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

[JerseyGirl]

I assumed that AJC did not review the tape and that the article is Harris' brother's version of what he (probably) viewed at the defense attorneys office.

I was surprised that AJC was going with this story, based on what the half-brother said - which is really strange for a reputable news source to rely on.

 

[New1]

I can't understand why a parent would even need some kind of reminder of their child unless they have some kind of memory loss. My child is 43 years old, and I think about him every single day, numerous times, and have done so since the day he was born. I don't know if RH actually forgot Cooper or if he intentionally forgot him, but the end result is the same. The child is dead and RH is responsible for his death. I don't think RH has been charged with premeditated murder as of yet, but I think he is guilty of what they charged him with so far. How could he think he is not guilty of child abuse and felony murder according to the law of what child abuse and felony murder means? I don't know for sure, but I think I would have pleaded guilty if I knew it was my fault my child was dead, accident or not. MOO

 

[cady]

I will look at the article again, to be sure, but I think they said that they viewed the tape. JMO

 

[Kip]

LOL That's my gripe! I guess because AJC was either allowed to view the surveillance tape (supposedly NOT for public distribution) or, as someone suggested, AJC got their hands on another surveillance tape from Home Depot which shows Ross' activity from a different angle. That is possible, but I would have hoped that LE took into custody ANY and ALL relevant surveillance tapes from the Treehouse parking lot. If LE did indeed do that, then AJC could only have been given access to the tape by someone working for the defense. JMO

The videos were likely not physical tapes but were recorded digitally. If that's the case, Home Depot or the security company would have given LE a copy of the digital file containing the relevant shots. An AJC reporter could have a contact who let them view it there, but it's probably most likely that the defense let the ACJ view it.

 

[JerseyGirl]

Actually there are 2 articles.

The first article is for non-paying customers and the reporter is not listed:
http://www.ajc.com/news/news/crime-law/ross-harris-brother-they-rushed-judgment/ngj3N/
The comments of Michael Baygents are part of a major examination by the AJC of the case against Harris, including a review of the videotape of Harris' arrival at the Home Depot parking lot the day Cooper Harris died, plus a transcript of Harris' probable cause hearing July 3.

Then it goes on and gives a link to the full story from his brother. Unfortunately, you have to pay for this version:
http://www.myajc.com/news/news/local/defense-for-toddlers-dad-writes-its-own-story/ngh3p/
and lists the reporters as: By Bill Rankin, Craig Schneider and Bill Torpy - The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
"Subscribers may read the full story on our premium website, MyAJC.com. Also featured are key passages from the transcript of the probable cause hearing, and word clouds of the closing arguments by both the prosecution and Harris' defense attorney."

 

[JerseyGirl]

The videos were likely not physical tapes but were recorded digitally. If that's the case, Home Depot or the security company would have given LE a copy of the digital file containing the relevant shots. An AJC reporter could have a contact who let them view it there, but it's probably most likely that the defense let the ACJ view it.

I bet defense let the brother view it, who called the AJC to tell his story and let them look at it, too.

 

[JerseyGirl]

If you go to this Boston.com link, they have the full paid version for free:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/2...ath-hot-car/fNCwGu2GIj9KZefvm40BBP/story.html

But a review by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution of some of the state’s evidence shows authorities may have overstated some of their case ...

...

On other points, Kilgore, during the hearing, and Baygents, in interviews with the AJC, offered interpretations quite different from the inferences drawn by police.

bbm

 

[AuburnTxTiger]

Age of consent in GA is 16.

This was discussed in detail last week or week before. *advertiser censored* is age 18 if person under 18 is not married if I remember correctly.

 

[MyBelle]

"misdemeanor illegal contact with a minor"

illegal contact with a minor is not in person?

I'm not sure what the misdemeanor charge actually involved. I don't believe he elaborated.

 

[cady]

Thanks, Jersey girl. It says "the video shows" repeatedly, so I think they viewed it. If they were just repeating what Baygents said, they would say" Baygents said"...........methinks. JMO

 

[AuburnTxTiger]

Age of consent in GA is 16.

This is one link I found on websleuths RH inappropriate relations forum. Looks like Georgia legislature had discussed changing the law.

This was posted by gngr~snap:


Re: sexting
16 yo girl can be charged with a felony as well.

"But teens can face felony child *advertiser censored* charges for "sexting," or sending one another nude photos via cellphone."

http://m.timesfreepress.com/news/201...-penalty/?news

 

[AuburnTxTiger]

Age of consent in GA is 16.

Another post concerning age from websleuths RH inappropriate relations forum concerning child *advertiser censored*.


Thanks to tlcya for posting this:

Images of child *advertiser censored* are not protected under First Amendment rights, and are illegal contraband under federal law. Section 2256 of Title 18, United States Code, defines child *advertiser censored* as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone under 18 years of age). Visual depictions include photographs, videos, digital or computer generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor, and images created, adapted, or modified, but appear to depict an identifiable, actual minor. Undeveloped film, undeveloped videotape, and electronically stored data that can be converted into a visual image of child *advertiser censored* are also deemed illegal visual depictions under federal law.

Notably, the legal definition of sexually explicit conduct does not require that an image depict a child engaging in sexual activity. A picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child *advertiser censored* if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive. Additionally, the age of consent for sexual activity in a given state is irrelevant; any depiction of a minor under 18 years of age engaging in sexually explicit conduct is illegal.

http://www.justice.gov/criminal/ceos/citizensguide/citizensguide_porn.html

 

[UESwifey]

I'm glad people in RH's life aren't making excuses for him. When I first read this I was a little angry because I took it as this friend believes RH is innocent. But I think holding out hope that he's innocent and supporting him are two different things.

Longtime Friend Of Hot Car Dad Ross Cooper Confused By Ongoing Events, Prays There’s A Reasonable Explanation For It All
http://popfix.net/longtime-friend-o...s-theres-a-reasonable-explanation-for-it-all/

 

[LisaB]

It is a little stunning. What's more important? 15 seconds or the fact that police have evidence Ross was texting sexually explicit messages to an underage girl? The guy at a minimum is a sexual predator and I doubt a jury will ignore that evidence.

JMO

I'd like them to file charges related to that. I can see the argument that it is a separate issue, but it was a contributing factor too.

 

[LisaB]

Serious question; is JRH's name, "Ross" NOT short for [modsnip]? I thought it was since he used it for so many of his SM accts. Is it really just "Ross"? Because I have been calling him [modsnip] for quite some time, thinking it was what "Ross" was short for.....

I think it is Ross. I call him [modsnip] in an effort to be disrespectful!

 

[MsMarple]

'Harris was supposed to drop Cooper to daycare around 9 a.m. last Wednesday but instead went straight to work, allegedly forgetting the boy was strapped in his car seat in the back of the vehicle for seven hours.
But instead of confessing to the tragic blunder – and admitting his baby had been dead for hours – it has been claimed Harris tried to cover his tracks by driving to a nearby shopping center with the dead child and telling onlookers the child had just been choking.'
http://www.georgianewsday.com/news/...-to-die-in-hot-cars.html#sthash.85wYMzhe.dpuf

eta:
'Eyewitness Edward Cockerham, 49, told MailOnline: ‘I was interviewed by the police last night and I told them I thought the guy was acting, he was really over-reacting to the situation.

'I know he had lost his baby but he was acting up more than he should have been. It seemed like acting to me. When he pulled in and people started asking him what had happened, he said that the baby had just started choking.

‘But the baby didn’t look like it had been choking, it looked like it had been sweating, like it had been in a swimming pool, his hair was all wet.'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...or-awful-day-make-supporters-think-twice.html

Thank you for that – I was trying to remember where the “choking” statement came from.

So, if the witness is correct and RH said Cooper had just started choking then why on earth would he tell LH hours later that he “Dreaded how he would look?”

Some have suggested it was because he realized Cooper was dead when he was driving to the movies and dreaded turning around to look at him. So why would he instead think Cooper was alive and choking yet dread looking at him? That makes no sense. If anything it would have filled him with hope that he could get medical assistance to his son.

Hope that he could get him to one of the nearby hospitals on time and – oh, wait!

Also, note that RH is claiming he forgot to drop Cooper at daycare and not that he had a false memory of dropping him off. That's an important difference in a Forgotten Baby Syndrome defense. In other cases the parent thought their child was somewhere safe, like daycare or in their crib. Not so in RH's case.

 

[popsicle]

This was discussed in detail last week or week before. *advertiser censored* is age 18 if person under 18 is not married if I remember correctly.

Yes... but I am talking about sexual contact, hence the age of consent.

 

[LisaB]

Actually,this information came from someone else other than the family member who happens to be a veteran police officer himself.

That'll be the day I believe a bunch of journalists over LE and the seasoned police officer I thought was explained to be RH's brother.

Yes. I think it is a matter of punctuation. Like this:

Actually,this information came from someone else other than the family member (who happens to be a veteran police officer himself).

 

[AuburnTxTiger]

Yes... but I am talking about sexual contact, hence the age of consent.

I misunderstood thinking you thought RH could not be charged with anything concerning his relationship of a 16 year old. Sexual contact age of consent in Georgia is 16, but RH can be charged with sending *advertiser censored* to person under age 18. I have posted several links in the last 10 minutes. Doesn't make common sense, but it is the current law in Georgia. Sex ok but sending nude photos are not. It is my understanding that the teen could have also been charged. You may want to check out the websleuth inappropriate behavior forum. There are lots of discussions. I won't post any more on this forum.

 

[MsMarple]

STOP IT RIGHT NOW! I have a 7½ pound pork roast in the fridge ready to turn into BBQ!!! You are making me hungry NOW!

Do you have buns and coleslaw to make sandwiches? And sweet tea? What time is dinner??? Mmmmmm...... :skip: :daisy: