GA - Suspicion over heat death of Cooper, 22 mo., Cobb County, June 2014, #5

[stmarysmead]

Originally Posted by JeannaT
The charges are certainly effective in being able to put someone away who had no intent of harming his child! I don't think that's "brilliant" I think that's horrific. That someone could be sent to death for a crime the legal system doesn't think they intended to happen.

In my opinion, honestly, to be convicted of a crime it should have to be proven there's intent.

Isn't that what all this hubub is about on this board with this sad case? Those who firmly believe it was his INTENT to harm that child?

So why not make that a part of this criminal prosecution process? PROVE intent - or at least make it a requirement of the charge.

Snip

@@@@@@@@

I have been pondering this post and others like it since last night. I have come to the conclusion that "hot car" deaths may just be the perfect crime. The perfect form of infanticide.

What I mean is this....how do you prove "intent?"

There's no gun to go out and buy, no poison in the child's system. Neglect and lack of bonding does not always come with bruises. If you leave a toddler alone in your apartment, no one will come to your defense and say that you are to be pitied because you "forgot" your child was in there....but in a CAR...then sympathy is extended because you were "distracted." People will say..."Oh, I forget things too."

Of all the ways for a child to die, this is among the most heinous. The most sadistic parent among us could hardly find a crueler way to rid themselves of a unwanted child. And yet, it is the safest way to do so....because, as this thread shows, how do you prove intent?

How do you prove what is deliberate...from what is...a distraction?

How does the prosecutor get a jury past "excusing" the grieving parent...deeming it just a "mistake?"
It is seeming to me, more and more impossible.

In this case,

....there are searches by both parents as to the conditions needed to kill.

...There is a very, very short time span between interaction with the child and abandoning him to an awful death.

....There is a variation in routine in that very, very short time, deliberately turning toward work instead of toward the daycare as was customary.

...There is a second trip to the car, with the door opened and reaching in. There is the fact that it was the hottest day of the month.

...There is the size of the car and the height of the Father.

But to many fine and intelligent posters...these things prove nothing. No intent. Barring the finding of a note.."Honey, today looks hot enough to do the deed." ....what EXACTLY could prove intent in a case like this? Every single thing can be explained or excused away by those looking to do so. I don't mean that as a criticism, but as an observation of just how high the bar has been set.

This case already differs from the "usual" cases...in significant ways, compelling ways. If these are not enough, what would be?

Or have we discovered the makings of the perfect crime? Wait for the right day...wait the right amount of time...cry about your loss...be showered with cash donations and sympathy for your tragic forgetfulness.

Perfect crime.

So my question this morning is...in a hot car death, just what WOULD prove intent to those who do not see enough here in this case...to do so? What would investigators need to find?

What could possibly prove...intent?

 

[Sonya610]

What could possibly prove...intent?

I am sure a few different things could but a poster a few pages back pointed out a fascinating possibility.

We know they have video of the car, we know they saw him put an "object" in the vehicle (I am concerned that they aren't naming the object because the video was poor quality and they couldn't tell what it was).

Anyway if they have video of him leaving the car that morning and he appears to be interacting with the kid, or LOOKING in the back of the van as he walks away....well that would do it.

Or incriminating texts between him and the wife. They appear to be completely addicted to cell phones (he was on the phone when a stranger was giving his dead kid CPR, she was on the phone as she followed the casket at the funeral, etc...)

 

[momrids6]

I would like the complete autopsy report. I have only seen that he passed from hyperthemia- I want to know how long he had been deceased.

 

[Sonya610]

I also want to know WHO he called immediately during the CPR?

How many men would rush to CALL the mother of the child they just killed? Most folks would be so horrified at what THEY HAD DONE they certainly wouldn't rush to tell their spouse as they would be delivering the worst news possible to a mother. I would think they would want to have someone else be with her when the news came.

I think this couple had a very weird narcissistic type relationship, I don't think she was some abused and mistreated little woman though.

 

[Chewy]

I have been pondering this post and others like it since last night. I have come to the conclusion that "hot car" deaths may just be the perfect crime. The perfect form of infanticide.

What I mean is this....how do you prove "intent?"

There's no gun to go out and buy, no poison in the child's system. Neglect and lack of bonding does not always come with bruises. If you leave a toddler alone in your apartment, no one will come to your defense and say that you are to be pitied because you "forgot" your child was in there....but in a CAR...then sympathy is extended because you were "distracted."

Of all the ways for a child to die, this is among the most heinous. The most sadistic parent among us could hardly find a crueler way to rid themselves of a child. And yet, it is the safest way to do so....because, as this thread shows, how do you prove intent?

How does the prosecutor get a jury past "excusing" the grieving parent...deeming it just a "mistake?"

In this case, there are searches by both parents as to the conditions needed to kill.

There is a very, very short time span between interaction with the child and abandoning him to an awful death.

There is a variation in routine in that very, very short time, deliberately turning toward work instead of toward the daycare as was customary.

There is a second trip to the car, with the door opened and reaching in. There is the fact that it was the hottest day of the month.

There is the size of the car and the height of the Father.

But to many fine and intelligent posters...these things prove nothing. No intent. Barring the finding of a note.."Honey, today looks hot enough to do the deed." ....what EXACTLY could prove intent in a case like this? Every single thing can be explained or excused away by those looking to do so. I don't mean that as a criticism, but as an observation of just how high the bar has been set.

This case already differs from the "usual" cases...in significant ways, compelling ways. If these are not enough, what would be?

Or have we discovered the makings of the perfect crime? Wait for the right day...wait the right amount of time...cry about your loss...be showered with cash donations and sympathy for your tragic forgetfulness.

Perfect crime.

So my question this morning is...in a hot car death, just what WOULD prove intent to those who do not see enough here in this case...to do so? What would investigators need to find?

What could possibly prove...intent?

This is exactly WHY all these cases need to be prosecuted. There is just too much emotional bias connected to the evaluation of evidence. It's the same, as I said, with a toddler drowning in a pool. These are horrific ways for a child to die, especially abandoned at the hands of a parent.

And frankly, anyone who has lost a child has shared that it is a devastating experience. IMO the "sympathy" we extend to the parent who forgets their child is simply a resistance to dealing with it ourselves.

If I forgot my kid in a car and I was charged with negligence I'd get up and say GUILTY. I'd want to be punished. Saying no punishment could be worse than losing a child would only BE a punishment for a parent that actually cared about their child. As I've stated before, there are plenty of parents who don't care about their children at all. Every day on this site we see stories about parents who deliberately kill their children. Whatever their reason, they don't care about their child as an individual human being.

As a society we have an obligation to speak on behalf of the victims and to seek justice on behalf of the victim. The more that we DON'T prosecute every single parent that does this, the more we create a safety zone for parents who want to be rid of their children.

Even if someone goes to trial there's a big chance that people will still try to make excuses for the PARENT instead of remembering the rights of a victim.

Babies and toddlers are completely at the mercy of their caregivers. And again, if a school bus driver left a child in the back of a school bus all day parents would want justice. If a babysitter forgot a baby in the car we would prosecute. That's because these people have a legal expectation of responsibility, remembering the child and being diligent and careful with the child.

I'd also like to point out how many "Fathers" seem to be doing this lately. There's automatic slack cut to the dad because fathers are not expected to be as hands on with the child.

It's very strange to me that the two most recent cases in the news involve fathers connected in some way to law enforcement. IOW something that may have come up in conversation at work etc. and they realized they can get away with murder.

What's really weird to me now is how the father is now being viewed as a victim of circumstance. I'll ask this question, would you have the same level of sympathy for the father if he left your own child in the back of the car the child died?


To me the intent is shown in the internet searches. If he really was thinking that this could possibly happen, the idea of a random trip to a car on the hottest day in two weeks, opening the door and getting unnerved by the hot temperature. Imagining your worst fear coming true. It would creep anyone out enough to just LOOK at the back seat of the car.

The father was at the car three times, from two different sides of the car, a week after "having a bad feeling about this." and not once did he even LOOK towards the backseat?? I do not believe it.

I also want to know WHO he called immediately during the CPR?

How many men would rush to CALL the mother of the child they just killed? Most folks would be so horrified at what THEY HAD DONE they certainly wouldn't rush to tell their spouse as they would be delivering the worst news possible to a mother. I would think they would want to have someone else be with her when the news came.

I think this couple had a very weird narcissistic type relationship, I don't think she was some abused and mistreated little woman though.

This bothers me too. The level of confusion with this happening, he's being arrested on the spot, pushed to complete the call by the police, emotionally (supposedly devastated) Why not call her pastor or a friend to go sit with her and give her the information. Why?

Wouldn't she be totally confused by what he was telling her on the phone? It would be a completely confusing phone call if she didn't know what was going on. :waitasec:

 

[Sonya610]

ETA: I wonder if they felt he was "damaged" from being left in the car an earlier day?

I didn't read all the warrants but just saw this in the article you posted:

"They're definitely going to look at how healthy was the child, the family's previous history, whether dad was usually somebody who was very responsible," she said. "And the defense, if this reaches a trial, will be collecting their evidence that he was a good parent, a fit parent."

http://www.11alive.com/story/news/crime/2014/06/28/justin-ross-harris-child-hot-car-death/11609645/

Is looking at the "health" of a child typical in this type of death? Seems that may indeed be a motive here.

 

[Chewy]

I would imagine it would speak to "time of death" and "motive" so yes, I'd want them to look at the health of the child. I also want to see the toxicology report.

 

[oh_gal]

So...if searching for "how long does it take an animal to die in a hot car" was not related to Cooper, why were both the dad and mom searching for this? I have yet to see a plausible explanation for this, [modsnip].

(FWIW, I don't believe for minute mom was searching for this. I think she is trying to take the heat off her husband. Her allegiance to him is frightening, to me).

[modsnip] I am hoping someone can provide me with a reason I can accept, because sometimes we can develop tunnel vision, and not see anything beyond what we've made up our mind is the truth. If this all turns out to be a horrible accident, I have no problem admitting I was wrong. I'm just not seeing it, at this time.

 

[Sonya610]

I would imagine it would speak to "time of death" and "motive" so yes, I'd want them to look at the health of the child. I also want to see the toxicology report.

Oh I want them to look at it too, just saying it seems a little unusual and only relevant with regards to a motive (the kid didn't die in 20 minutes, 7 hours would be easily fatal to even the extremely healthy toddler).

 

[stmarysmead]

Terrific post, Chewy.

One difficult things about "conversing" in a forum is that we really cannot ask follow up questions. Without being confrontational but just with the sincerest curiosity, I'd like to know what exactly WOULD prove intent in these hot car cases...to those who see nothing in this case that does so?

I think we would find that the sympathy for the parent makes them pretty much Teflon. This is why I think this type of murder is a perfect crime.

I do understand that we all are different. But the most commonplace reaction to fear is vigilance. If they feared this death enough for BOTH of them to have to google it...then you can bet they were discussing it. So where is there any sign that they took ANY step...toward prevention? ANYTHING? A homemade sign that says..."check for Baby! " cost next to nothing. A phone call, checking up....costs next to nothing.

Why bother to google if you were not going to do anything with the information?

The only explanation other than premeditated murder...would be that they researched because they were leaving him in the car to save money. A check against daycare records of the child's hours and their work hours should eliminate that.

I wonder if he called his wife immediately after his trip to the car at lunch? I wonder if there was a particular time she picked the child up (say, 2PM) and that she failed to show up at the daycare at her usual time? I wonder of she knew long before that call from the shopping center that her child was dead?

 

[believe09]

Does anyone know if he was actually seen in CFA? Or maybe he was seen in CFA but "sleeping" while being held? Did anyone see him at all before/after that stop? I may have missed it but how do we know Cooper was at CFA? Is there a surveillance video or eyewitness report?

I guess my mind is hung up on this statement from police:

Pierce told CNN On Friday, 'I cannot confirm that the child, as originally reported, was in the car at 9am'.


If not, where was he between CFA & being placed in the car after 9am? What would make police suspect he was NOT in the car upon arriving at HD?


LINK TO NEWS STORY WITH QUOTE

This statement has stuck with me throughout. I am anxious for an explanation.

 

[Sonya610]

I wonder if he called his wife immediately after his trip to the car at lunch?

Great point. I wonder if he did too, in the parking lot as he walked back to his office (so he could talk without others overhearing).

 

[Elley Mae]

Was it confirmed that justin went inside at the chic-fil-a or did he do the drive-thru, he looks like a drive-thru kind of guy. I do wonder if cooper was seen alive before they set out for the trip that day. jmo

 

[Sonya610]

Was it confirmed that justin went inside at the chic-fil-a or did he do the drive-thru, he looks like a drive-thru kind of guy. I do wonder if cooper was seen alive before they set out for the trip that day. jmo

I recall that it was confirmed. Some folks were asking if he went to the drive through and then someone said he actually DID strap the kid in the seat AFTER they ate at Chick-fil-A, that started the hot debate about forgetting in 3 minutes. I always thought the stop at Chic-fil-A was in part to get it on the record that the child WAS alive that morning, and probably to show daddy doting over the boy.

 

[Chewy]

I want to make sure that's what they actually searched. It seems odd that if you are concerned about your baby, you'd type in "animal." That in and of itself seems like an attempt to cover up a search. There's been so many stories like this in the news, a simple search for "baby dies in hot car" would bring up a lot of information.


Why "animal." IMO it was an attempt to hide the search. He probably thought he'd be able to pull it off. As I've posted before, (but it's in other threads) IMO it's obvious to me that his afternoon visit to put something in the car was supposed to be his big reveal.

What did he put in the car? That would be another clue. I can't imagine you needing so badly to put something in a hot car in the middle of the day. Why would you? Would you put a laptop in a hot car in the middle of the day? A stack of papers? What did he put in the car?

Notice btw that he didn't put it in the TRUNK of the car because there's no way he'd get away with standing at the back of the car and looking straight in. IMO He opened the side door and heard the choking and immediately realized the child wasn't dead yet. So he closed the door and walked away. Then he had to redo his discovery. He drives somewhere with a lot of people to create a huge distraction and lots of activity at the scene. But then he slips up and says the reason he pulled over is he heard choking and immediately remembered his son. And this statement is what busted him right in front of the cops.

I'm curious why they arrested him so quickly, instead of, as others said, taking him in for questioning. It's a sensitive topic. It could cause a lot of backlash if they jumped the gun. So something is evident.

 

[LadyJustia]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/29/justice/georgia-toddler-death/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Does this mean that she could be charged, too? I have a feeling they are leaking this tonight for a reason.

Yes, she could absolutely still be charged. There is no statute of limitation on murder.

 

[popsicle]

Does anyone know if he was actually seen in CFA? Or maybe he was seen in CFA but "sleeping" while being held? Did anyone see him at all before/after that stop? I may have missed it but how do we know Cooper was at CFA? Is there a surveillance video or eyewitness report?

I guess my mind is hung up on this statement from police:

Pierce told CNN On Friday, 'I cannot confirm that the child, as originally reported, was in the car at 9am'.


If not, where was he between CFA & being placed in the car after 9am? What would make police suspect he was NOT in the car upon arriving at HD?


LINK TO NEWS STORY WITH QUOTE

That statement was made in the beginning before they had checked his story I believe. Since then, they have stated in the sworn SW statement that they were at CFA, he removed him from the seat, they ate, he placed him back in and buckled him in with the carseat in the center of the back seat.

 

[popsicle]

I want to make sure that's what they actually searched. It seems odd that if you are concerned about your baby, you'd type in "animal." That in and of itself seems like an attempt to cover up a search. There's been so many stories like this in the news, a simple search for "baby dies in hot car" would bring up a lot of information.


Why "animal." IMO it was an attempt to hide the search. He probably thought he'd be able to pull it off. As I've posted before, (but it's in other threads) IMO it's obvious to me that his afternoon visit to put something in the car was supposed to be his big reveal.

What did he put in the car? That would be another clue. I can't imagine you needing so badly to put something in a hot car in the middle of the day. Why would you? Would you put a laptop in a hot car in the middle of the day? A stack of papers? What did he put in the car?

Notice btw that he didn't put it in the TRUNK of the car because there's no way he'd get away with standing at the back of the car and looking straight in. IMO He opened the side door and heard the choking and immediately realized the child wasn't dead yet. So he closed the door and walked away. Then he had to redo his discovery. He drives somewhere with a lot of people to create a huge distraction and lots of activity at the scene. But then he slips up and says the reason he pulled over is he heard choking and immediately remembered his son. And this statement is what busted him right in front of the cops.

I'm curious why they arrested him so quickly, instead of, as others said, taking him in for questioning. It's a sensitive topic. It could cause a lot of backlash if they jumped the gun. So something is evident.

BBM They didn't arrest him immediately. They handcuffed him and took him in for questioning. He was arrested around 10pm. They stated it was because of evidence at scene as well as information revealed during the interview.

 

[Chewy]

Terrific post, Chewy.

One difficult things about "conversing" in a forum is that we really cannot ask follow up questions. Without being confrontational but just with the sincerest curiosity, I'd like to know what exactly WOULD prove intent in these hot car cases...to those who see nothing in this case that does so?

I think we would find that the sympathy for the parent makes them pretty much Teflon. This is why I think this type of murder is a perfect crime.

I do understand that we all are different. But the most commonplace reaction to fear is vigilance. If they feared this death enough for BOTH of them to have to google it...then you can bet they were discussing it. So where is there any sign that they took ANY step...toward prevention? ANYTHING? A homemade sign that says..."check for Baby! " cost next to nothing. A phone call, checking up....costs next to nothing.

Why bother to google if you were not going to do anything with the information?

The only explanation other than premeditated murder...would be that they researched because they were leaving him in the car to save money. A check against daycare records of the child's hours and their work hours should eliminate that.

I wonder if he called his wife immediately after his trip to the car at lunch? I wonder if there was a particular time she picked the child up (say, 2PM) and that she failed to show up at the daycare at her usual time? I wonder of she knew long before that call from the shopping center that her child was dead?

Someone posted before that maybe they didn't/couldn't take him to day care and that he left the child in the car. The googling "how long" could be an attempt to see how long they could get away with leaving the child without danger.

But frankly, ANY research would show that the child could potentially die in 15 minutes. If he HAD to leave the child in the car....sorry there's just nothing that makes any sense. CALL IN SICK and stay with your child. He's an IT guy, he could easily do work from home to show the bosses that he was taking it seriously.

They are members of a huge church with lots of support around them. So why not ask a friend to baby sit. It just doesn't add up.

Even if you play devils advocate and say he was trying to use the car to baby sit him and was just checking on him at lunch time and realized the child was dead, you simply cannot strap a 22 month old child in a car seat for 3 hours without it being a major problem. Sorry but that's just an impossible idea, IMO.

BBM They didn't arrest him immediately. They handcuffed him and took him in for questioning. He was arrested around 10pm. They stated it was because of evidence at scene as well as information revealed during the interview.

Oh I didn't realize that. That changes the story. Thanks so much for clarifying.

 

[popsicle]

Someone posted before that maybe they didn't/couldn't take him to day care and that he left the child in the car. The googling "how long" could be an attempt to see how long they could get away with leaving the child without danger.

But frankly, ANY research would show that the child could potentially die in 15 minutes. If he HAD to leave the child in the car....sorry there's just nothing that makes any sense. CALL IN SICK and stay with your child. He's an IT guy, he could easily do work from home to show the bosses that he was taking it seriously.

They are members of a huge church with lots of support around them. So why not ask a friend to baby sit. It just doesn't add up.

Even if you play devils advocate and say he was trying to use the car to baby sit him and was just checking on him at lunch time and realized the child was dead, you simply cannot strap a 22 month old child in a car seat for 3 hours without it being a major problem. Sorry but that's just an impossible idea, IMO.






Oh I didn't realize that. That changes the story. Thanks so much for clarifying.

I agree... I don't think he was trying to use the car as a babysitter.