TRIAL - Ross Harris #1

[turaj]

i do think def. asked Stoddard so many questions that were outside his scope...but no objections....and still wonder what jury is thinking.

 

[turaj]

IMO, even though I think LE handled the initial scene quite poorly, I believe LE's actions, and even suspicions, were at least within bounds at the scene, and during their initial interviews with Leanne and RH.

I also don't fault them for finding RH's extra marital activity hinky, given that his child ended up dead, and stranger things have happened.

As LE investigated though, and found no evidence to support their suspicions of intent, they had choices to make. I very much fault them for deciding to go forward with malice murder charges AFTER they knew how weak to non existent their case was, and for all the very dubious actions they seem to have taken to make their weak case look stronger.

I'm beginning to think that one of the reasons the DA didn't pursue the DP was a keen awareness a RH conviction on malice murder would never have survived the close scrutiny of a DP appellate process.

agree...seem to have lost my thanks button as usual.

 

[turaj]

Are there any interviews with Leanna on video we can watch?

 

[PaperDoll]

What kind of compellingevidence does one need? Cooper died due to his dad leaving him in a hot car all day long. Was this simply a ooops, my bad, I shouldn’thave done that because my wife is going to kill me???? Did he forget anything else in the car whenhe went into work? Why Cooper? I believe he did it on purpose. He knew he didn’t take him to daycare. He actually carried Cooper into CFA, holding him in his arms very aware of that. He even strapped him in the car seat, very aware of that. Then in less than a minute or so HE FORGETS!!!!! UGH! Sorry but I’m right and everyone else is wrong.. lol ok, maybe not but I can certainly think that.. :crazy:

 

[turaj]

just realize the guy def. is grilling now is Yaeger...he is not looking good either.

 

[turaj]

What kind of compellingevidence does one need? Cooper died due to his dad leaving him in a hot car all day long. Was this simply a ooops, my bad, I shouldn’thave done that because my wife is going to kill me???? Did he forget anything else in the car whenhe went into work? Why Cooper? I believe he did it on purpose. He knew he didn’t take him to daycare. He actually carried Cooper into CFA, holding him in his arms very aware of that. He even strapped him in the car seat, very aware of that. Then in less than a minute or so HE FORGETS!!!!! UGH! Sorry but I’m right and everyone else is wrong.. lol ok, maybe not but I can certainly think that.. :crazy:

I agree with you but what I am looking at is whether the state is going their job to prove it to the jury...so far no....I am very concerned that many of us are not going to be happy with the verdict...unless things really turn around here.

 

[cricket49]

Did I miss Stoddard testifying this week? I was watching live stream with chat and most of the comments seemed immature and I was distracted too much. Next week I am only going to watch the live stream with no chat.

 

[PaperDoll]

IMO, even though I think LE handled the initial scene quite poorly, I believe LE's actions, and even suspicions, were at least within bounds at the scene, and during their initial interviews with Leanne and RH.

I also don't fault them for finding RH's extra marital activity hinky, given that his child ended up dead, and stranger things have happened.

As LE investigated though, and found no evidence to support their suspicions of intent, they had choices to make. I very much fault them for deciding to go forward with malice murder charges AFTER they knew how weak to non existent their case was, and for all the very dubious actions they seem to have taken to make their weak case look stronger.

I'm beginning to think that one of the reasons the DA didn't pursue the DP was a keen awareness a RH conviction on malice murder would never have survived the close scrutiny of a DP appellate process.

Hope4More, :blowkiss: I enjoy your postseven though we don’t agree.. lol I didn’tlisten to the jury selection but from my understanding, and I could be wrong,didn’t they move to another County because they had a hard time finding jurorswho didn't automatically think Ross was guilty?

 

[just the facts pls]

What kind of compellingevidence does one need? Cooper died due to his dad leaving him in a hot car all day long. Was this simply a ooops, my bad, I shouldn’thave done that because my wife is going to kill me???? Did he forget anything else in the car whenhe went into work? Why Cooper? I believe he did it on purpose. He knew he didn’t take him to daycare. He actually carried Cooper into CFA, holding him in his arms very aware of that. He even strapped him in the car seat, very aware of that. Then in less than a minute or so HE FORGETS!!!!! UGH! Sorry but I’m right and everyone else is wrong.. lol ok, maybe not but I can certainly think that.. :crazy:

They want a complete dossier detailing his plans to leave Cooper in the back seat, including a full written confession signed in blood attached by with a letter from a mental health professional stating that JRH was completely sane at the time of his premeditating Cooper's death. Anything less is an unreasonable witch hunt.

 

[just the facts pls]

Hope4More, :blowkiss: I enjoy your postseven though we don’t agree.. lol I didn’tlisten to the jury selection but from my understanding, and I could be wrong,didn’t they move to another County because they had a hard time finding jurorswho didn't automatically think Ross was guilty?

From what I saw of the trial, it didn't matter if they thought JRH was guilty, only that they were able to put aside their own opinion and hear out the facts in court.

The judge has repeatedly admonished the jurors to keep an open mind, not talk about the case, and to never go scouting for information outside of court. I don't know what more people want, except a full acquittal because apparently it's impossible for a baby faced IT specialist to possibly be guilty of such a terrible crime.

 

[Doghairrules]

I have been following this case since the beginning. It's hard to miss. Not only is it a webslueth headliner, but it got an unprecedented amount of press coverage, out of the many of Hot Car deaths we see every year...

So what makes one a murder suspect as opposed to a parent who made a deadly "mistake"? I can see nothing substantial, that makes this seem like an evil plot to murder this child, as opposed to a deadly error, made by a selfish, preoccupied person, who forgot about what should have been the most important thing on his mind, that day.

Personally, I don't think these people had some sort of master plan for ridding themselves of the burden of parenthood. I think the guy was a Jack@ss who forgot his kid in the car. LE didn't like his attitude, mannerisms, behaviors... or whatever.... so RH is being charged with murder, instead of getting sympathy, or a wrist slap like most of these cases...

We had a death in our family last week. I found myself noticing at both the Wake and the Funeral service, how many different modes of behavior there were among the mourners... Some were balling their eyes out, some were smiling, some seemed stiff, an unemotional, some were drunk, some were angry and some were acting as if it were just a day like any other...

As for myself, I was unable to actually acknowledge my loss, I felt very much the same as I had when he was ill and away from us, in hospital. It was a few days later, in the grocery store, that it sunk in, and grief came harshly and unexpectedly, in such a benign setting! I hate how harshly we human beings judge one another, people we don't know a thing about, but all of sudden we get fed info that makes us feel we are somehow qualified to declare another person a monster, by the way, (we are led to believe?), they live, grieve, or behave...

I'm not prepared to make any judgment on these parents. I don't feel there is any overwhelming evidence that they are brutal murderers. This whole case has a witch-hunt feel to it imo... In any case, it's a terribly sad reflection on human-kind.

I am very sorry for your loss and I agree that grief comes in very different ways. My father died very suddenly after being hospitalized with broken ribs. I was a mess on the 3 hour drive home and when I saw him. Right after that the family pastor prayed with us in the waiting room and mentioned something about praying for guidance as we made the decision about whether to turn his life support off. After he finished praying, I looked at him and said, "that will be the easiest decision we make this week." To outsiders that may seem a cold and weird statement. But my family had talked about this basically all our lives, we were in complete agreement on the decision and it was very clear to all of us that our father and husband was no longer there. So context is important.

And to your comment about the grocery store - one of my brothers had a brain tumor when we were teens and the prognosis was dire. My mother still talks about the hardest thing for her to do during that period was go to the grocery store, where everyone else wS living a normal life. (My brother is still alive, btw, but there was two years of roller coasters, treatments and the constant worry.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GA_Peach]

the younger defense atty (don't know name offhand) is doing a masterful job of making Stoddard look absolutely bad and negligent. Stoddard is a veteran and as I listen to this testimony it is clear it was time for him to retire. This is painful and making me feel like I am back watching OJ.

It's funny that you mentioned OJ. Since listening to the State's attorneys during juror questioning, I have feared that this case would be the next OJ. My biggest concern with this trial would be that people put LE rather than the defendant on trial.

Agree clearly not out of "thin air" but the state sure has some work to do here. I guess the person he was talking to on the phone will be very important in terms of sealing his preoccupation but I don't so far see malice...do I think he is totally guilty...I do but if I were on that jury so far would not be impressed with state's case.

Agree. The State's presentation has been terrible up to this point.

IMO, even though I think LE handled the initial scene quite poorly, I believe LE's actions, and even suspicions, were at least within bounds at the scene, and during their initial interviews with Leanne and RH.

I also don't fault them for finding RH's extra marital activity hinky, given that his child ended up dead, and stranger things have happened.

As LE investigated though, and found no evidence to support their suspicions of intent, they had choices to make. I very much fault them for deciding to go forward with malice murder charges AFTER they knew how weak to non existent their case was, and for all the very dubious actions they seem to have taken to make their weak case look stronger.

I'm beginning to think that one of the reasons the DA didn't pursue the DP was a keen awareness a RH conviction on malice murder would never have survived the close scrutiny of a DP appellate process.

I agree with this. I don't condone how LE has conducted themselves, and I think that perjury charges should be considered. Defendants deserve the right to a fair trial. However, defendants also deserve to be judged on what they have or have not done.

 

[PaperDoll]

I agree with you but what I am looking at is whether the state is going their job to prove it to the jury...so far no....I am very concerned that many of us are not going to be happy with the verdict...unless things really turn around here.

I personally don't think the State needs to provide much in this case, again, this is MOO! They don't need to sell me because from the get go, and hopefully the jurors will see it MY WAY, lol.. but the evidence from the beginning that he forgot in less than a minute doesn't fly with me. If the State simply presented the trip to CFA and to work, is all I need to find him guilty. Sorry, this is why I wouldn't be a good juror because nothing the defense can do will change my mind. They can poke holes all day long and my heart, soul and mind goes back to the less than a minute he forgets.

 

[blue22]

the younger defense atty (don't know name offhand) is doing a masterful job of making Stoddard look absolutely bad and negligent. Stoddard is a veteran and as I listen to this testimony it is clear it was time for him to retire. This is painful and making me feel like I am back watching OJ.

It's so interesting how people see things differently. I thought the younger attorney (the one w/ the glasses, if that's who you mean) was grating to watch. He incessantly asked the same questions over and over, getting the same answers over and over. (IMO, of course.) I was thinking. "we GET IT, move on!!!" I thought the other two have done a much better job. That's what makes juries so interesting, IMO. We have no idea how they are seeing and interpreting any of this. For me, it makes watching a trial stressful/amazing. Watching all these pieces presented or exposed, being anxious, not caring for certain presentations, etc. I can't imagine being on this jury and how exhausting it must be!

Kind of off topic, sorry!

 

[Hope4More]

It's funny that you mentioned OJ. Since listening to the State's attorneys during juror questioning, I have feared that this case would be the next OJ. My biggest concern with this trial would be that people put LE rather than the defendant on trial.



Agree. The State's presentation has been terrible up to this point.



I agree with this. I don't condone how LE has conducted themselves, and I think that perjury charges should be considered. Defendants deserve the right to a fair trial. However, defendants also deserve to be judged on what they have or have not done.

Yes. And had the State just charged RH with 2nd degree child cruelty, even with a second charge of felony murder, I think they would have had a strong case.

IMO the State's dogged pursuit of malice murder and 1st degree child cruelty, charges unsupportable by the evidence, has warped every part of the process, including now at trial, where the credibility of most of their witnesses has been called into question.

The State's case may yet be salvaged because of just how unsympathetic this defendant is, a point imo they deliberately exploited by insisting upon the admission of bad character evidence, and the inclusion of the sex-minor charges in this trial.

But what they are risking, imo, is that this jury is not just persuaded that the State knowingly overcharged RH and that their witnesses have been untruthful, but that they're angered or disturbed enough by that to find reasonable doubt RH is guilty even of the lesser charge of 2nd degree cruelty.

 

[DaleTray]

So, no testimony on record to this assertion?

Lol, anyway, I'm sure the defense has people lined up to sing the praises of the child-killer.

I wouldn't expect anything less.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Please keep things in context. Since the death of Cooper I have seen not one person praise or approve of Ross. On the contrary, I think 100% considers Ross' actions despicable. I think if the media had stayed out of this and their reporting alleged facts, and all sleuther's judged on facts we hear testified to, we would have a total different story.
I think many of us can agree the media today runs rampant with biased and slanted stories (not facts) to receive more clicks. The media rant loose with purported Stoddard facts before we could hear actual facts in courtroom. I try my best to remind myself it's not the defenses position to prove Stoddard wrong, but rather, the states position to prove testimony to be fact. We have plenty of testimony yet to hear. In my opinion Ross was a neglectful dad and I would would vote for Ross to be elected president of the club Worst Husband of the year

 

[Hope4More]

I personally don't think the State needs to provide much in this case, again, this is MOO! They don't need to sell me because from the get go, and hopefully the jurors will see it MY WAY, lol.. but the evidence from the beginning that he forgot in less than a minute doesn't fly with me. If the State simply presented the trip to CFA and to work, is all I need to find him guilty. Sorry, this is why I wouldn't be a good juror because nothing the defense can do will change my mind. They can poke holes all day long and my heart, soul and mind goes back to the less than a minute he forgets.

Thing is, whether or not RH knew Cooper was in the car at that intersection comes down to the question of intent.

There obviously was no "forgetting" of Cooper at the intersection if RH was in the process of deliberately killing his son.

Conversely, if there was no intent to kill Cooper, then as difficult as it may be to believe or accept, Ross Harris was not aware that Cooper was in the car. Believe that there was no intent and the why's and how's of how that could be are immaterial, except for considering whether or not his lack of awareness meets the standard of criminal negligence.

Intent is at the heart of the question of forgetting, and it's precisely the question of intent where IMO the State is failing most miserably.

 

[THATchick1021]

Sorry in advance if this has been discussed. I followed this case closely when it first happened but admittedly have not been following the trial very well. I remember when it was first reported that the mother supposedly is on recording asking Ross if he said too much. I am wondering if this was another inaccurate media thing? Because if she did say that I cannot come up with an innocent reason for asking that?

Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk

 

[LaLaw2000]

Deleted

Self moderating (LOL) and blocking users that I don't want to argue with anymore

Same here!

 

[turaj]

It's so interesting how people see things differently. I thought the younger attorney (the one w/ the glasses, if that's who you mean) was grating to watch. He incessantly asked the same questions over and over, getting the same answers over and over. (IMO, of course.) I was thinking. "we GET IT, move on!!!" I thought the other two have done a much better job. That's what makes juries so interesting, IMO. We have no idea how they are seeing and interpreting any of this. For me, it makes watching a trial stressful/amazing. Watching all these pieces presented or exposed, being anxious, not caring for certain presentations, etc. I can't imagine being on this jury and how exhausting it must be!

Kind of off topic, sorry!

Oh believe me I find him "grating" as well...but I believe he is doing that style and repeating to make an impression on the jury...I think he made these IT guys look incompetent...probably way more incompetent that they are. They probably just followed their usual protocol without a concern about what could come of this and never thought they would have to testify to this detail.