LeAnna (Mom) #1

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Um.....Ross Harris read up on the car seat and the correct usage of it. He told LE that himself when explaining that he "strapped Cooper in real tight."

Yes and that makes HIM responsible for it being wrong that day.. NOT HER.

 

[Linda7NJ]

We'll have to disagree. imo, A mother IS responsible for ensuring her child's safety and that especially includes safety equipment in the family vehicles. Especially so if it is her "worst fear" that the child will die in that vehicle, as she has reportedly stated to police. This isn't about her husband's actions that day, it is about her actions and words.

Yes, the baby "could have fit" in the car seat....if was adjusted properly and it was not. That is a fact that came out in the hearing. I don't know of anyone who uses a child car seat improperly. In fact, when my twin grandchildren were born last year, at dismissal the hospital nurse examined their car seats and their installation prior to her allowing the children to be placed in the car.

JMO

Exactly!
Well
Said!

I could probably "fit" a toddler of that size in a lot of things, like a boot box, carry on bag, etc...that doesn't mean it's appropriate, safe, or legal.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MyBelle]

What does that have to do with her being guilty? Do you know how many people look guilty when the police and press get through with them? And yet they are proven innocent later??!

Then there are those who are guilty and are proved guilty. The presumption of innocence is something everyone is entitled to and that goes for Ross as well. Just because a person has been charged does not make him any more guilty than someone who has not yet been charged. What makes Ross "look" guilty--and also implicates his wife--is the evidence we already know about because of the hearing. Broad-sweeping generalizations such as suggesting many parents use improperly installed car seats is not going to fly with a jury, imo. Especially considering how easy it is to properly install and adjust a car seat.

The police have said they continue to investigate this case. It hasn't been closed.

JMO

 

[LisaB]

On Thursday, Cobb County attorney Lawrence Zimmerman told CNN that Leanna Harris has hired him, adding that he is not speaking to the media at this time.

The 30-year-old dietitian is licensed in Georgia and Alabama, records show, and she has lived in Georgia since 2012. Before moving to the Atlanta suburb of Marietta, Leanna Harris lived in Moundville, Alabama, a town of about 2,400 people south of Tuscaloosa.

She married Ross Harris May 7, 2006, in Tuscaloosa where her husband worked as a police dispatcher from June 10, 2006, to May 22, 2009.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/10/justice/hot-car-death-whats-next/

So he was unemployed when they married? Nice.

 

[New1]

I don't know about any of the rest of you, but I'm starting to doubt some of the things Det. Stoddard said at the PCH. He just volunteered so much information that wasn't asked for, and when people testify like that, I view them as an over-zealous witness. So, I'm anxious to see (if we ever get to see it) the video taped statement of LH asking RH if he said "too much" and what context it was said in, and if it really was the first thing she said to RH like Det. Stoddard said it was. I remember Stoddard testifying that LH went in, sat RH down and said, "Well, did you say too much?" That makes it sound like that was the first and only thing she said to RH during that whole conversation. Of course, that would make her sound guilty of being in on or knowing about RH planning to kill Cooper from the way Stoddard testified. Stoddard offered up only the information that would throw suspicion on both of them. The same about her statements at daycare, and Stoddard wasn't even there at daycare. He was testifying to hear say, wasn't he? Are you allowed to do that only if you're a detective? I think they should have called someone who was actually at the daycare and heard LH's statements first hand.

Another thing I'm confused about is who made the statement "I dreaded how he would look." I've heard it reported both ways (RH and LH), but it was never a "gotcha" moment for me no matter which one said it. In a certain context, I think it would not be a suspicious statement by either one of them. For instance, IF RH saw some part of Cooper's body when he looked to the right to change lanes, and that WAS when he realized Cooper had been in the car all day, I think it would be natural to dread how he would look because he would know darn well his baby was most likely dead. If LH said she the reason she didn't want to see Cooper when they asked her if she wanted to, it is totally understandable to say to RH "I didn't want to see him because I dreaded how he would look." Over-zealous witnesses can pick out part of a sentence and give it a whole new meaning. I want to see the video taped interview and hear from witnesses who were at the daycare before I would totally believe all that Stoddard said. JMO

 

[Spice]

Yes and that makes HIM responsible for it being wrong that day.. NOT HER.

BOTH parents are responsible for the welfare of their children. Cooper was too big for that car seat, it may have been in Ross' car, but she also knew he had outgrown it and never bothered to replace it with one for his correct weight and height. They were both neglectful in that respect.

And as far as that day, she is responsible as well if she was complicit in the plan to kill Cooper by conspiring or having prior knowledge of Ross' plan to "accidentally" leave Cooper strapped tightly into a car seat that was too small for him to begin with. If she hired a hitman to kill someone she would still be "responsible" for the death of that person. And it is looking very much like LE believes she was complicit.

My opinion only.

 

[MyBelle]

That was my immediate thought too. If you get to daycare or school to pick up your child and are told the child was never dropped off isn't your first instinct to call the person who was supposed to drop them off and ask WTF? I'd have been on the phone to my husband in seconds, and if he didn't answer his own phone I'd be calling his work. I've never gotten that whole scenario at the daycare at all or the whole business about LH driving with the childcare assistant to the HD offices - did no one think to CALL ahead?

Of course your first instinct would be to call. What Leanna did was immediately place blame on Ross and Ross alone yet she didn't call him. Her words and actions aroused suspicion because they are suspicious words and actions.

JMO

 

[Linda7NJ]

Then there are those who are guilty and are proved guilty. The presumption of innocence is something everyone is entitled to and that goes for Ross as well. Just because a person has been charged does not make him any more guilty than someone who has not yet been charged. What makes Ross "look" guilty--and also implicates his wife--is the evidence we already know about because of the hearing. Broad-sweeping generalizations such as suggesting many parents use improperly installed car seats is not going to fly with a jury, imo. Especially considering how easy it is to properly install and adjust a car seat.

The police have said they continue to investigate this case. It hasn't been closed.

JMO

He's not being held without bail because the court believes he's innocent. The judge found the evidence supports the charge and he's probably guilty.
RH doesn't get a presumption of innocence anywhere but on the jury
Imo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Then there are those who are guilty and are proved guilty. The presumption of innocence is something everyone is entitled to and that goes for Ross as well. Just because a person has been charged does not make him any more guilty than someone who has not yet been charged. What makes Ross "look" guilty--and also implicates his wife--is the evidence we already know about because of the hearing. Broad-sweeping generalizations such as suggesting many parents use improperly installed car seats is not going to fly with a jury, imo. Especially considering how easy it is to properly install and adjust a car seat.

The police have said they continue to investigate this case. It hasn't been closed.

JMO

Just because it was said at the hearing does not make it 100% true or accurate in the way it was reported. I

The truth is what matters. She is not guilty of anything so far. Not EVEN CHARGED. But even if she is charged with something it was still him to killed the child. Put him in the seat, Left him there.

I really don't understand why we are allowed to discuss her so broadly when she has not even been charged. I don't know if she has even been named an official POI.

So so far she is a victim. IMO

 

[Spice]

I don't know about any of the rest of you, but I'm starting to doubt some of the things Det. Stoddard said at the PCH. He just volunteered so much information that wasn't asked for, and when people testify like that, I view them as an over-zealous witness. JMO

Respectfully snipped by me.

He did? I didn't see that at all.

It was a Probable Cause hearing, he had to testify to the charges to justify what evidence they had that led to the States charges to begin with.He was answering the Prosecutor's questions directly. The defense can and did object when they felt they needed too. The judge upheld the charges, and denied bail.

There is no such thing as an "over zealous" witness. Maybe an overzealous prosecutor, but not a witness. They are not in control of the situation. They are there to answer questions with testimony. Questions posed by the court. They don't just get to go up there and start lecturing and talking freestyle to the judge without parameters.

Respectfully, I don't think anything could be further from the truth :moo:

 

[Elley Mae]

He's not being held without bail because the court believes he's innocent. The judge found the evidence supports the charge and he's probably guilty.
RH doesn't get a presumption of innocence anywhere but on the jury
Imo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bbm, Just want to thank you for that word. It is so important to me when saying that a person IS innocent. When in fact they are PRESUMED to be innocent. It's just me, but thanks.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I don't know about any of the rest of you, but I'm starting to doubt some of the things Det. Stoddard said at the PCH. He just volunteered so much information that wasn't asked for, and when people testify like that, I view them as an over-zealous witness. So, I'm anxious to see (if we ever get to see it) the video taped statement of LH asking RH if he said "too much" and what context it was said in, and if it really was the first thing she said to RH like Det. Stoddard said it was. I remember Stoddard testifying that LH went in, sat RH down and said, "Well, did you say too much?" That makes it sound like that was the first and only thing she said to RH during that whole conversation. Of course, that would make her sound guilty of being in on or knowing about RH planning to kill Cooper from the way Stoddard testified. Stoddard offered up only the information that would throw suspicion on both of them. The same about her statements at daycare, and Stoddard wasn't even there at daycare. He was testifying to hear say, wasn't he? Are you allowed to do that only if you're a detective? I think they should have called someone who was actually at the daycare and heard LH's statements first hand.

Another thing I'm confused about is who made the statement "I dreaded how he would look." I've heard it reported both ways (RH and LH), but it was never a "gotcha" moment for me no matter which one said it. In a certain context, I think it would not be a suspicious statement by either one of them. For instance, IF RH saw some part of Cooper's body when he looked to the right to change lanes, and that WAS when he realized Cooper had been in the car all day, I think it would be natural to dread how he would look because he would know darn well his baby was most likely dead. If LH said she the reason she didn't want to see Cooper when they asked her if she wanted to, it is totally understandable to say to RH "I didn't want to see him because I dreaded how he would look." Over-zealous witnesses can pick out part of a sentence and give it a whole new meaning. I want to see the video taped interview and hear from witnesses who were at the daycare before I would totally believe all that Stoddard said. JMO

He was doing his job. His job isn't to offer up exculpatory evidence at a probably cause hearing. That's not being over zealous!

RH said, he DREADED how Cooper would look.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

BOTH parents are responsible for the welfare of their children. Cooper was too big for that car seat, it may have been in Ross' car, but she also knew he had outgrown it and never bothered to replace it with one for his correct weight and height. They were both neglectful in that respect.

And as far as that day, she is responsible as well if she was complicit in the plan to kill Cooper by conspiring or having prior knowledge of Ross' plan to "accidentally" leave Cooper strapped tightly into a car seat that was too small for him to begin with. If she hired a hitman to kill someone she would still be "responsible" for the death of that person. And it is looking very much like LE believes she was complicit.

My opinion only.

However the person who drove the child that day was the hands on guardian. It was their responsibility. And JRH was the one who said he read everything and did it right.. The blame lays right there.

 

[MyBelle]

I don't know about any of the rest of you, but I'm starting to doubt some of the things Det. Stoddard said at the PCH. He just volunteered so much information that wasn't asked for, and when people testify like that, I view them as an over-zealous witness. So, I'm anxious to see (if we ever get to see it) the video taped statement of LH asking RH if he said "too much" and what context it was said in, and if it really was the first thing she said to RH like Det. Stoddard said it was. I remember Stoddard testifying that LH went in, sat RH down and said, "Well, did you say too much?" That makes it sound like that was the first and only thing she said to RH during that whole conversation. Of course, that would make her sound guilty of being in on or knowing about RH planning to kill Cooper from the way Stoddard testified. Stoddard offered up only the information that would throw suspicion on both of them. The same about her statements at daycare, and Stoddard wasn't even there at daycare. He was testifying to hear say, wasn't he? Are you allowed to do that only if you're a detective? I think they should have called someone who was actually at the daycare and heard LH's statements first hand.

Another thing I'm confused about is who made the statement "I dreaded how he would look." I've heard it reported both ways (RH and LH), but it was never a "gotcha" moment for me no matter which one said it. In a certain context, I think it would not be a suspicious statement by either one of them. For instance, IF RH saw some part of Cooper's body when he looked to the right to change lanes, and that WAS when he realized Cooper had been in the car all day, I think it would be natural to dread how he would look because he would know darn well his baby was most likely dead. If LH said she the reason she didn't want to see Cooper when they asked her if she wanted to, it is totally understandable to say to RH "I didn't want to see him because I dreaded how he would look." Over-zealous witnesses can pick out part of a sentence and give it a whole new meaning. I want to see the video taped interview and hear from witnesses who were at the daycare before I would totally believe all that Stoddard said. JMO

The reason he went to such great length about Leanna is because they are going to go before a grand jury, imo. I also think it was because there was an active campaign of public fundraising and attempts by Ross' supporters to influence public opinion.

I have no reason to doubt the detective's testimony or to question his credibility. There are exceptions to the hear say rules and a Judge presided over the hearing. It was the Judge who denied bail and said it is a possible death penalty case. The case is being handled professionally and properly. Kudos are in order, not criticism.

JMO

 

[Spice]

However the person who drove the child that day was the hands on guardian. It was their responsibility. And JRH was the one who said he read everything and did it right.. The blame lays right there.

Absolutely.

IF she wasn't involved. And that is a very big if at this point in time.

My Opinion Only.

 

[Linda7NJ]

However the person who drove the child that day was the hands on guardian. It was their responsibility. And JRH was the one who said he read everything and did it right.. The blame lays right there.

In your opinion.

If she had prior knowledge ...she's legally and morally guilty as well.

I would not allow my child to go off with ANYONE without being confident every care and precaution would be meticulously look after.
She KNEW her son outgrew that car seat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MyBelle]

He's not being held without bail because the court believes he's innocent. The judge found the evidence supports the charge and he's probably guilty.
RH doesn't get a presumption of innocence anywhere but on the jury
Imo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I totally agree with you! The guy is going to get a fair trial, if he insists on going to trial rather than enter a plea.

JMO

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

In your opinion.

If she had prior knowledge ...she's legally and morally guilty as well.

I would not allow my child to go off with ANYONE without being confident every care and precaution would be meticulously look after.
She KNEW her son outgrew that car seat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

None of which is proven yet. No arrest. Nothing. He is the baby's FATHER. Not a sitter. It is not the same thing. He is responsible for his son in his care.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

The reason he went to such great length about Leanna is because they are going to go before a grand jury, imo. I also think it was because there was an active campaign of public fundraising and attempts by Ross' supporters to influence public opinion.

I have no reason to doubt the detective's testimony or to question his credibility. There are exceptions to the hear say rules and a Judge presided over the hearing. It was the Judge who denied bail and said it is a possible death penalty case. The case is being handled professionally and properly. Kudos are in order, not criticism.

JMO

The problem in a hearing like this is there is no real balance. Just why they are arresting him and their reasoning.

So we will see when the trial happens. And I think in this case there will be one.

 

[JerseyGirl]

Another thing I'm confused about is who made the statement "I dreaded how he would look." I've heard it reported both ways (RH and LH), but it was never a "gotcha" moment for me no matter which one said it. In a certain context, I think it would not be a suspicious statement by either one of them. For instance, IF RH saw some part of Cooper's body when he looked to the right to change lanes, and that WAS when he realized Cooper had been in the car all day, I think it would be natural to dread how he would look because he would know darn well his baby was most likely dead. If LH said she the reason she didn't want to see Cooper when they asked her if she wanted to, it is totally understandable to say to RH "I didn't want to see him because I dreaded how he would look." Over-zealous witnesses can pick out part of a sentence and give it a whole new meaning. I want to see the video taped interview and hear from witnesses who were at the daycare before I would totally believe all that Stoddard said. JMO

Ross said, "I dreaded how he would look". I agree, it was reported by various MSM that Leanna said it too, but according to Stoddard, RH said it.

Please make note that RH said it in PAST tense.

Leanna never asked to see Cooper, when offered, she said she wanted to see her husband.