me to learn that it has actually happened where a parent forgets a child in their car seat! And in my mind there is no excuse for forgetting a child in a carseat by a parent especially. It's still a homicide and should still be a criminal offense even if it wasn't intentional or with malice.

BBM. Precisely. I think that is what some of us have been arguing all along. It doesn't and shouldn't matter if it was unintentional, the law should do whatever it takes to get through the heads of ALL parents that leaving your child in a dangerous situation because you forgot is not acceptable just a driving without a seatbelt or through red lights or leaving a campfire unattended in a wildfire region because you forgot is not acceptable. This appears to be the only kind of crime where 'forgetfulness' is an excuse and gets a pass - for parents, yet should this happen to a non-familial caregiver in charge of a child there would be all kinds of hell raised.

As it stands these cases are generally treated with kid gloves because the parent had a terrible, tragic accident so there is a reluctance on the part of the authorities to pursue charges and strict penalties through the courts on the grounds the loss of the child means the parent "has been punished enough". Look at well-meaning but misguided (IMO) public backlash in support of RH in the wake of his arrest early on in this case. The trouble with the 'punished enough' approach is we are absolving parents of their need for due diligence and vigilance in raising their kids and of course it then becomes the method of choice for those people who do have malicious intentions and are looking for an 'easy' way out of parenthood.

 

[JustyThoughts]

BBM

"Distracted by hook up plans"? Before work? After strapping Cooper into his car seat at Chick-Fil-A? At the stop light when he SHOULD have turned left to take Cooper to day care? Not understanding how that works.

I'm so far behind on reading..... My thoughts on this is he was using the hook-up plans as a distraction - to the evil thing he was doing with Cooper that day.