GA - Suspicion over heat death of Cooper, 22 mo., Cobb County, June 2014, #2

[jjenny]

If the search was not done within the same week or so, I don't think it would be too difficult for the defense to explain away. If the family owns a dog, perhaps he was wondering how long he could leave the dog in the car if they were going to be at a rest stop or something for a few minutes. I also don't understand why he would search for "how long does it take an animal to die in a hot car" instead of simply "animals in hot car". I bet there will be a lot more debate over this in a few months, with some arguing there is no way he would search for something so incriminating and unnecessary, so it might not be as clear cut as it looks.

If I want to know how long it takes for an animal to die in a hot car, that is what I am going to search for. Not animals in hot cars.

 

[jjenny]

I never said I agreed. I said you should never leave a child in a car period.
I will mention that many of the people who have accidentally left their child in the car ( not leaving them purposely then forgetting) and their children died have not been prosecuted. Less than half. The ones that were ... a large percentage were later found not guilty by a jury or given a very minimal sentence. It depends on the state and DA but the ones that went to trial and found not guilty tells me that there are plenty of people out there feel this could happen to someone (anyone) given everyday circumstances of a busy parent. Right or wrong that is how the situations turned out. I would have to know all the details of each case before I could decide if I agree. The poster defending her friend knows the entire story and the women's background so I'm sure her perception is going to differ from yours.


People are feisty today! Its ruining the feel of this forum for me.

Yes, exactly. Many people are not prosecuted, or found not guilty.
So if someone actually wanted to get rid of their child (for whatever reason), what better way than to leave them in a hot car? And then claim it to be an accident.
I am not saying this happened in this particular case, but that's what I was thinking of for a while now.

 

[Judicious1]

Horrible thought...what if he did that search after going to his car at lunch because "it was taking too long"




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Science and medical information would dictate that is not probable. The child was most likely deceased before 10:30 assuming he walked into work around 9:30. Experts on the news have said children don't last very long. They said given his age and weight Cooper probably succumbed to his injuries with in an hour. I would guess the search was done prior to the date of death (if planned) or after finding him ( if he did discover at lunch) in effort to build some kind of alibi or story for wife/police. Just speculation

 

[blue22]

If the search was not done within the same week or so, I don't think it would be too difficult for the defense to explain away. If the family owns a dog, perhaps he was wondering how long he could leave the dog in the car if they were going to be at a rest stop or something for a few minutes. I also don't understand why he would search for "how long does it take an animal to die in a hot car" instead of simply "animals in hot car". I bet there will be a lot more debate over this in a few months, with some arguing there is no way he would search for something so incriminating and unnecessary, so it might not be as clear cut as it looks.

I think if it weren't on the day of the death, it wouldn't even be used. That evidence would be a defense attorneys dream.

 

[jjenny]

Science and medical information would dictate that is not probable. The child was most likely deceased before 10:30 assuming he walked into work around 9:30. Experts on the news have said children don't last very long. They said given his age and weight Cooper probably succumbed to his injuries with in an hour. I would guess the search was done prior to the date of death (if planned) or after finding him ( if he did discover at lunch) in effort to build some kind of alibi or story for wife/police. Just speculation

If the child was already dead at lunch, why would he need to know how long it takes for an animal to die?
How soon the child would die in a car would depend on what temperature was outside. Child is not going to die within an hour if outside temperature is not very hot.
Case in point-woman who left children in the car when she went for job interview (who had a bunch of people defending her)-her children didn't die.

 

[blue22]

If I want to know how long it takes for an animal to die in a hot car, that is what I am going to search for. Not animals in hot cars.

"In the search history on that computer, a law enforcement source tells the FOX 5 I-Team someone searched for information on how long it takes for an animal to die in a hot car"

I am just bolding that, because it's what I've read in every article since the leak came about. The reporter it was leaked directly to, used those exact words.

http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/story/25864933/sources-toddler-death

 

[Judicious1]

Yes, exactly. Many people are not prosecuted, or found not guilty.
So if someone actually wanted to get rid of their child (for whatever reason), what better way than to leave them in a hot car? And then claim it to be an accident.
I am not saying this happened in this particular case, but that's what I was thinking of for a while now.

If that was the case I would assume there would be enough in the person's life history and evidence of motive or planning to hopefully find them guilty. In the cases not prosecuted or found not guilty the parents were known and had character witnesses reflecting they had been nothing but loving and responsible parent suffering from a fatal lapse in judgement with nothing but sorrow to gain from their actions.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

If I want to know how long it takes for an animal to die in a hot car, that is what I am going to search for. Not animals in hot cars.

Animals in hot cars would bring up the same results, though. The first link...I don't even have to click it...says "Animals can sustain brain damage or even die from heatstroke in just 15 minutes". If he used animal instead of child to be less suspicious, you would think he would also omit the "to die" part.

Why would he search for animals dying in a hot car if he wanted to know how long it would take a child to die? All the results will be about animals, not children. Why would he search for something so incriminating on his work computer? I find it very unlikely the child was not dead at lunch. He could either discover him then or after work. Looking up hot car accidents was just unnecessary.

 

[blue22]

If the child was already dead at lunch, why would he need to know how long it takes for an animal to die?
How soon the child would die in a car would depend on what temperature was outside.

It's more likely (IMO) that he didn't know if the child was dead, and if he spent time checking surveillance and/or witnesses would see such.

 

[jjenny]

If that was the case I would assume there would be enough in the person's life history and evidence of motive or planning to hopefully find them guilty. In the cases not prosecuted or found not guilty the parents were known and had character witnesses reflecting they had been nothing but loving and responsible parent suffering from a fatal lapse in judgement with nothing but sorrow to gain from their actions.

Being loving and responsible parent is in the eye of the beholder.
Nobody knows what goes on in someone's mind.

 

[CCmakes3]

Science and medical information would dictate that is not probable. The child was most likely deceased before 10:30 assuming he walked into work around 9:30. Experts on the news have said children don't last very long. They said given his age and weight Cooper probably succumbed to his injuries with in an hour. I would guess the search was done prior to the date of death (if planned) or after finding him ( if he did discover at lunch) in effort to build some kind of alibi or story for wife/police. Just speculation

Maybe he had to do an internet search because he didn't have the guts to closely inspect the child or check his pulse.

 

[Judicious1]

If the child was already dead at lunch, why would he need to know how long it takes for an animal to die?
How soon the child would die in a car would depend on what temperature was outside. Child is not going to die within an hour if outside temperature is not very hot.
Case in point-woman who left children in the car when she went for job interview (who had a bunch of people defending her)-her children didn't die.

Correct and based on the temp outside they can cage the temp inside. Based on all variables they feel he would have does within the hour.

Like I said, if he didn't plan it, found him at lunch, panicked and didn't know what to do he could have looked it up in hopes of figuring out a excuse to cover up the grave mistake. Telling them he heard the child choking tells me my scenario is feasible. Stupid because clearly the boy looked as though he had been deceased long time but never the less he didn't start off saying in left him in the car.

 

[Judicious1]

Maybe he had to do an internet search because he was too much of a wimp to closely inspect the child or check his pulse.

Very well could have been this

 

[jjenny]

Very well could have been this

So instead of calling 911, your opinion is that this "loving and responsible' parent went back to the office to do internet searches, while he wasn't even sure that the child was dead?

 

[Threeplus1]

It would be interesting to hear from co-workers about his disposition that day at work. I haven't seen anything reported either way though.

I also find it interesting that no one is really speaking out (for or against) about this. Usually, there's no shortage of vocal family members and well-intentioned friends and acquaintances.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Yes, exactly. Many people are not prosecuted, or found not guilty.
So if someone actually wanted to get rid of their child (for whatever reason), what better way than to leave them in a hot car? And then claim it to be an accident.
I am not saying this happened in this particular case, but that's what I was thinking of for a while now.

But LE would do an investigation, and would likely find info that it was not an accident, like they did in this case.

 

[Judicious1]

Being loving and responsible parent is in the eye of the beholder.
Nobody knows what goes on in someone's mind.

Exactly - this is just why I think people doing it purposely can and will be weeded out. Either jury can tell from evidence and character witnesses and draw conclusions from that.

 

[blue22]

It would be interesting to hear from co-workers about his disposition that day at work. I haven't seen anything reported either way though.

I also find it interesting that no one is really speaking out (for or against) about this. Usually, there's no shortage of vocal family members and well-intentioned friends and acquaintances.

I think they lawyered up moment one. I'm sure they are being told not to talk.

With that said, I don't blame the mother. She is going through hell. I think talking to the public would be the last thing on my mind.

 

[jjenny]

But LE would do an investigation, and would likely find info that it was not an accident, like they did in this case.

How would you tell if someone deliberately left their child in the car vs. forgot the child in the car?

 

[eileenhawkeye]

It would be interesting to hear from co-workers about his disposition that day at work. I haven't seen anything reported either way though.

I also find it interesting that no one is really speaking out (for or against) about this. Usually, there's no shortage of vocal family members and well-intentioned friends and acquaintances.

Pretty much every news article's comments section had people who knew Harris defending him.