Post Verdict - Ross Harris Trial

[Aleph]

Yes indeed, that was me He was very intent on interviewing me because I drove 8 hours one-way to be there at the sentencing. It was an incredible experience, and I'm glad I was there to represent Cooper. Although, I wish I had stayed on the defense side of he courtroom because I would have been recorded the entire time. When we moved to the prosecution side (we were confused, lol), we managed to sit behind this big dude and you can only see the outline of my hair and the shoulder of my pink jacket.

Rankin of course asked my opinion of the verdict and sentencing, and when I stated I supported it--he said point blank that he agreed with verdict (said it was the "correct one") and the sentencing (really the only logical sentence for the charges he was convicted of).

I wonder if he "came around" on that, because at the beginning of the podcast he sounded extremely sympathetic to RH.

It was a good podcast.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Aleph]

I agree with everything in your post, except that I still believe his wife knew something. Her behavior, her words, and her supporting him say it all to me. If I had a husband who was committing the creepy, heinous acts her husband was and then he did this to my baby, there's no way on God's green earth that I would support him, or even pretend to. I would be shouting it out to the mountain tops that he was guilty. JMO

Yeah, there's something strange there (IMO). I think RH chose the method he did because it would make him look good -- at least, in his perspective. He could present himself as the victim of a little-known syndrome. It wouldn't be something like a divorce where he would be embarrassed to return to church.

I wonder if he talked about his forgotten baby syndrome "fears" with Leanne. Almost as a trial balloon of sorts, to see how she'd react. But also to lay the groundwork. And if so she couldn't say anything now because it would sound too strange and possibly implicate her. I do think she was protecting herself on the stand, not him. I just don't know from what.

MOO, speculation, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MsMtOlympus]

Yes indeed, that was me He was very intent on interviewing me because I drove 8 hours one-way to be there at the sentencing. It was an incredible experience, and I'm glad I was there to represent Cooper. Although, I wish I had stayed on the defense side of he courtroom because I would have been recorded the entire time. When we moved to the prosecution side (we were confused, lol), we managed to sit behind this big dude and you can only see the outline of my hair and the shoulder of my pink jacket.

Rankin of course asked my opinion of the verdict and sentencing, and when I stated I supported it--he said point blank that he agreed with verdict (said it was the "correct one") and the sentencing (really the only logical sentence for the charges he was convicted of).

Thank you for taking the time to reply, NCT! (And thank you for representing Cooper at the sentencing. The lack of support for the actual victim of this heinous crime from his own family is shocking.)

 

[NCTeacher]

Yeah, there's something strange there (IMO). I think RH chose the method he did because it would make him look good -- at least, in his perspective. He could present himself as the victim of a little-known syndrome. It wouldn't be something like a divorce where he would be embarrassed to return to church.

I wonder if he talked about his forgotten baby syndrome "fears" with Leanne. Almost as a trial balloon of sorts, to see how she'd react. But also to lay the groundwork. And if so she couldn't say anything now because it would sound too strange and possibly implicate her. I do think she was protecting herself on the stand, not him. I just don't know from what.

MOO, speculation, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have theorized, since Leanna's testimony, that by her own admission at the police station this was something "they always talked about," actually meant that it was her fear, they saw the PSA on television, Ross began hatching his plan---and in his self-obsessed narcissism and morbid glee and excitement for what he was about to do TALKED ABOUT IT ALL THE TIME. I guarantee he brought it up everyday in those first few weeks of June, maybe even expressed he was "worried" he could forget Cooper: "Oh, what if he fell asleep in the car and I was so distracted I forgot he was there and just drove right on to work, what if that happened? I would be so upset with myself, I would have to become one of those hot car death advocates and work hard to bring awareness to this, wouldn't you?"

Then he watches the hot car video and types in the comments "It would be terrible if my son were in that car."

Less than a week later...his son dies in a hot car.

I just don't know why he thought anybody would buy his story. And I really don't know why Leanna buys his pathetic story.

 

[NCTeacher]

I wonder if he "came around" on that, because at the beginning of the podcast he sounded extremely sympathetic to RH.

It was a good podcast.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I got to admit, I never watched his podcasts prior to my interview (sheepishly typing as we speak). I had no knowledge of where he stood on the issue. But he was very pro-verdict and pro-sentence in our conversation. He said it was incredible to believe that Ross forgot so quickly and before the stoplight directly in front of the CFA. I didn't know until I read on here in the last couple of days the guy I was talking had ever been remotely pro-defense. He came across as very pro-prosecution, pro-judge, pro-verdict, pro-sentence.

 

[NCTeacher]

Thank you for taking the time to reply, NCT! (And thank you for representing Cooper at the sentencing. The lack of support for the actual victim of this heinous crime from his own family is shocking.)

It was my absolute privilege to represent Cooper. This little boy will always have a special place in my heart.

 

[NCTeacher]

The back of my head needles me with these three statements

He must have left him in the car
We talked about it all the time
Did you say too much

Often times I think this is her brain leaking their plan.

Was it truly her biggest fear or their biggest plan.

Don't come at me with all the in vitro stuff...sometimes people think they want something but it turns out they really don't. That includes children. It's not all rainbows and unicorns....

Check your inbox.

 

[NCTeacher]

The GA Appeal was very easy to read and just as it happened. The format is different than those I have read/am reading in Arkansas. Some things were just WOW moments remembering this trial. I thinking some may be overturned, jmho

Judge Staley husband passed away last Jan iirc. Did she retire? or maybe she was just reelected? This says term expired 2016? Cant find if she was reelected 2016 to be sworn 2017.

Mary Ellen Staley was a superior court judge of the Cobb County Judicial Circuit in Georgia. She was elected to this position in 1992 and her term expired in 2016.[1][2]https://ballotpedia.org/Mary_E._Staley

It says "Former Judge" in Cobb County on the sidebar. I think she may've retired, because it said she was relected for the term 2012-2018 and it hyperlinks "Retired Judges" at the bottom. Was it this case, this testimony, this trial that made her want to begin her retirement? We may never know

 

[NCTeacher]

Then again, Mary Staley still in the superior court judges' directory, and Adele Grubbs is correctly listed as a "senior judge" and she just "retired" on December 30th, 2016 according to a news article: http://www.mdjonline.com/news/cobb-...f0a-11e6-9051-c742e456bdfb.html#disqus_thread

 

[Carolina Girl]

The back of my head needles me with these three statements

He must have left him in the car
We talked about it all the time
Did you say too much

Often times I think this is her brain leaking their plan.

Was it truly her biggest fear or their biggest plan.

Don't come at me with all the in vitro stuff...sometimes people think they want something but it turns out they really don't. That includes children. It's not all rainbows and unicorns....

I have always thought she was involved. Can not help it, still do.

 

[neesaki]

It says "Former Judge" in Cobb County on the sidebar. I think she may've retired, because it said she was relected for the term 2012-2018 and it hyperlinks "Retired Judges" at the bottom. Was it this case, this testimony, this trial that made her want to begin her retirement? We may never know

Who knows, if I were a judge, I can say that a case as heinous as this, might well do me in. JMO.

Oh, and thank you NCTeacher for being a voice for little Cooper in this trial. I really appreciate all you've contributed, I can't say enough. :seeya:

 

[monkeypants]

It says "Former Judge" in Cobb County on the sidebar. I think she may've retired, because it said she was relected for the term 2012-2018 and it hyperlinks "Retired Judges" at the bottom. Was it this case, this testimony, this trial that made her want to begin her retirement? We may never know

She seemed broken up during the sentencing....final straw perhaps.

 

[arkansasmimi]

It says "Former Judge" in Cobb County on the sidebar. I think she may've retired, because it said she was relected for the term 2012-2018 and it hyperlinks "Retired Judges" at the bottom. Was it this case, this testimony, this trial that made her want to begin her retirement? We may never know

Yes I saw that and I even tried to see who were on ballot for this year as I found that Judges were on ballot every even year in Nov and sworn in Jan. I have wondered if maybe that is why she ruled how she did on some of her rulings.

Also found it interesting that in the MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL (which is how it is also listed on the court docket, not Appeal?) anyway in the Motion, each time Kilgore wrote the date of order it always told who prepared it DA OFFICE for all but 1 and it was a private law firm that "nothing to do with the case" < paraphrasing not quoting but very close to -Have to pull up the Motion. So the DA office does Judges paperwork? I just find that odd she/Judges would not have their own legal secretary transparency/unbias and all JMHO

 

[LinasK]

Which is fine, and perhaps the law should be changed to what you suggest. When I described the case to a friend (a father of two), he said exactly what you did.


That was not the law in Ross's case, however, and I find it horrifying that someone could be locked up for life because of an accident. The State didn't come close to proving to me, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it wasn't an accident.

BBM. If it was an accident. Ross was convicted of actually murdering his child and trying to make it look like an accident.

 

[NCTeacher]

BBM. If it was an accident. Ross was convicted of actually murdering his child and trying to make it look like an accident.

Good catch there! Head cold has my head in a complete fog. Had Ross been convicted of a lesser charge because the jury believed it was an "accident" (grrrrr, negligence is more like it) he wouldn't have gotten LWOP. He got LWOP because the jury and judge believed that Ross Harris deliberately, with malice, left a 22 month old baby in a car, in June, in Atlanta for 7 hours to die in a horrific, tortuous way---all while knowing exactly what that little baby would be going through.

That premise is what got him LWOP. Not because people believe that irresponsible parents who forget their kids in cars should be locked up for the rest of their lives. Those people IMO should be charged with negligent manslaughter and serve the appropriate time.

 

[LinasK]

Good catch there! Head cold has my head in a complete fog. Had Ross been convicted of a lesser charge because the jury believed it was an "accident" (grrrrr, negligence is more like it) he wouldn't have gotten LWOP. He got LWOP because the jury and judge believed that Ross Harris deliberately, with malice, left a 22 month old baby in a car, in June, in Atlanta for 7 hours to die in a horrific, tortuous way---all while knowing exactly what that little baby would be going through.

That premise is what got him LWOP. Not because people believe that irresponsible parents who forget their kids in cars should be locked up for the rest of their lives. Those people IMO should be charged with negligent manslaughter and serve the appropriate time.

I have a cold now too, I know exactly how you're feeling.

 

[NCTeacher]

I have a cold now too, I know exactly how you're feeling.

Funny thing is, I have gone the longest time ever without a cold--like 8 months or something (I'm a teacher, that's a world record, I think), I thought I had developed a super-man style immune system. Nope. This cold is putting my immune system in a choke-hold, submission-style.

 

[MrX]

BBM. If it was an accident. Ross was convicted of actually murdering his child and trying to make it look like an accident.

Yes, and the only post-verdict quotes, that I have seen from jurors, indicate that none of them believed it possible to forget a child in a car. The case was decided at jury selection. I've talked to others that also only followed the actual trial and agree that it would be hard to convict. Consider if Ross had the Casey Anthony jury...

 

[Inthedetails]

Yes, and the only post-verdict quotes, that I have seen from jurors, indicate that none of them believed it possible to forget a child in a car. The case was decided at jury selection. I've talked to others that also only followed the actual trial and agree that it would be hard to convict. Consider if Ross had the Casey Anthony jury...

I think what really hurt Ross' case was when the jury got to see the car in person. IIRC, that was not televised for court followers to see. Am I remembering that correctly?

Anyway, I do think seeing how small the car was and reviewing tape showing the lunchtime visit to the car were HUGE factors in the conviction.

ETA: It's not that the jury didn't believe it's possible to forget a child in a car. I think they found it impossible to forgot a toddler IN THAT CAR.

jmo

 

[katydid23]

I think what really hurt Ross' case was when the jury got to see the car in person. IIRC, that was not televised for court followers to see. Am I remembering that correctly?

Anyway, I do think seeing how small the car was and reviewing tape showing the lunchtime visit to the car were HUGE factors in the conviction.

ETA: It's not that the jury didn't believe it's possible to forget a child in a car. I think they found it impossible to forgot a toddler IN THAT CAR.

jmo

In THAT car and in that short a time frame--especially since the daycare building is within view much of the drive to the office.