TRIAL - Ross Harris #1

[Hope4More]

CLICK HERE LISTEN TO THE LATEST TRUE CRIME RADIO PROGRAM AFTER 10:30 PM EASTERN EVERY THURSDAY NIGHT!​

The trial continues for Ross Harris accused of purposely leaving his toddler son Cooper in a hot car to die a horrible death.

The prosecution is scoring big points as it lays out its case against Harris but what does the defense table have up its sleeve?

Joining us tonight, (Thursday October 13th) on True Crime Radio is Cathy from Courtchatter.com

Cathy knows this case inside and out. At the very least you will find her observations to be extremely interesting.

Later in the show, we welcome Dawn Drexel, Brittanee Drexel mother. She will tell us about her struggles to find her daughter. Has her daughter's killer been caught? We'll see.

You will be able to hear this edition of True Crime Radio by clicking on my SPREAKER ACCOUNT after 10:30 PM Eastern.

Cathy from Courtchatter.com and more on True Crime Radio TONIGHT!

Can't say I agree with your assessment that the prosecution is scoring big points D) but thanks for the timely heads up about tonight.

 

[matou]

Is there trial tomorrow?

 

[Hope4More]

BBM

Just for clarification, the call was routed to the main THD HQ number. It was not a phone number dedicated to LAA. I am not sure if it even matters, but I wanted to clarify. When the phone number was read during one of the pretrial hearings, I immediately recognized it as the main THD HQ phone number.

I agree that it is all that is known. It's just bizarre, and I hope that we receive additional testimony on this matter.

Thanks for the clarification. The call being initially handled by a central corporate switchboard makes it all the more likely, imo, that the call was delayed in reaching classroom #5.

And if so, a long wait to perhaps bypass one of those extremely annoying in the best of times canned messages, then perhaps being put on hold, then transferred, then still no one on the line to talk with, all the while desperate to reach one's wife to tell her what has happened to their precious son? How excruciating that would be, and frustrating, and maddening, and all the while trying to process his baby's death......

 

[blue22]

Imo what is important about the car seat in terms of this trial is that Cooper's head in fact was not 3" over the top of the car seat, but actually fully 3.5" BELOW the top of the seat. Even if RH glanced towards the back seat, Cooper's head would not have been visible.

Every witness, including LE, has said they didn't see any evidence of any kind that Cooper was neglected or not properly taken care of. Should Ross AND/OR Leanne , who after all was equally responsible for Cooper, have bought a second larger car seat? Sure. IMO the fact they hadn't yet, given Cooper's torso still fit into the seat with inches to spare, just isn't a huge big deal. They both worked and had a young child. In real life sometimes even very important things don't get taken care of as soon as they should.

BBM

There is no way for you to know this. Has this been sworn into evidence? Are there pictures? Were you there? Has the defense asserted this, and shown evidence to back this up through their cross? Did you see Cooper in the car seat that day? You don't know any of this. Beyond that, LE HAVE said Ross neglected Cooper. That's what he is on trial for. In real life, people get hurt. And when people get hurt, especially children, the people entrusted with their care will be judged. They neglected to keep Cooper safe in that car, both of them. Only one of them was on trial for his death, that doesn't mean the mother didn't make a mistake that was careless. I blame Ross for his death only. However, something as simple as putting a kid in a correct car not happening is ridiculous and lazy. And it is just one more thing to show how little he cared for his son's safety added to the totality.

The seat is rated for BELOW 30 INCHES and Cooper was 33. IMO, a 33 year old toddler cannot be 3 inches under an infant car seat, rated for a child UNDER 30 inches. I think the prosecution will show this. Again, JMO. I'm not going to present my opinion as fact.

 

[yupikgirl]

Cooper was not an infant and he was not in a correct seat. That is a fact.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[magnolia]

Is there trial tomorrow?

Yes ~~

 

[Hope4More]

BBM

There is no way for you to know this. Has this been sworn into evidence? Are there pictures? Were you there? Has the defense asserted this, and shown evidence to back this up through their cross? Did you see Cooper in the car seat that day? You don't know any of this. Beyond that, LE HAVE said Ross neglected Cooper. That's what he is on trial for. In real life, people get hurt. And when people get hurt, especially children, the people entrusted with their care will be judged. They neglected to keep Cooper safe in that car, both of them. Only one of them was on trial for his death, that doesn't mean the mother didn't make a mistake that was careless. I blame Ross for his death only. However, something as simple as putting a kid in a correct car not happening is ridiculous and lazy. And it is just one more thing to show how little he cared for his son's safety added to the totality.

The seat is rated for BELOW 30 INCHES and Cooper was 33. IMO, a 33 year old toddler cannot be 3 inches under an infant car seat, rated for a child UNDER 30 inches. I think the prosecution will show this. Again, JMO. I'm not going to present my opinion as fact.

Of course I wasn't there, etc . etc. But I do know basic math, have listened to the testimony, read the autopsy report, and trust that the seat measurements by LE testified to at trial are accurate (of the seat itself, not much else).

Basic math: Cooper measured 14" from the top of his head to his buttocks. The car seat, from buttock padding to the top, as measured from inside the seat, was 19".

Seat height minus Cooper's height equals his head not extending over the top by 3" as keeps getting claimed, but being below the top of his seat by inches. His head being below the top of the seat, not above the top of the seat means the top of the seat would block line of sight to Cooper's head say, as RH reached for his computer bag, or earlier, as he backed in, given the position of RH's rearview mirror, set for a man over 6' tall.

Kind of straight forward logic, IMO.


ETA.. Just an opinionated question, but I'm wondering if the DA's adjustments to Cooper's seat to give it a 4" tilt has anything to do with the holes in their argument that Harris must have seen Cooper in the car.

 

[blue22]

Of course I wasn't there, etc . etc. But I do know basic math, have listened to the testimony, read the autopsy report, and trust that the seat measurements by LE testified to at trial are accurate (of the seat itself, not much else).

Basic math: Cooper measured 14" from the top of his head to his buttocks. The car seat, from buttock padding to the top, as measured from inside the seat, was 19".

Seat height minus Cooper's height equals his head not extending over the top by 3" as keeps getting claimed, but being below the top of his seat by inches. His head being below the top of the seat, not above the top of the seat means the top of the seat would block line of sight to Cooper's head.

Kind of straight forward logic, imo.

I'm not sure if you have children, or work with children...but the way seats are shaped impact the way a child's body fits in the seat. Infant seats are not meant for toddlers. Even tiny toddlers. In my experience, babies outgrow the height of infant seats far before their measurements do. Again, it's JMO that the prosecution will show Cooper was visible. I don't think the measurements will prove or disprove anything. The fact that Cooper was in an unsafe seat cannot be disputed, though. Te defense can't get around that, no matter how much you think they are golden and superior.

 

[katydid23]

I don't think it matters if his head showed or not. The fact is that his car seat was inches away from the driver's seat. And it was only a matter of 1 or 2 minutes, before the driver had to make a decision about which way to turn. Having the baby so close to him, and having the seat so visible, makes it very hard to believe that he could be so easily forgotten.

And my granddaughter's arms are always moving in her car seat. She is always waving them around and pointing at things. She is 18 months old and makes constant noise and is constantly moving in her car seat. It is very hard to believe that if she were just inches away from me, I could 'forget' she was even there. If her car seat was so close to mine, she'd probably be reaching out to try and touch me, imo.

And I am not going to accept his deafness in one ear as any kind of excuse. If you have a weakness or a disability, and you are caring for your child, then you need to do something to make up for it to keep them safe. If he knew he could not hear his child then he needed to look over at him even more than the average parent would, imo.

 

[Hope4More]

I don't think it matters if his head showed or not. The fact is that his car seat was inches away from the driver's seat. And it was only a matter of 1 or 2 minutes, before the driver had to make a decision about which way to turn. Having the baby so close to him, and having the seat so visible, makes it very hard to believe that he could be so easily forgotten.

And my granddaughter's arms are always moving in her car seat. She is always waving them around and pointing at things. She is 18 months old and makes constant noise and is constantly moving in her car seat. It is very hard to believe that if she were just inches away from me, I could 'forget' she was even there. If her car seat was so close to mine, she'd probably be reaching out to try and touch me, imo.

And I am not going to accept his deafness in one ear as any kind of excuse. If you have a weakness or a disability, and you are caring for your child, then you need to do something to make up for it to keep them safe. If he knew he could not hear his child then he needed to look over at him even more than the average parent would, imo.

Maybe the detail of where Cooper's head was inside the car seat will matter to the jury, maybe it won't, no way of knowing yet.

Pointing out incorrect information here matters, imo, for any fact based discussion about Cooper and the car seat. Or any fact-based discussion of evidence, for that matter. The significance of factual evidence is subjective, but thankfully, facts are facts are facts. And factually, there is no possibility that Cooper's head stuck out 3" over the top of the seat, or over the top of the seat at all, which imo, isn't a trivial detail to either the defense or State.

 

[blue22]

Maybe the detail of where Cooper's head was inside the car seat will matter to the jury, maybe it won't, no way of knowing yet.

Pointing out incorrect information here matters, imo, for any fact based discussion about Cooper and the car seat. Or any fact-based discussion of evidence, for that matter. The significant of factual evidence is subjective, but thankfully, facts are facts are facts.

Yes, they are. Which is why I point out that it's my opinion, instead of presenting opinions as fact.

 

[amymarie]

Why would Ross have the call routed to the classroom instead of the front office desk of the daycare? Every daycare I have ever been to has someone at the front desk for "security", where parents check in and out. Wouldn't this have been Leanna'a first point of contact when she arrived? Why would you call the teachers that are busy teaching the other children? Especially when you are calling with such upsetting news?

Come to think of it, I don't think outside calls could even go to the classrooms of my kids' daycare. Only the front desk could call back into the classrooms.

 

[blue22]

I don't think it matters if his head showed or not. The fact is that his car seat was inches away from the driver's seat. And it was only a matter of 1 or 2 minutes, before the driver had to make a decision about which way to turn. Having the baby so close to him, and having the seat so visible, makes it very hard to believe that he could be so easily forgotten.

And my granddaughter's arms are always moving in her car seat. She is always waving them around and pointing at things. She is 18 months old and makes constant noise and is constantly moving in her car seat. It is very hard to believe that if she were just inches away from me, I could 'forget' she was even there. If her car seat was so close to mine, she'd probably be reaching out to try and touch me, imo.

And I am not going to accept his deafness in one ear as any kind of excuse. If you have a weakness or a disability, and you are caring for your child, then you need to do something to make up for it to keep them safe. If he knew he could not hear his child then he needed to look over at him even more than the average parent would, imo.

I don't either, but I bet the defense will try their hardest to make it seem like it matters. I think most people sitting on a jury will have more sense then that. I agree on the hearing. I think the defense needs to be careful with how they approach that. If they are really aggressive, it could come across as desperate. I know completely deaf people and their kids didn't die in a car or anywhere else. It's a pretty weak argument, actually. All JMO.

 

[Hope4More]

I don't either, but I bet the defense will try their hardest to make it seem like it matters. I think most people sitting on a jury will have more sense then that. I agree on the hearing. I think the defense needs to be careful with how they approach that. If they are really aggressive, it could come across as desperate. I know completely deaf people and their kids didn't die in a car or anywhere else. It's a pretty weak argument, actually. All JMO.

Somewhere along the line pretrial, iirc, RH stated that Cooper "must have fallen asleep." I can't imagine the defense would run with (I agree) the weak argument that deafness explains why RH wasn't aware Cooper was still in the car, when the fallen asleep is already on the record and is a far more likely explanation.

 

[blue22]

Somewhere along the line pretrial, iirc, RH stated that Cooper "must have fallen asleep." I can't imagine the defense would run with (I agree) the weak argument that deafness explains why RH wasn't aware Cooper was still in the car, when the fallen asleep is already on the record and is a far more likely explanation.

I remember him stating something like that, also.

Do you think the defense will really go with that? Suggesting a toddler falling asleep is a reasonable answer for forgetting a few minutes later (I'm assuming the time frame is 5 minutes or less until the u-turn) seems...risky. I think they are a competent enough team to not have to go there. I could be wrong, though. They could take that angle and it would be interesting to see.

JMO.

 

[GA_Peach]

The reply button is not working for me so I apologize.

The "must have fallen asleep" argument really bothers me. How would Ross have known that Copper fell asleep? The ONLY way that he would have known that is if Ross was aware that Cooper was in the car.

 

[GA_Peach]

I remember him stating something like that, also.

Do you think the defense will really go with that? Suggesting a toddler falling asleep is a reasonable answer for forgetting a few minutes later (I'm assuming the time frame is 5 minutes or less until the u-turn) seems...risky. I think they are a competent enough team to not have to go there. I could be wrong, though. They could take that angle and it would be interesting to see.

JMO.

It's about 30 seconds to the U-turn. It is impossible for me to believe that Ross 1) buckled Cooper in the car, 2) saw Cooper and was able to determine he feel asleep, and 3) then subsequently forget Cooper was in the car. That supposedly occurred in approximately 90 seconds. If that is what the DT wants to try and sell, I am not buying any of it.

 

[Maisiebelle]

For the people who are saying Cooper wouldn't be visible above the back of the car seat....... How then did RH see him when he was changing lanes after he finished work? He said he saw him, drove up the road a bit, pulled in and started screaming as he removed Cooper from the car....

 

[monael]

The problem I keep having with these measurements is this: Do we know exactly where the coroner decided his buttocks were in the measurement, and is that an accurate place to measure to decide whether Cooper's head would be sticking up or not? I am sitting down and trying to figure out where exactly on my buttocks you would need to measure to determine how high the top of my head is in relation to the chair back. Every time I think I found the right place, when I stand up it seems to be in a slightly different place on my butt. Not to mention, measuring that against the chair, how would you know how much my seat sunk into the cushion?

 

[magnolia]

It's about 30 seconds to the U-turn. It is impossible for me to believe that Ross 1) buckled Cooper in the car, 2) saw Cooper and was able to determine he feel asleep, and 3) then subsequently forget Cooper was in the car. That supposedly occurred in approximately 90 seconds. If that is what the DT wants to try and sell, I am not buying any of it.

BBM -- Did RH say he positively saw Cooper asleep? Saying, he "must have fallen asleep" does not mean RH saw him asleep. I looked around for my cat a few minutes ago. Don't see him. Don't hear him. He must be somewhere asleep.