TRIAL - Ross Harris #1

[DaleTray]

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.

I couldn't agree more. I have seen it a few times where the state overcharges and ultimately the defendant is underconvicted

 

[minor4th]

I'm rewatching some of the testimony that I didn't get to watch closely at the time.

It's really interesting that every witness who describes a smell in the car - they are all really careful to avoid saying it smelled like decomposition. But that is what they are implying! (it smelled like "death"; diaper, sweat and "death")

I think they are trying to lead the jury to believe there was a strong decomposition odor without actually saying it. Probably because they know the defense will have experts to testify that there wouldn't be a smell of decomposition under those circumstances.

I am really disturbed by the way the prosecution and police are presenting this case. It seems Ike they are straight up trying to deceive the jury.

 

[turaj]

I'm rewatching some of the testimony that I didn't get to watch closely at the time.

It's really interesting that every witness who describes a smell in the car - they are all really careful to avoid saying it smelled like decomposition. But that is what they are implying! (it smelled like "death"; diaper, sweat and "death")

I think they are trying to lead the jury to believe there was a strong decomposition odor without actually saying it. Probably because they know the defense will have experts to testify that there wouldn't be a smell of decomposition under those circumstances.

I am really disturbed by the way the prosecution and police are presenting this case. It seems Ike they are straight up trying to deceive the jury.

I expected much more from the state.

 

[LaLaw2000]

When LE has someone who is suspected of having committed a murder, it is SOP to investigate their lives. I do not get where LE is being criticized or where the prosecutor is being criticized for putting forth witnesses and testimony pertaining to RH's character. It paints a picture of WHO RH really is. Point out a trial to me where the accused/charged does not have his or her character scrutinized!

This is in reference those who believe the Sexting and visits to a prostitute has nothing to do with the murder. I goes to the character of who RH is.

* I am one who thinks RH is guilty of planning and carrying out murder of this poor baby.

JMO

 

[Hope4More]

As an aside, about the possible relevance to this trial of RH sexting with a minor.

IIRC, in one pretrial hearing or another the State asserted that RH had searched for information on what laws he was breaking by sexting her, and the penalties for being convicted on those charges. IMO the search he allegedly did on "surviving in prison" was related to the sexting.


If all the above is true, then RH continued sexting with a minor after he was fully aware that he could well end up in prison if caught. And, he not only continued sexting with her, but became more and more bold about it, including sending a photo of his genitals and requesting that she send him an explicit photo of herself.

And, though he had the IT expertise to conceal this activity if he chose, he did not, and neither did he attempt to erase this activity after the fact.

What does that say about RH, if anything, that is relevant to the charges against him about harming Cooper?

 

[just the facts pls]

Deleted

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

I debated about how or if I should respond to this, but I'll just put it this way:

PaperDoll has done an excellent job showing why arguing this case is unnecessary. The facts are undeniable: JRH could remember Cooper was in the car after a 15-20min car ride to Chik-Fil-A, but somehow "forgot" about Cooper only thirty seconds to two minutes after leaving Chik-Fil-A. Not only is this implausible, JRH was the one responsible for taking Cooper to day care 19 out of the past 25 days. You do not "forget" your child in two minutes, and not after taking them to day care for almost every day.

The only question left to ask is, why? This is where the sexting and double life comes in. It is absolutely relevant when JRH is admitting he doesn't have a conscience and that he loves his son and all "but we all need escapes." Any reasonable person would deduce that he wanted to press the reset button on his life. JRH was a thirty four year old man who up until a few years ago, was used to being free to live his own life and do whatever he wanted. Cooper was a growing child whose demand would only increase as he got older. Every parent knows this.

It's not that hard to figure out why he is on malice murder charges, and why he is probably guilty.

 

[LaLaw2000]

just the facts pls, I would thank you 100 times if the button would let me! Excellent post, IMO!

 

[blue22]

I'm rewatching some of the testimony that I didn't get to watch closely at the time.

It's really interesting that every witness who describes a smell in the car - they are all really careful to avoid saying it smelled like decomposition. But that is what they are implying! (it smelled like "death"; diaper, sweat and "death")

I think they are trying to lead the jury to believe there was a strong decomposition odor without actually saying it. Probably because they know the defense will have experts to testify that there wouldn't be a smell of decomposition under those circumstances.

I am really disturbed by the way the prosecution and police are presenting this case. It seems Ike they are straight up trying to deceive the jury.

It's entirely possible that they didn't smell decomposition, and that's why they are saying they didn't. I don't think in this case its fair to assume they are being "really careful to avoid." Do you want them to say they smelled something they didn't? I have used the "smells like death" comment when describing a mouse that died in an air vent at work. It was a smell unlike anything I've smelled, but describing it as "decomposition" would have never crossed my mind.

** I am NOT comparing Cooper to a mouse.

 

[matou]

Wouldn't the windows be steamed up from Cooper's body heat, crying, etc?

 

[matou]

I think the inside of the car would have been wet, including Ross's car seat. Unless it dried out when he opened the door at lunch to put the light bulbs in. Cooper was soaked. His heat would have filled the car, along with his moisture, the moisture of the hot air itself, from his screaming, crying, breath, etc.

Did he often leave work early, I wonder. Or was it only on that day?

 

[yupikgirl]

just the facts pls, I would thank you 100 times if the button would let me! Excellent post, IMO!

Agreed!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yupikgirl]

I smell dead people weekly at work (unfortunately)- and I don't use the word decomposition.

IMO- I would use the word when a body has been dead a long time (24 hours). Now that said I don't know the difference in smell between a body that has been dead for 4-6 hours and a body that has been dead long enough to decompose. I can imagine it's much worse , but I don't actually know. Just as I can imagine that the smell in that car was stronger than the smell on my unit which is air conditioned and well ventilated.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hope4More]

When LE has someone who is suspected of having committed a murder, it is SOP to investigate their lives. I do not get where LE is being criticized or where the prosecutor is being criticized for putting forth witnesses and testimony pertaining to RH's character. It paints a picture of WHO RH really is. Point out a trial to me where the accused/charged does not have his or her character scrutinized!

This is in reference those who believe the Sexting and visits to a prostitute has nothing to do with the murder. I goes to the character of who RH is.

* I am one who thinks RH is guilty of planning and carrying out murder of this poor baby.

JMO

The easiest way to find trials in which the defendant's "character" as such was permitted to be scrutinized is to search for verdicts that were overturned on appeal for abuse of judicial discretion on that issue.

Character evidence as such is impermissable, unless it has direct bearing on the alleged crimes being prosecuted at trial.

The obvious reason for that is juries are only to consider evidence relating to the charges brought to trial, the concern being extraneous bad character evidence will improperly "inflame the passions" of a jury.

RH paying prostitutes for sex imo has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not he premeditated the murder of his son, or if he is criminally negligent for the accidental death of his son.

I don't think Staley should have allowed in evidence of his sexting with a minor, because imo the prejudicial impact of that evidence far outweighs any probative value it may have, but allowing in the testimony of prostitutes goes far beyond even that, imo, into a solid issue for appeal.

 

[Hope4More]

Fwiw, several of the original search warrants executed on June 18, 2014 state specifically that RH attempted to do CPR on Cooper, and only ceased doing so when someone else took over.

When did that story begin changing?

 

[Safeguard]

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

Thank you Doghairrules for your condolence, (and thank you GA_peach also). He was only 44 and such a sharp, witty, hilariously funny man. I was in such complete denial that he could die from his illness! Even at the traditional Irish Catholic service, I just could not equate the body being presented, as having housed such a lovely man, just days ago...

I am sorry you lost your Dad, so unexpectedly too! Happy that that you still have your Brother. Your Mom is right about the normalcy of life, feeling almost obscene somehow... People shopping for cookies, or hotdogs... strangers exchanging polite small talk while pleasant music plays softly in the backround...when there has been such a huge rift in our lives, the word just goes on around us, and we can feel more alone at those times.

More on topic; I recall, as a child, there was this big campaign, with ads on TV and just everywhere, urging folks to be sure to remove the doors off of old refrigerators before discarding them, as kids were climbing inside, and becoming trapped and suffocating. I also recall the trunk of cars being another area where curious children were meeting the same fate, while playing Hide-n-Go Seek...

What I don't remember are Murder charges. Not for Hot Car deaths, or any of the other accidental deaths that could/would be considered criminal today. These tragedies were generally considered horrible accidents, for which the parents would pay a life sentence in pain and remorse. There was sympathy for the loss of their child. Perhaps that was not the correct response in some cases, but I feel we have gone to the other extreme these days.

Now we want not only charges filed, but a public lynching. We want cameras in the court rooms so we can witness the slightest affliction exhibited by those we feel we have every right to judge.

I suppose it could be said that we have become more intolerant, of things that never should have been tollorated, but it feels like we have also become a crueler, more judgemental and bloodthirsty society...

In this case, the thing I am hearing being used as *proof* of premeditated murder, in some people's minds, is the short amount of time RH had to *forget* Cooper. But that is exactly how the mind often works when you forget something...You forget for a second...and because he pulled into his work, in that small time frame I feel he could have acted like he did any other day, after dropping off cooper. So yes. I do think he could have auto piloted in that short time frame, if it had been a considerably longer drive, I would find that more troubling tuthfully. JMO.

 

[THATchick1021]

I am sorry to keep butting in but I am torn. On one hand my ex was in IT and he was VERY good at hiding infidelity in his phone so why is Ross leaving it out in the open for the investigation to find? But on the other, and some of the reason I lean toward guilty, is the comments by himself and his wife. "Malicious intent", "Did you say too much?". Not noticing ANY smell??? Decomp aside. A dirty diaper in a hot car??? That would stink to high heaven. I don't know what to think but there needs to be severe punishment. And like, I believe GA Peach said, he can be found guilty of felony murder if not premeditated. I have a 1 year old, 3 year old, and a 4 year old. I personally can't wrap my head around "forgetting" your child especially in that time frame, but even if he did "forget" there needs to be an example set. Moo.

Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk

 

[THATchick1021]

I don't think Ross was expecting anything but sympathy and compassion. Never expecting his phones/computers to be searched. I personally think he did it on purpose moo. I think mom knew. I could be wrong but I can't get past his and Leannes comments.
I REALLY REALLY want to be wrong.
Did they test paternity by any chance?

Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk

 

[NCTeacher]

The easiest way to find trials in which the defendant's "character" as such was permitted to be scrutinized is to search for verdicts that were overturned on appeal for abuse of judicial discretion on that issue.

Character evidence as such is impermissable, unless it has direct bearing on the alleged crimes being prosecuted at trial.

The obvious reason for that is juries are only to consider evidence relating to the charges brought to trial, the concern being extraneous bad character evidence will improperly "inflame the passions" of a jury.

RH paying prostitutes for sex imo has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not he premeditated the murder of his son, or if he is criminally negligent for the accidental death of his son.

I don't think Staley should have allowed in evidence of his sexting with a minor, because imo the prejudicial impact of that evidence far outweighs any probative value it may have, but allowing in the testimony of prostitutes goes far beyond even that, imo, into a solid issue for appeal.

No. No and no again. His behavior and all the sexually-based testimony and evidence is to MOTIVE.

Example of this line of thinking:
Question: Mr. Attorney, why do you think JRH killed his son?
Answer: He wanted his burdensome toddler out of his life so he could freely pursue a sexually permissive one.
Question: Why the heck do you think that?

That second question is being answered as we speak.

 

[THATchick1021]

Oh and 22months is an important time to CONTINUE taking daily pictures. They grow so fast at this stage.
RIP Coop. Lighting a candle for our little guy. Either way, he didn't deserve this.

Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk

 

[justkk]

I don't think Ross was expecting anything but sympathy and compassion. Never expecting his phones/computers to be searched. I personally think he did it on purpose moo. I think mom knew. I could be wrong but I can't get past his and Leannes comments.
I REALLY REALLY want to be wrong.
Did they test paternity by any chance?

Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk

I think it was intentional for many reasons but I too am very disturbed by the comments "no malicious intent" and "did you say too much". There is just not much to explain these away.

We can all discuss and disagree on whether one could forget in 1 minute or whether we look behind us when backing up etc... But those comments just really stick out.
Also, Leanne not going to see her child upon learning of his death and instead wanting to see RH - huh? I just can't wrap my head around that one either.
JMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk