Trial - Ross Harris #3

[arkansasmimi]

If the State doesn't call Murphy, I bet lunch that the Defense does!!!

After break talk about RH and the visit to car. LOL And I got feeling that Kilgore Cross may continue thru into tomorrow

 

[Bc007]

So far the defense has pointed out there were many people LE didn't bother to track down and interview. Many could have shed some light on the morning of the 18th. Investigators could have run plates, they could have waited and canvases the lot each morning. The woman especially. She was super close to the back of the car facing Cooper!

Stoddard seems unapologetic that he jumped the gun on the searches and the terms he claimed were looked up. No way to confuse words that were non existent. He pulled them from thin air once the knew the video link was confirmed to be in the internet history. That is partially what helped to charge and hold Ross.

 

[Hope4More]

I think that at the beginning, they were mistaken about some of the evidence. They had to 'eat it' and correct some of their early claims and accusations. I agree that he was a bit gung-ho and some of it was incorrect.

But I think he strongly believed that Ross killed his son and is trying to get justice for him.

I think that's so. But, there is no excuse for an officer sworn to uphold the law and protect the rights of the accused to have conducted himself the way he has. He's lied, and perjured himself in court. There's no excuse for that, imo. He disgraces LE. Not to mention, what justice for Cooper is it if his father is convicted for malice murder and that's a crime he did not commit?

 

[Bc007]

I think the texting matters because he was texting DURING THE TIME he allegedly forgot about the child. Instead of caring for his child, he was texting/sexting and that seems to be negligence, imo.

Yes except for texting isn't a crime.

 

[Jj1075]

Wow what was Kilgores point there? Seems He was trying to "go for the jugular" with listings every search warrant and seemed torally thrown off by Stoddards answer that he didn't sit next to other detectives and know about every search warrant as it happened.
What do you all think his point was going to be if he responded yes?

 

[Bc007]

Wow what was Kilgores point there? Seems He was trying to "go for the jugular" with listings every search warrant and seemed torally thrown off by Stoddards answer that he didn't sit next to other detectives and know about every search warrant as it happened.
What do you all think his point was going to be if he responded yes?

That he didn't have control over the investigation he was task to oversee. That he didn't ask for supporting documents or care to research or cross check facts before testifying under oath multiple times.

 

[JerseyGirl]

Oops, just prior to recess, here is additional testimony:

“You worked closely hand-in-hand on this case didn’t you?” Kilgore said. Yes, Stoddard replied.

They sat close to each other in the office. Do you have the ability to apply for a search warrant over the internet? Kilgore asked. Is your desk in close proximity to that area?

“It was a few rows away,” Stoddard said.

Stoddard said he could not hear or see people who were applying for search warrant.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Quote Originally Posted by JerseyGirl View Post
getting back to the testimony:

Harris lives several miles away from Little Apron, Kilgore said, significantly farther than Chick-fil-A to the daycare.

Cooper would usually either eat at home or at the daycare.

Kilgore is now discussing the fact that Harris was considering going on a family cruise with his wife, Cooper and other family members.

On June 9, 2014, there is a group text discussing the cruise. Harris initiated the messaging saying: “Let’s talk about a cruise. I want this to happen bad.”

Harris’ brother responds, okay. And Harris says he has a friend who is a travel agent who could see what kind of deals they could get.

BBM

I can't understand why Kilgore would want to make points of that. Seems like something the prosecution can pounce on.

Stoddard: I don't remember specifically how often where Cooper would eat (paraphrasing last words)

Nothing the prosecution can pounce on there.

Plus Kilgore didn't even drive the route from RH home to CF. Google it to get the milage. Which we know from watching Stoddards go pro (and the jury is not local to the area either) we have no idea how long. I know personally places that Google maps show times that may show 15 min but only in real life maybe 5. JMHO

 

[FinallyRegistered]

Wow what was Kilgores point there? Seems He was trying to "go for the jugular" with listings every search warrant and seemed torally thrown off by Stoddards answer that he didn't sit next to other detectives and know about every search warrant as it happened.
What do you all think his point was going to be if he responded yes?

The point probably would've been that his client was denied bond and was charged on false search warrants. Stoddard seems to have figured out that was the path and got whiny.

(I miss Flores.)

 

[Inthedetails]

Yes except for texting isn't a crime.

1. It's a crime if it's sexting with a minor, which he has done

2. Distractions do not need to be a crime to be distracting enough to be negligent. If I'm surfing the net while my toddler takes a bath and drowns, that negligence even though surfing the net is not a crime. (My kids are adults - they are safe, btw!)

jmo

 

[Hope4More]

Wow what was Kilgores point there? Seems He was trying to "go for the jugular" with listings every search warrant and seemed torally thrown off by Stoddards answer that he didn't sit next to other detectives and know about every search warrant as it happened.
What do you all think his point was going to be if he responded yes?

Stoddard was the lead investigator and the detective who interviewed RH on the 18th. He absolutely knew what was being written on those search warrants, because he was the only one who could have provided the info to Murphy, who wrote all 8 of them.

He's basically throwing Murphy under a bus. Charming fellow.

 

[justkk]

only the drive-through. On June 18th was the first time Harris took Cooper inside Chik-Fil-A

I don't think that it was the first time he took him inside CFA. BUT,
Many have questioned "why" on a day when RH was already late to work AND was planning to leave early he would choose to take Cooper inside for their daddy/son time. (Which is a joke because he spent that time messaging women).
I think this was part of his "I was out of my usual routine" excuse/plan as to why he left Cooper.

One of the reasons I believe this is that on the video between LH and RH he said "I decided to take him to breakfast that day - It was the worst mistake of my life" (or something to that effect).
So he had already thought about this being a good "reason" why he left him in the car, he is setting the stage for how he could have forgotten. IMO

It just seems to be too much of a coincidence that he went in "that" day when he was already late AND planning to leave early...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bc007]

Some of the jurors that were able to be rehab'd so they could serve on the jury after saying they could set aside their previous feelings of guilt based on the "facts" the media reported, are the ones the state now needs to worry the most about. They have pretty much discredited all of it as false with exception to the cheating, sexting and that the little boy may or may not have been left in the car on accident. IMO jurors were most likely were hyper sensitive to anything to do with the info they had based their opinion on prior to trial so the fact some flat or never took place was not lost on them. Human nature ...

 

[katydid23]

Katy, with all due respect, he's being caught on multiple lies, or absolute best case, gross negligence on his part as lead detective. Really.

If nothing else registers with this jury about this, I think they will be very much aware that what they heard about those searches was untrue, and that Stoddard lied about them, under oath.

The searches are not the only things that point to a possibility of a guilty verdict. And he did show that original they were mistaken when they thought he made the searches himself. So I am not sure it was an outright lie on his part.

 

[arkansasmimi]

In July 2014, Stoddard testified that Harris viewed the video twice. Yes, the detective said.

“That was sworn testimony under oath and yesterday you testified a little bit differently,” Kilgore said.

Yesterday, Stoddard said he did not know if Harris had watched the whole video one or times. Stoddard said he had not read the full report from an expert who looked at Harris’ searches.

“If you read it on the screen, it says it was accessed twice. We didn’t know what that meant,” Stoddard said.

He could not have viewed that five or six minute video twice, Kilgore said, because the two searches were 1 second apart.

Stoddard testified that he had only met with the expert 1 time and had not read his final report so doesn't know what it says. Would have to ask the expert...

Kilgore: We will ask the expert...

:silly:

 

[FinallyRegistered]

Some of the jurors that were able to be rehab'd so they could serve on the jury after saying they could set aside their previous feelings of guilt based on the "facts" the media reported, are the ones the state now needs to worry the most about. They have pretty much discredited all of it as false with exception to the cheating, sexting and that the little boy may or may not have been left in the car on accident. IMO jurors were most likely were hyper sensitive to anything to do with the info they had based their opinion on prior to trial so the fact some flat or never took place was not lost on them. Human nature ...

Wow, you are so right.

 

[Bc007]

1. It's a crime if it's sexting with a minor, which he has done

2. Distractions do not need to be a crime to be distracting enough to be negligent. If I'm surfing the net while my toddler takes a bath and drowns, that negligence even though surfing the net is not a crime. (My kids are adults - they are safe, btw!)

jmo

My kids are safe as well thank you. I'm simply trying to be objective and not assume everyone on the jury assumes they were, are currently are, the perfect parent who could never make a careless mistake. Jurors bring their history and life experience in with them like it or not.

Has done it and is being charged for it as he should be. It is still in dispute ( for me) if it has anything to do with the potential to have forgotten his child was in the car.

 

[arkansasmimi]

The searches are not the only things that point to a possibility of a guilty verdict. And he did show that original they were mistaken when they thought he made the searches himself. So I am not sure it was an outright lie on his part.

Katydid but everything they got comes from those searches? Other than Cooper being in the car, which RH has never denied.

 

[arkansasmimi]

PhilHollowayEsq: If Harris is standing there - the jury would see him in relation to the jury and would be able to see that he should be able to see into it

 

[katydid23]

Yes except for texting isn't a crime.

It is a crime to send pictures of your junk to a teen girl. And he did that while his baby was frying to death in the car.