The Grand Jury & Trial

[MsMarple]

I just found out he had two life insurance policies on him, on for $2,000 and another for $25,000. With all the true crime shows I've seen, that's motive enough for me!!

Interestingly, the judge declared the insurance policies inadmissable as evidence.

http://media.wix.com/ugd/943520_bd551a05178b427594957de0687f1859.pdf

Another interesting bit is a defense motion to exclude any politically incorrect references found on Ross' electronic devices. I wonder what that's all about? :dunno:

http://media.wix.com/ugd/943520_bcd6999d6c414db6807ae59dce788079.pdf

Links are from http://www.courtchatter.com/#!justin-ross-harris-trial-archive/cqbf as posted upthread by tlcya.

I think this is going to be a helluva trial.

 

[Hope4More]

Bold added by me.

The part in bold is not entirely true. Harris has been charged with felony murder as well as malice murder. Unlike malice murder, which requires intent, felony murder refers to a death that occurs during the commission of another felony. In the case of JRH, the other felony is second-degree child cruelty. Second-degree child cruelty simply requires criminal negligence, not willful intent. In Georgia, "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." In order for the prosecution to prove that JRH committed felony murder, they only need to prove that JRH showed a reckless disregard for Cooper's safety.

While I think that proving intent and malice beyond a reasonably doubt will be nearly impossible (I am not expecting to see a conviction of malice murder and first-degree child cruelty), it will be equally hard for the defense to show that JRH didn't show a reckless disregard for Cooper's life if for no other reason than Cooper died "under" Ross's care. I suspect that he will be found guilty of second-degree child cruelty, which would also lead to a felony murder conviction.

As you mentioned in your other post, JRH was allegedly distracted by his texting. It's precisely for that reason that his actions are likely to be considered criminally negligent. Rather than looking after Cooper and dropping him off at daycare, he was paying attention to his phone. He was less concerned with the blood flowing to his brain and more concerned with the blood flowing to other parts of his body.

Thanks for this great post- you ARE a peach.

I've looked up how Georgia defines all the charges brought against the defendant, but your explanation is great, and helps makes sense of why the State included the charge of felony murder (a backdoor route to a murder conviction via the second -degree child cruelty charge).

It sounds like you're very familiar with law, so am assuming you share the same understanding that juries rarely understand jury instructions or follow them even if they do.

I agree that a conviction on the second-degree child cruelty charge is most likely too, but unless I'm mistaken, the jury would not be obligated to decide for felony murder if they found him guilty of second degree child cruelty. The path to both would be there for them if they chose, but they are separate charges to be decided separately.

BTW.....a truly open-minded jury IMO would struggle over whether or not to convict on second degree child cruelty. Intent isn't necessary, but the bar is set higher than just negligence. If a parent simply forgets a child is in a car, that's negligence, but is it wanton disregard, etc.

Is it criminal negligence to get distracted enough to forget your child is in the car? Or is it criminally negligent to have not realized your child was in the car because you were distracted? Or..both, or....neither?

 

[DexterMorgan]

Bold added by me.

The part in bold is not entirely true. Harris has been charged with felony murder as well as malice murder. Unlike malice murder, which requires intent, felony murder refers to a death that occurs during the commission of another felony. In the case of JRH, the other felony is second-degree child cruelty. Second-degree child cruelty simply requires criminal negligence, not willful intent. In Georgia, "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." In order for the prosecution to prove that JRH committed felony murder, they only need to prove that JRH showed a reckless disregard for Cooper's safety.

While I think that proving intent and malice beyond a reasonably doubt will be nearly impossible (I am not expecting to see a conviction of malice murder and first-degree child cruelty), it will be equally hard for the defense to show that JRH didn't show a reckless disregard for Cooper's life if for no other reason than Cooper died "under" Ross's care. I suspect that he will be found guilty of second-degree child cruelty, which would also lead to a felony murder conviction.

As you mentioned in your other post, JRH was allegedly distracted by his texting. It's precisely for that reason that his actions are likely to be considered criminally negligent. Rather than looking after Cooper and dropping him off at daycare, he was paying attention to his phone. He was less concerned with the blood flowing to his brain and more concerned with the blood flowing to other parts of his body.

How was Ross committing a felony while also forgetting Cooper in the car. He wasn't texting the minor while exiting the car.

So getting convicted of felony murder will be really hard. That would happen if he robbed a store and ran off on foot while leaving his kid in the car that died from the hot car death. Jmo. I'm thinking negligent homicide if anything.

But they seem to be reaching while trying to now charge him with child *advertiser censored* charges from the texting done with the 16 year old.

I think he will beat the murder case. They should have charged him with involuntary manslaughter or something. Because their evidence seems very weak. Especially if the wife says that she was the one to research hot car deaths and not him.

 

[ms madge]

How was Ross committing a felony while also forgetting Cooper in the car. He wasn't texting the minor while exiting the car.

So getting convicted of felony murder will be really hard. That would happen if he robbed a store and ran off on foot while leaving his kid in the car that died from the hot car death. Jmo. I'm thinking negligent homicide if anything.

But they seem to be reaching while trying to now charge him with child *advertiser censored* charges from the texting done with the 16 year old.

I think he will beat the murder case. They should have charged him with involuntary manslaughter or something. Because their evidence seems very weak. Especially if the wife says that she was the one to research hot car deaths and not him.

Nope as GA Peach said

In the case of JRH, the other felony is second-degree child cruelty.

 

[kimi_SFC]

Isn't there a media thread for this case? I remember the day care email was fairly early on in the case - must be an article in the media thread somewhere.

GA - Suspicion over heat death of Cooper, 22 mos *** MEDIA LINKS *** NO DISCUSSION***
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=247912



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Inthedetails]

GA - Suspicion over heat death of Cooper, 22 mos *** MEDIA LINKS *** NO DISCUSSION***
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=247912



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Super. That is the place to go for people who want to do their homework on the case.

Thanks for posting.

 

[Hope4More]

GA Peach- I'm new to this discussion, but not to WS, so in the spirit of southern and WS hospitality,

:welcome:


Thinking about what you posted changes what I think will be the State's approach. All they need to do to get a felony murder conviction is to prove criminal negligence. Reasonable doubt is moot if intent doesn't need to be proven. Any thoughts on how you think the State might do that?

 

[Magdalyn]

"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."

I would say since

A) We know he knows the risks of leaving a child in a hot car as he and his wife admitted to viewing information on the internet on this very thing, Ross stating leaving his son in the car was his biggest fear, he watched a tv show about it.

B)Considering he is in charge of his son's safety, and safe arrival at daycare, and according to him, leaving his son in a hot car was 'his biggest fear', combined with a very short duration of drive time between buckling his son in after breakfast at Chik-fil-a and arriving at work, and the sexting happening at the same time he's to be focusing on getting his son to daycare...

doesn't look like a stretch to prove beyond reasonable doubt a wanton or reckless disregard for the safety of others who might reasonably be expected to be injured thereby


Further, I feel that if his defense is going to go 'sex addiction' angle, that would not soften the impact on me as to his culpability to negligence/second degree child cruelty/felony murder. If Ross were busy enjoying his alcohol addiction, or his meth addiction, while responsible for driving an automobile to breakfast and to work with his child in his care, and his child ended up dead because he 'forgot he was in the car'... none of that would add up to 'it could happen to anyone' to me. Those circumstances happened as they did due to his criminal negligence (if I didn't believe it was premediated.)

Another test I like to do if I wonder should a parent be held criminally responsible in a child's death: If an unrelated to the child, paid babysitter made the same actions the parent did, would they be considered criminally negligent? If Ross's attorneys go the 'so distracted by his sex addiction' route? Exchange Ross for the person who drives the van at the daycare. Keep the sex addiction the same. Jane Doe the daycare van driver was in the throes of her sex addiction/sexting/texting with one of her 6 paramours while she was responsible for Cooper's transportation. A few minutes after buckling Cooper into the van, Jane forgot about him, forgot to get him out of the van, and went into work to continue sexting...exchanging nude images... Her job that morning? To get Cooper safely to the daycare. The one thing she didn't manage to do amidst her 'sex addiction'? Get Cooper safely to daycare. Result. Death of the child in her care.

 

[Hope4More]

Interestingly, the judge declared the insurance policies inadmissable as evidence.

http://media.wix.com/ugd/943520_bd551a05178b427594957de0687f1859.pdf

Another interesting bit is a defense motion to exclude any politically incorrect references found on Ross' electronic devices. I wonder what that's all about? :dunno:

http://media.wix.com/ugd/943520_bcd6999d6c414db6807ae59dce788079.pdf

Links are from http://www.courtchatter.com/#!justin-ross-harris-trial-archive/cqbf as posted upthread by tlcya.

I think this is going to be a helluva trial.

Thanks for those links. So the judge allowed his internet searches in because she considers them intrinsic evidence of his state of mind and ruled explicitedly that their probative value outweighed the potential prejudicial.

I've never heard "political correctness" used as a legal term of art, but since the DT wrote that after the searches were already allowed in, I'm guessing the defendant's SM communications contain more than a smattering of derogatory references to categories of people the DT knows individual jurors might well represent.

 

[Hope4More]

"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."

I would say since

A) We know he knows the risks of leaving a child in a hot car as he and his wife admitted to viewing information on the internet on this very thing, Ross stating leaving his son in the car was his biggest fear, he watched a tv show about it.

B)Considering he is in charge of his son's safety, and safe arrival at daycare, and according to him, leaving his son in a hot car was 'his biggest fear', combined with a very short duration of drive time between buckling his son in after breakfast at Chik-fil-a and arriving at work, and the sexting happening at the same time he's to be focusing on getting his son to daycare...

doesn't look like a stretch to prove beyond reasonable doubt a wanton or reckless disregard for the safety of others who might reasonably be expected to be injured thereby


Further, I feel that if his defense is going to go 'sex addiction' angle, that would not soften the impact on me as to his culpability to negligence/second degree child cruelty/felony murder. If Ross were busy enjoying his alcohol addiction, or his meth addiction, while responsible for driving an automobile to breakfast and to work with his child in his care, and his child ended up dead because he 'forgot he was in the car'... none of that would add up to 'it could happen to anyone' to me. Those circumstances happened as they did due to his criminal negligence (if I didn't believe it was premediated.)

Another test I like to do if I wonder should a parent be held criminally responsible in a child's death: If an unrelated to the child, paid babysitter made the same actions the parent did, would they be considered criminally negligent? If Ross's attorneys go the 'so distracted by his sex addiction' route? Exchange Ross for the person who drives the van at the daycare. Keep the sex addiction the same. Jane Doe the daycare van driver was in the throes of her sex addiction/sexting/texting with one of her 6 paramours while she was responsible for Cooper's transportation. A few minutes after buckling Cooper into the van, Jane forgot about him, forgot to get him out of the van, and went into work to continue sexting...exchanging nude images... Her job that morning? To get Cooper safely to the daycare. The one thing she didn't manage to do amidst her 'sex addiction'? Get Cooper safely to daycare. Result. Death of the child in her care.

Good points, all.

IMO what's troublesome (more generally than this case) is giving the State the power to charge and potentially convict for murder in a situation like this, even if there was no intent to kill and the tragedy was genuinely an accident.

A felony charge for second-degree child cruelty in an accidental case seems pretty harsh, a murder charge IMO goes too far. jmo.

 

[GA_Peach]

Thanks for this great post- you ARE a peach.

I've looked up how Georgia defines all the charges brought against the defendant, but your explanation is great, and helps makes sense of why the State included the charge of felony murder (a backdoor route to a murder conviction via the second -degree child cruelty charge).

It sounds like you're very familiar with law, so am assuming you share the same understanding that juries rarely understand jury instructions or follow them even if they do.

I agree that a conviction on the second-degree child cruelty charge is most likely too, but unless I'm mistaken, the jury would not be obligated to decide for felony murder if they found him guilty of second degree child cruelty. The path to both would be there for them if they chose, but they are separate charges to be decided separately.

BTW.....a truly open-minded jury IMO would struggle over whether or not to convict on second degree child cruelty. Intent isn't necessary, but the bar is set higher than just negligence. If a parent simply forgets a child is in a car, that's negligence, but is it wanton disregard, etc.

Is it criminal negligence to get distracted enough to forget your child is in the car? Or is it criminally negligent to have not realized your child was in the car because you were distracted? Or..both, or....neither?

I agree with all of this. While second-degree child cruelty and felony murder are definitely two different charges, there is no doubt that Copper's death was caused by being left in the car, the child-cruelty charge. Assuming that the jury finds him guilty of second-degree child cruelty, a felony, conviction of felony murder would be likely. However, juries are an interesting group.

I worked at the Home Depot Store Support Center, the location where the daycare is located, years ago and have been enamored with this case from day 1. It will be very interesting to see how it all plays out in court. As for me, I am still on the fence.

 

[flourish]

1. Qualified experts disagree on whether or not there would have been noticable odor when Ross returned to his car after leaving work.

2. An email from Cooper's daycare wouldn't set off any alarms for Ross, especially if he assumed Cooper was there. Why would it?

Care takers, including schools, would call, not email in an emergency situation, and they sure don't contact parents if a child doesn't show up for one day.

If the daycare needed to reach a parent and Ross didn't respond they would have called Leanne, and they obviously didn't.

An email from the day care should have set off alarms for him! The email was sent out because Cooper wasn't at day care. If he thought he'd taken him to day care, then the email should have been rather alarming!

Yes, schools and day cares do contact parent(s) if a child is not present for one day. Automatic dialers or email programs call or text or whatever the number or address that's attached to that child. Not all schools or day cares have the same policies, of course. This topic was discussed at length at the beginning of this case. But for example, I taught preschool for years up until this school year. If a child didn't come to school, I was required to contact the family unless they actually called the school as they were required. It wasn't automatic. I had to get into each family's file and call, text, or email to try to find out where said child was that day. If my own child doesn't come to school, I get an automated call telling me that "a student from my household is absent." That's to a) make sure child didn't leave for school, never get there and parents don't know (kidnapped, playing hooky, etc) and b) to annoy parents into remembering to call when their kids are sick, although communication lines do get crossed and parents get called even if they're already called. But point is that email likely did happen and it really should have alerted and alarmed him by its very nature and intent.

 

[flourish]

His claim of supposed hearing loss can be medically tested too and to what degree. Get an audiologist to perform an audiogram!

Well, but just proving he was able to hear doesn't prove he did hear. Ambient noise and what not. (pretty sure you know that my slp friend but good point you made)

 

[Magdalyn]

Personally, I have to see what all is uncovered, all evidence presented at trial to determine if the charges are too harsh or go too far. And of course it's yet to be determined if it's an accidental case. We shall see!

 

[Hope4More]

Personally, I have to see what all is uncovered, all evidence presented at trial to determine if the charges are too harsh or go too far. And of course it's yet to be determined if it's an accidental case. We shall see!

Really was referring not to this case, but in general, given the awful reality that while thankfully uncommon, parents DO accidentally cause the death of their children by leaving them unattended in hot cars.

When truly an accident, IMO the responsible parent has already suffered the most horrible consequences and punishment imaginable, and I can't understand what interest of the State is served in bringing felony charges.

 

[Hope4More]

An email from the day care should have set off alarms for him! The email was sent out because Cooper wasn't at day care. If he thought he'd taken him to day care, then the email should have been rather alarming!

Yes, schools and day cares do contact parent(s) if a child is not present for one day. Automatic dialers or email programs call or text or whatever the number or address that's attached to that child. Not all schools or day cares have the same policies, of course. This topic was discussed at length at the beginning of this case. But for example, I taught preschool for years up until this school year. If a child didn't come to school, I was required to contact the family unless they actually called the school as they were required. It wasn't automatic. I had to get into each family's file and call, text, or email to try to find out where said child was that day. If my own child doesn't come to school, I get an automated call telling me that "a student from my household is absent." That's to a) make sure child didn't leave for school, never get there and parents don't know (kidnapped, playing hooky, etc) and b) to annoy parents into remembering to call when their kids are sick, although communication lines do get crossed and parents get called even if they're already called. But point is that email likely did happen and it really should have alerted and alarmed him by its very nature and intent.

I still haven't been able to find a link to verifiable info that states the email from daycare was sent because Cooper hadn't been dropped off, and that the defendant is known to have seen and/or opened the email.

I find it difficult to believe that both facts are known- the email was related to Cooper's absence, and the defendant saw/opened it.

If both facts are known to be true, what's the question? He's guilty of malice murder and every other charge.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Bill Rankin ‏@ajccourts 18m18 minutes ago
Juror #29 in #RossHarris trial: "My opinion now is that he's guilty. If what I hear in court changes that opinion it will be changed."

Bill Rankin ‏@ajccourts 1h1 hour ago
Juror #28 in #RossHarris case investigated 100s of homicides as Massachusetts state trooper. Acknowledges police don't always get right guy.

User Actions
Follow

Philip A. Holloway
‏@PhilHollowayEsq
Ex-cop juror in #JustinRossHarris #hotcardeath case currently works for criminal defense atty looking for flaws in criminal investigations

 

[Hope4More]

Bill Rankin ‏@ajccourts 18m18 minutes ago
Juror #29 in #RossHarris trial: "My opinion now is that he's guilty. If what I hear in court changes that opinion it will be changed."

Bill Rankin ‏@ajccourts 1h1 hour ago
Juror #28 in #RossHarris case investigated 100s of homicides as Massachusetts state trooper. Acknowledges police don't always get right guy.

User Actions
Follow

Philip A. Holloway
‏@PhilHollowayEsq
Ex-cop juror in #JustinRossHarris #hotcardeath case currently works for criminal defense atty looking for flaws in criminal investigations

Thanks for taking the time to post these updates.

 

[MsMarple]

Christian Boone ‏@ReporterJCB 12m12 minutes ago
I've been told both sides will be calling experts on sex addiction during #RossHarris trial #hotcardeaht
https://twitter.com/ReporterJCB

 

[Hope4More]

Apologies if this has already been posted here whenever ago. An insightful piece by a local who also sat in the courtroom observing both the defendant and Leanne, discussing how common was life insurance on infants in Cobb County on through her thoughts about when the defendant likely knew Cooper was dead:

http://patch.com/georgia/eastcobb/justin-ross-harris