I actually really agree with on the reason for the search.i watch that show as well and it's a pretty thin excuse IMO.
Everyone is so crazy hung up on whether he researched hot car deaths its insane, I've had to roll and scroll over these posts because they play ZERO part in this trial. He cleared his cache regularly...there is NO way to know what he searched for, when he searched it and how many times if at all!! gotta call out my animated movie quotes and "let it go" peeps. It's a rabbit hole.
All we need to know if his knowledge is WHAT RH HAS TOLD US HE KNOWS. Plain and simple. He told us he knows it exists, he told us he watched a video, a psa and LH tells us there was a long standing conversation between them, we know he was at some point doing a second look as we told us this, he told us he knew he should have put his brief case back there. WE KNOW BECAUSE HE SPOKE THE WORDS! <modsnip>
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Exactly. In his interview he talks about it. He references "look again". He talks about being an advocate. What he searched for and what he read about doesn't matter. He knew and didn't do anything THAT DAY to prevent it.
In the beginning I actually felt that it was an accident. Even after he sexting etc. didn't change my mind. It wasn't until later that I changed my mind. I do believe this can be an accident. I also believe accident or not the parent should be charged with something. I also feel that in accidents the parent likely feels there is no punishment worse than what already happened. I see where the jury will struggle with this. Especially if they feel he's guilty. It's horrible.
EDIT- oops sorry didn't read your whole post thoroughly LOL didn't mean to repeat what you said
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk