Is there anyone that believes Ross is innocent?

[Moxie Vi]

He was also found guilty of negligence. If someone dies due to your felony negligence in Georgia, it's felony murder

That was the best explanation I've heard so far of how he could be guilty on counts that on the surface appear contradictory. Thanks for that!

 

[Hope4More]

So in defense of Ross. you have to paint him as a negligent, deceitful father, who ignored his son while sexting, then lied to the cops to try and avoid detection, making up a story about kissing his son, in case they both died. Sounds like he deserves to spend time in prison even if what you say about him in his defense is true.

What RH deserves is the fair trial guaranteed to him by the U.S. Constitution. I didn't believe he received a fair trial. To believe that Harris didn't receive a fair trial isn't to defend him, but to defend his or anyone else's fundamental constitutional rights.

It's not "painting" Ross as anything to put together the pieces as I have. He hadn't had a full night's sleep in 4 days, and had only slept a few hours in the early morning of the 18th. He'd tried to complete his portion of a project, even though his project manager had gone ahead and done the work himself, and he'd also sent out a resume that early AM--indicating attempts at coping, not of existential murderous despair.

The State greatly exaggerated it's narrative about RH's sexting that day. RH wasn't it in fact preoccupied with sexting before he left for CFA, or when driving to CFA, or (with perhaps one brief exception) while he was at CFA, or during his drive from CFA to the Treehouse, or from what I can discern, even in the time he had before leaving for lunch.

Was RH negligent that morning? I believe he was, but not because he was sexting; he simply wasn't sexting in any relevant timeframe. I think he was negligent because the timeline & evidence suggest RH's mind was so completely elsewhere, away from Cooper, that it was in fact possible for him to forget Cooper was in the car.

Was it deceiptful of RH to lie to LE about that wanting to take Cooper to a special daddy-son breakfast (he'd lost track of time while texting and couldn't get Cooper to daycare on time)? Yep. And about commandeering Leanna's lines about her hot car deaths fears? Yep. And about being attuned to Cooper that AM that he'd given Cooper hugs and kisses and heard Cooper say "school"? Yep, etc., yep, and yep.

Does he deserve to spend time in prison for trying to save his own arse when speaking to LE? Nah, though ironically, the very things he said to try to save his own arse were instead trotted out by the State as "evidence" of intent.

As I've said, I'd have thought it just if RH was convicted on 2nd degree CC (but not felony murder), because I think both are true: it was an accident, but it was an accident that could only have happened because of a generalized negligence that AM.

 

[CapitalBat]

I was on the fence through most of the trial - Brewer actually tipped me to malice murder and there was nothing done by the defense (or prosecution) that changed my mind. I was very happy with the verdict and happy to hear that the jury wasn't split and was just being methodical. I respect them immensely for that. Since the verdict came in, I've rewatched the RH and LH video and oh my god, listen to those 42 minutes yourself and see if you can catch him saying he's sorry. I heard it one time at the end of a long list of "how could this happen to me" laments, like he belatedly realized oh, this happened to my son and wife also, I need to acknowledge that. He's not sorry, he never was sorry. He'd have been sorry and expressed that if it had been an accident, IMO.

 

[TexMex]

What RH deserves is the fair trial guaranteed to him by the U.S. Constitution. I didn't believe he received a fair trial. To believe that Harris didn't receive a fair trial isn't to defend him, but to defend his or anyone else's fundamental constitutional rights.

It's not "painting" Ross as anything to put together the pieces as I have. He hadn't had a full night's sleep in 4 days, and had only slept a few hours in the early morning of the 18th. He'd tried to complete his portion of a project, even though his project manager had gone ahead and done the work himself, and he'd also sent out a resume that early AM--indicating attempts at coping, not of existential murderous despair.

The State greatly exaggerated it's narrative about RH's sexting that day. RH wasn't it in fact preoccupied with sexting before he left for CFA, or when driving to CFA, or (with perhaps one brief exception) while he was at CFA, or during his drive from CFA to the Treehouse, or from what I can discern, even in the time he had before leaving for lunch.

Was RH negligent that morning? I believe he was, but not because he was sexting; he simply wasn't sexting in any relevant timeframe. I think he was negligent because the timeline & evidence suggest RH's mind was so completely elsewhere, away from Cooper, that it was in fact possible for him to forget Cooper was in the car.

Was it deceiptful of RH to lie to LE about that wanting to take Cooper to a special daddy-son breakfast (he'd lost track of time while texting and couldn't get Cooper to daycare on time)? Yep. And about commandeering Leanna's lines about her hot car deaths fears? Yep. And about being attuned to Cooper that AM that he'd given Cooper hugs and kisses and heard Cooper say "school"? Yep, etc., yep, and yep.

Does he deserve to spend time in prison for trying to save his own arse when speaking to LE? Nah, though ironically, the very things he said to try to save his own arse were instead trotted out by the State as "evidence" of intent.

As I've said, I'd have thought it just if RH was convicted on 2nd degree CC (but not felony murder), because I think both are true: it was an accident, but it was an accident that could only have happened because of a generalized negligence that AM.

Georgia code: Criminal negligence is an act or failure to act which demonstrates a willful, wanton, or reckless disregard for the safety of others who might reasonably be expected to be injured thereby.


Felony child cruelty

(c) Any person commits the offense of cruelty to children in the second degree when such person with criminal negligence causes a child under the age of 18 cruel or excessive physical or mental pain.

Felony murder

A person commits the offense of murder when, in the commission of a felony, he or she causes the death of another human being irrespective of malice.

In Georgia, as Kilgore said "murder is murder is murder"
I respect the jury's hard work. To say they convicted him of murder because of the sexting is not fair to them

 

[katydid23]

What RH deserves is the fair trial guaranteed to him by the U.S. Constitution. I didn't believe he received a fair trial. To believe that Harris didn't receive a fair trial isn't to defend him, but to defend his or anyone else's fundamental constitutional rights.

It's not "painting" Ross as anything to put together the pieces as I have. He hadn't had a full night's sleep in 4 days, and had only slept a few hours in the early morning of the 18th. He'd tried to complete his portion of a project, even though his project manager had gone ahead and done the work himself, and he'd also sent out a resume that early AM--indicating attempts at coping, not of existential murderous despair.

The State greatly exaggerated it's narrative about RH's sexting that day. RH wasn't it in fact preoccupied with sexting before he left for CFA, or when driving to CFA, or (with perhaps one brief exception) while he was at CFA, or during his drive from CFA to the Treehouse, or from what I can discern, even in the time he had before leaving for lunch.

Was RH negligent that morning? I believe he was, but not because he was sexting; he simply wasn't sexting in any relevant timeframe. I think he was negligent because the timeline & evidence suggest RH's mind was so completely elsewhere, away from Cooper, that it was in fact possible for him to forget Cooper was in the car.

Was it deceiptful of RH to lie to LE about that wanting to take Cooper to a special daddy-son breakfast (he'd lost track of time while texting and couldn't get Cooper to daycare on time)? Yep. And about commandeering Leanna's lines about her hot car deaths fears? Yep. And about being attuned to Cooper that AM that he'd given Cooper hugs and kisses and heard Cooper say "school"? Yep, etc., yep, and yep.

Does he deserve to spend time in prison for trying to save his own arse when speaking to LE? Nah, though ironically, the very things he said to try to save his own arse were instead trotted out by the State as "evidence" of intent.

As I've said, I'd have thought it just if RH was convicted on 2nd degree CC (but not felony murder), because I think both are true: it was an accident, but it was an accident that could only have happened because of a generalized negligence that AM.

I disagree that he did not get a fair trial. He had an entire team of experienced, intelligent, committed, well respected attorneys who believed in his innocence. They moved the trial out of town, they kept cameras out of the court room and they had a very educated judge with decades of trial experience. I think his constitutional rights were well preserved.

He cannot use 'lack of sleep' as any kind of defense, imo, because it was his own choice to stay up late sexting. He could have gone to sleep earlier if he was not so engrossed, by his own poor choices.

Of course the State is going to try and slant the narrative. As does the Defense Team. Both sides spin the narrative and it is up to the jury to look at the facts and decide. Which they did.

 

[Hope4More]

Georgia code: Criminal negligence is an act or failure to act which demonstrates a willful, wanton, or reckless disregard for the safety of others who might reasonably be expected to be injured thereby.


Felony child cruelty

(c) Any person commits the offense of cruelty to children in the second degree when such person with criminal negligence causes a child under the age of 18 cruel or excessive physical or mental pain.

Felony murder

A person commits the offense of murder when, in the commission of a felony, he or she causes the death of another human being irrespective of malice.

In Georgia, as Kilgore said "murder is murder is murder"
I respect the jury's hard work. To say they convicted him of murder because of the sexting is not fair to them

Meh. Never said RH was convicted of murder because of his sexting.

Yep, yep, I understand GA laws regarding child cruelty and felony murder, which is why I've been posting for many months my opposition to any state being able to charge and prosecute murder without having to prove intent.

 

[DeDee]

Thanks for posting about the view of "a lot of " people who actually know RH, that they believe Cooper's death was an accident. Cooper's mother, his grandparents on both sides, RH's attorneys, Ms. Meadows the motive, and from what can be known, virtually if not all RH's friends and family also believe it was an accident. I do as well.

I firmly believe no jury would have found RH guilty of malice murder had Judge Staley's rulings been impartial, and had jurors not been exposed to overwhelming pretrial publicity, much of it inaccurate, most of it highly prejudicial.

I'm sure these jurors believed they could put aside what they thought they knew. I don't believe it was possible for them to do so, and their contradictory verdict - guilty of negligence AND premeditation suggests to me they did not, making them all the more receptive to believing RH was capable of killing his own son.

Still, I'll always be baffled the State was successful in repackaging the tarnished goods LE had peddled to a magistrate to obtain search warrants, and presenting them to the jury as " evidence" of intent.

I wish Mr. Kilgore best of luck in having RH's convictions overturned on appeal, and that RH is retried with the minors charges severed, as they should have been in this trial.

I wish Mr. Kilgore best of luck in having RH's convictions overturned on appeal, and that RH is retried with the minors charges severed, as they should have been in this trial.

I feel basically the same simply b/c no one should be sentenced to life in prison if they are not guilty of the charges levied against them.

I'm sure these jurors believed they could put aside what they thought they knew. I don't believe it was possible for them to do so, and their contradictory verdict - guilty of negligence AND premeditation suggests to me they did not, making them all the more receptive to believing RH was capable of killing his own son.

Why such a harsh judgement against the twelve jurors? The heavy publicity had dwindled to a peep once the trial venue was changed. Besides, the jurors did not learn everything. They never learned about the life insurance policy as that evidence was ruled as too prejudicial.

JRH was having sex with strangers and he liked it. He was soliciting sex from minors. He liked it. He was not giving it up to go gently into the good night. It is JRHs own fault that he is in prison. The prosecutors, defense team, nor the investigators did that to him. JRH charted his own path.

Remove all of the sexting and meet ups with prostitutes. JRHs insomnia sleep patterns need to be explained; establishing the meeting with co workers for lunch via messenger; communications with his wife, especially the day he continually postponed going home after helping move Winston. The jury could not speculate on what filled his time. How is that fair to society?

JRHs lover was sex. He murdered his son because of the addiction to his lover. It is keynote to the actions that he took for months before and culminated when Cooper suffered and died.

 

[DexterMorgan]

Didn't a Georgia judge get 1 year for the same thing while playing golf and going to McDonald's and work?

 

[TexMex]

Meh. Never said RH was convicted of murder because of his sexting.

Yep, yep, I understand GA laws regarding child cruelty and felony murder, which is why I've been posting for many months my opposition to any state being to charge and prosecute murder without having to prove intent.

Meh. IIRC 46 states have a felony murder rule.
Two people rob a store...one shoots the clerk. Both commit a felony doing the robbery. Both get charged with felony murder.
The jury looked at RH statement and trip back with the lightbulbs. They asked for no readback of any sexts.

 

[DexterMorgan]

I feel basically the same simply b/c no one should be sentenced to life in prison if they are not guilty of the charges levied against them.


Why such a harsh judgement against the twelve jurors? The heavy publicity had dwindled to a peep once the trial venue was changed. Besides, the jurors did not learn everything. They never learned about the life insurance policy as that evidence was ruled as too prejudicial.

JRH was having sex with strangers and he liked it. He was soliciting sex from minors. He liked it. He was not giving it up to go gently into the good night. It is JRHs own fault that he is in prison. The prosecutors, defense team, nor the investigators did that to him. JRH charted his own path.

Remove all of the sexting and meet ups with prostitutes. JRHs insomnia sleep patterns need to be explained; establishing the meeting with co workers for lunch via messenger; communications with his wife, especially the day he continually postponed going home after helping move Winston. The jury could not speculate on what filled his time. How is that fair to society?

JRHs lover was sex. He murdered his son because of the addiction to his lover. It is keynote to the actions that he took for months before and culminated when Cooper suffered and died.

He murdered his child once. But was found guilty on multiple murder charges.

How is that possible.

 

[TexMex]

Didn't a Georgia judge get 1 year for the same thing while playing golf and going to McDonald's and work?

That was Arkansas. Not guilty verdict on negligent homicide. Diamond testified

 

[Hope4More]

I disagree that he did not get a fair trial. He had an entire team of experienced, intelligent, committed, well respected attorneys who believed in his innocence. They moved the trial out of town, they kept cameras out of the court room and they had a very educated judge with decades of trial experience. I think his constitutional rights were well preserved.

He cannot use 'lack of sleep' as any kind of defense, imo, because it was his own choice to stay up late sexting. He could have gone to sleep earlier if he was not so engrossed, by his own poor choices.

Of course the State is going to try and slant the narrative. As does the Defense Team. Both sides spin the narrative and it is up to the jury to look at the facts and decide. Which they did.

RH did have good attorneys, and in Kilgore, the best of the best. Doesn't mean he had a fair trial. Staley granted change of venue only after she played chicken with the DT, complained vociferously about the inconvenience, and only because even she knew RH would win on appeal if she didn't.

Virtually every other of her rulings were transparently pro-prosecution, from first to last, pretrial through trial. Allowable discretion up to a point, not so much after that, though from what I've learned about GA's judicial system during this case, maybe Staley doesn't believe GA's appellate courts will check her.

------We obviously disagree about Staley. I found her appalling, from her ear picking on the bench and smarmy chats with the jury on through her rulings and her open contempt for both RH and the DT.

What's done is done, unless it's undone, and if that, won't be anytime soon.

 

[watergirl62]

He murdered his child once. But was found guilty on multiple murder charges.

How is that possible.

Judge Staley will hopefully clear that up for us on the 5th. It seems like 2 of those charges - 3 and 5? - would sift out. As in malice negates negligence, so you can't have it both ways. Right?

 

[Hope4More]

Meh. IIRC 46 states have a felony murder rule.
Two people rob a store...one shoots the clerk. Both commit a felony doing the robbery. Both get charged with felony murder.
The jury looked at RH statement and trip back with the lightbulbs. They asked for no readback of any sexts.

Well.....that's not quite on point, actually. GA is one of a tiny handful of states, if that many, that have equated criminal negligence resulting in a child's death with felony murder. Much of the legal world finds GA's new law allowing that shocking, for many reasons. I agree.

 

[TexMex]

Well.....that's not quite on point, actually. GA is one of a tiny handful of states, if that many, that have equated criminal negligence resulting in a child's death with felony murder. Much of the legal world finds GA's new law allowing that shocking, for many reasons. I agree.

link? In most states cruelty to a child is a felony
Georgia has a child cruelty 3rd degree that is punished as a misdemeanor on first and second conviction...felony third conviction

 

[TexMex]

I disagree that he did not get a fair trial. He had an entire team of experienced, intelligent, committed, well respected attorneys who believed in his innocence. They moved the trial out of town, they kept cameras out of the court room and they had a very educated judge with decades of trial experience. I think his constitutional rights were well preserved.

He cannot use 'lack of sleep' as any kind of defense, imo, because it was his own choice to stay up late sexting. He could have gone to sleep earlier if he was not so engrossed, by his own poor choices.

Of course the State is going to try and slant the narrative. As does the Defense Team. Both sides spin the narrative and it is up to the jury to look at the facts and decide. Which they did.

Judge Staley was awesome. She reminded me of a professor I had in vet school. No nonsense but a gracious Southern lady.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Well.....that's not quite on point, actually. GA is one of a tiny handful of states, if that many, that have equated criminal negligence resulting in a child's death with felony murder. Much of the legal world finds GA's new law allowing that shocking, for many reasons. I agree.

Over decades..it's always baffled my mind..that when responsible for causing the death of kids..somehow those who abuse and murder them get rather lenient sentences..My take from that is that kids somehow aren't deemed important.... Some states have taken the lead to address this fact..thankfully some states do.

I recall back in the day..murdering one's wife who's close to full term pregnancy..the baby was Not considered at all...Now these viable little humans are being considered!!

It's called evolution in recognizing someone's child is deemed important ...and it's not so new either..as when Scott Peterson murdered his wife with child..he was found guilty of not just Lacy's murder but the baby too! It's really not such a New thing H4M :truce:

 

[RANCH]

Meh. Never said RH was convicted of murder because of his sexting.

Yep, yep, I understand GA laws regarding child cruelty and felony murder, which is why I've been posting for many months my opposition to any state being able to charge and prosecute murder without having to prove intent.

I agree wholeheartedly that prosecuting someone for murder when there's no premeditation is wrong. I feel that manslaughter statutes are there for a reason. For cases where a person kills another human being without intent or premeditation.

Giving the jury no choice but murder in a case like this is wrong.

That's another reason why I feel this jury convicted on the malice murder charge. They didn't have to decide on intent so much as possible intent. The State didn't have to prove anything. The jury wanted the defense to prove RH was innocent of murder.

That's not the way it's supposed to work IMO.

 

[dizzychick]

I have always thought he was just a bonehead with a sex and testosterone addiction. no real desire to cook his kid, he seemed quite happy doing what he was doing w/o much objection from his wife.

 

[TexMex]

I agree wholeheartedly that prosecuting someone for murder when there's no premeditation is wrong. I feel that manslaughter statutes are there for a reason. For cases where a person kills another human being without intent or premeditation.

Giving the jury no choice but murder in a case like this is wrong.

That's another reason why I feel this jury convicted on the malice murder charge. They didn't have to decide on intent so much as possible intent. The State didn't have to prove anything. The jury wanted the defense to prove RH was innocent of murder.

That's not the way it's supposed to work IMO.

The manslaughter statutes in Georgia don't fit this crime though.
Voluntary must be from a sudden heat of passion
Involuntary is described as being an action arising from a crime other than a felony.
The jury, as Kilgore tried to argue, had the option to declare this was an accident on counts 1-5. They did not.