Small Details that are interesting in the Cooper Harris case, #1

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
eileenhawkeye said:
Wouldn't they need a warrant before they could start going through his cell phone?
Click to expand...

Yes, of course. (Unless he offered it, but I doubt he did.) They got warrants for his office that night, I wouldn't assume they couldn't also get the warrant for his phone.
 
K_Z said:
It makes perfect sense to me that RH was taken into custody at the scene. Look at the situation dispassionately for a moment.

There is a small child victim in full rigor mortis, with obvious skin discoloration, open eyes with protruding tongue, visible injuries to the child's face, and a strong scent of decomposition, and the fact that RH had been DRIVING the car moments before with such a gruesome victim situation inside. To any LEO, they would immediately know that the time of death was anywhere from a few hours ago, up to 24 hours-- definitely not immediately recent (as in the last few minutes or hours).

Even before they knew about RH's "double life", bystanders and LEOs report how very strange RH's behavior was at the scene. The officers definitely could have been thinking that the child was dead from abuse or foul play, or even staged post mortem into the too-small carseat to make it look like a heat death. (And yes, I think the LEOs at the scene probably immediately recognized that the bucket style carseat was for an infant, and the victim was clearly a toddler.) RH being on his phone while others tended to his child, as well as him cursing at the LEO when she asked him to get off the phone only adds to the big picture. I can definitely see why they took him into custody at the scene. Just nothing about that scenario looks like an accident, IMO. I'm actually surprised it took LE until 10 pm or so to officially arrest RH and read him his rights.
Click to expand...

I mean, really. A kid dies, a parent is questioned. Every time. Accident or not. EVERY time.
 
eileenhawkeye said:
There is a small part of me that wonders whether LE arrested him b/c of what he said to the officer, and is now trying to get all the evidence to fit. It just seems odd that they arrested him before any evidence was in. Maybe they had a hunch, and it turned out to be right. Were they prepared to lessen the charges or drop them if it turned out it was an accident?
Click to expand...

IMO, and I could be wrong, but a child died while in the custody of his father and the father (JRH) was acting suspicious and not cooperating with LE so I guess LE has a obligation or right to arrest JRH until further notice.
 
K_Z said:
It makes perfect sense to me that RH was taken into custody at the scene. Look at the situation dispassionately for a moment.

There is a small child victim in full rigor mortis, with obvious skin discoloration, open eyes with protruding tongue, visible injuries to the child's face, and a strong scent of decomposition, and the fact that RH had been DRIVING the car moments before with such a gruesome victim situation inside. To any LEO, they would immediately know that the time of death was anywhere from a few hours ago, up to 24 hours-- definitely not immediately recent (as in the last few minutes or hours).

Even before they knew about RH's "double life", bystanders and LEOs report how very strange RH's behavior was at the scene. The officers definitely could have been thinking that the child was dead from abuse or foul play, or even staged post mortem into the too-small carseat to make it look like a heat death. (And yes, I think the LEOs at the scene probably immediately recognized that the bucket style carseat was for an infant, and the victim was clearly a toddler.) RH being on his phone while others tended to his child, as well as him cursing at the LEO when she asked him to get off the phone only adds to the big picture. I can definitely see why they took him into custody at the scene. Just nothing about that scenario looks like an accident, IMO. I'm actually surprised it took LE until 10 pm or so to officially arrest RH and read him his rights.
Click to expand...

:tyou: This ^ ^ ^ ^ It really is just that simple
 
Linda7NJ said:
He was not arrested at the scene.

IMO he was cuffed and removed from the scene because he was belligerent and non compliant.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I hope we don't have to listen through another trial about the cuff and then and uncuffed implications is as we heard in the casey anthony trial

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2
 
So much for that child advocacy safety course he took. To always turn around. He overdid his coverup. It's just too much to all be coincidence.
 
o/t Did anyone ever see Ross' facebook before it went down?
 
Baznme said:
So much for that child advocacy safety course he took. To always turn around. He overdid his coverup. It's just too much to all be coincidence.
Click to expand...

Exactly. This is your biggest fear and instead of putting something in the backseat and always looking for your child, you forget them in 40 seconds. After breakfast. During the routine of something you do all the time.

Nope.
 
matou said:
What's going to be next? The car seat was 7 inches away from Ross' head instead of around 6 inches? Ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Probably, but I think the one-inch discrepancy could be explained by the thickness of Ross's hair, particularly if he used a round brush and blow dryer on it that day. :p
 
blue22 said:
But they said they noticed the smell immediately, and that was their first clue. That happened before he did that.

Here is the reason I don't believe that. They aren't forcing the evidence to fit, it DOES fit. The child was in the wrong seat, he forgot him in seconds, there was a smell, he was living a double life. This stuff is not made up. HE did all of this.
Click to expand...

They did not arrest him on the spot. He was arrested several hours later, right?
 
Now if the news only credited WS posters for the information they post about on the news and then claim they found it i.e. Ross' Kik account information found by Babylisaupdates.
 
matou said:
Now if the news only credited WS posters for the information they post about on the news and then claim they found it i.e. Ross' Kik account information found by Babylisaupdates.
Click to expand...

No doubt!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 82 more.
Total: 1,790 (members: 83, guests: 1,707)

Online statistics

Members online
83
Guests online
1,707
Total visitors
1,790
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,478
Messages
18,204,517
Members
233,861
Latest member
evremevremm
Back
Top