Trial - Ross Harris #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
A question for minor4th and others.

If I was any of those girls over age I would have rrquested to have *in camera* only, which would negate me being on television and my name being splashed in the media. did any of the gals request sich and denied? Is that, Minor... something that should have been considered and might have been considered in the state of Georgia.

Or is this something that would never have been approved and I have just been following too many other trials and misunderstanding this opportunity to not have name splashed all over?

It's not an option. Trials are public and you can't restrict access just because a witness (not a minor) might be uncomfortable with it.

In some trials, I've seen the judge allow a witness to not have their face on camera, but their names are not hidden and the audio is still available. Anyone could go and watch the trial or get a transcript of the proceedings.
 
Just heard they have plan to play Ross' entire police interview this afternoon.

This should be interesting.

They are setting up video equipment, so that makes sense.
 
I would expect my daughter to testify if she had continued in a sexual online relationship with an older man when she was a teen. There is still accountability with teens. it was not like she was 8 yrs old or 12 yrs old. 16 yr olds know what is what. imo


Having been a very wild 16 year old (no, I don't mean sexually), I can assure you not all 16 year olds have the faintest notion of what's what, much less of consequences. For example, you would not have been the slightest bit safe on the roads I drove my car, one I worked for and paid for by myself, because going as fast as I could on windy mountain roads was a blast, and if I ever thought about it all, I'm sure I thought injury and death is what happened to old people. ;)

ETA. I do think it's asinine that it's legal to have sex with a 16 year old in GA, but illegal to send a 16 year old sexual pics.
 
Having been a very wild 16 year old (no, I don't mean sexually), I can assure you not all 16 year olds have the faintest notion of what's what, much less of consequences. For example, you would not have been the slightest bit safe on the roads I drove my car, one I worked for and paid for by myself, because going as fast as I could on windy mountain roads was a blast, and if I ever thought about it all, I'm sure I thought injury and death is what happened to old people. ;)

But if you had gotten in an accident, you would have been expected to go to court and testify if there was a court case connected to it.

The victim of Ross's crime has to testify to the case to get him convicted as charged. That is how it works. And I think it is a good thing because she was old enough to take some accountability for her part in the ongoing relationship. She was 16, not 11. Plenty old enough for some common sense, imo.
 
OK, ran to Wendys, ate, caught up here... time to go back to courtroom .. hopefully soon lol Got lots of leaves to rake this weekend lol
 
Ouch.

The reason why their sexting is considered a crime is she , as a minor, is presumed to not yet be capable of the sound judgement one expects of adults. RH committed a crime in sexting with her. She committed no crime greater than being a teenager.

I think a 16 yr old is old enough to be accountable. If she killed someone, she'd be tried as an adult.
MOO
 
Will we find out the amounts of text/messages this last teen had with JH on June 18th?
 
I think a 16 yr old is old enough to be accountable. If she killed someone, she'd be tried as an adult.
MOO

Sad that I have to point this out...

The (former?) minor is NOT on trial, Ross Harris is on trial.
 
I think a 16 yr old is old enough to be accountable. If she killed someone, she'd be tried as an adult.
MOO

Agree. They also charge minors for child *advertiser censored* if they deliberately send naked photos via text.

Especially if they are old enough to know.
 
Sad that I have to point this out...

The (former?) minor is NOT on trial, Ross Harris is on trial.

Of course she is not on trial. But there is a trial and she is the key witness because the charges are about his actions towards her.
 
[video=youtube;4pwppsCpPpw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pwppsCpPpw[/video]
 
Cathy ‏@courtchatter 3m3 minutes ago

#RossHarris - The jury is not in the courtroom. Det. Stoddard is being proffered.
 
Of course she is not on trial. But there is a trial and she is the key witness because the charges are about his actions towards her.

Her parents should be on trial as well. Jmo.

There daughter was involved with grown Ross due to her parents negligence. Jmo
 
Of course she is not on trial. But there is a trial and she is the key witness because the charges are about his actions towards her.

Yes, obviously. But a this "held accountable" talk regarding him or her is ridiculous. It has nothing to do with what ROSS did or did not do COOPER.
 
:thinking: Stoddard: he has spent years on helicopter and C130's and he does not hear so well.
 
Prosecutor says he would like to provide a written transcript of the interview with Harris. Defense attorney Maddox Kilgore objects to the written transcript, arguing that the video can be heard. Stoddard says the written transcript says "inaudible" when the audio is unclear.

Prosecutor says officers' names have been redacted. Judge agrees to allow the written transcript.
 
RH sitting in the interview room. Raises hands to the ceiling and says "what was I thinking"
 
Here is the live, non-buffering link on youtube:

[video=youtube;4pwppsCpPpw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pwppsCpPpw[/video]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
222
Guests online
2,689
Total visitors
2,911

Forum statistics

Threads
599,698
Messages
18,098,237
Members
230,901
Latest member
IamNobody
Back
Top