Trial - Ross Harris #5

[Maisiebelle]

Another request for mistrial?

 

[DexterMorgan]

A carseat in the middle is so parents can easily keep a eye on their child even though it's harder to put them in and take them out of said carseat .

So how could he forget nor not see Cooper when he reversed parked.

I would love to hear witnesses that have driven with Ross to tell us if he looks over his shoulder when reversing.

I still do that while backing out of my driveway even if I know the coast is clear.

Or I atleast use the rear view mirror.

But you folks are right . His defense does have a good point about how some things are being made up or exaggerated by professional witnesses .

 

[popsicle]

The next court day will be HALLOWEEN, lol

Judging by her lawyer, LH might be on the stand Monday.

 

[Ms. Fletcher]

I believe he said they told him they wanted to look "in the East Cobb area", not just that they wanted to look in a good school district. IIRC he stated that he was the one that pointed them to certain school districts within the East Cobb area.

 

[JerseyGirl]

Jesse Evans rises to argue against the defense request that the judge reconsider her ruling on Murphy's testimony.

The jury comes back into the courtroom for brief re-cross by Evans. Lumpkin does an even briefer re-direct, and the witness is excused.

There is a brief conference at the bench. "We have accomplished what is available to be accomplished for today," Staley Clark says. "It is Friday after all."

She dismisses the jury and hears additional arguments about the motion to exclude testimony by Det. Shawn Murphy.

Lumpkin asks the judge to declare a mistrial, saying the prosecution has sought to shift the burden of proof from the state to the defense.

Prosecutor Evans strongly denies that the state understands which side has the burden of proof and hasn't engaged in "burden-shifting."

Staley Clark, apparently without ruling on the motion for a mistrial, declares the court in recess.

http://www.ajc.com/news/local/minute-minute-the-justin-ross-harris-trial-oct/hxhLRIbpQMr4wj0AW6dk5N/

 

[minor4th]

I think the judge made a mistake in completely restricting the defense like that. More later

 

[Bc007]

She ruled against them presenting the evidence.

Catching up- this is total BS! The state has already called him! He is on the whitness list. His name is on some of the warrants no? Why wouldn't they be able to discuss the warrants?!! Is this judge trying to get this reversed on appeal and make the county pay for a second trial becuase that's exactly where this is headed!! Unreal! At least the objections started in front of the jury and I hope the defense lets them have it on this topic in the closing!! Can they mention this and call attention to the fact they didn't want it heard? Anything goes in a closing right?

 

[arkansasmimi]

The next court day will be HALLOWEEN, lol

I said that this morning but after what just happened, it might really be pretty scary.
She has to give the Def their written Order from a denial this week. I wouldn't doubt they file some kind of Motion to go to a higher court. Can't remember what it called. Seems like that happened in the Geo Zimmerman case? Maybe for a different reason, but as someone else just posted, and the Defense argued, he is not getting a fair trial as is his Constitutional Rights. As is a Right to each U.S. citizen. No matter what your feelings are about RH, if you were in that chair, you would want and expect your Rights to be protected. It is going to be way worse if he gets convicted and it gets overturned on Appeal. JMHO

 

[arkansasmimi]

Catching up- this is total BS! The state has already called him! He is on the whitness list. His name is on some of the warrants no? Why wouldn't they be able to discuss the warrants?!! Is this judge trying to get this reversed on appeal and make the county pay for a second trial becuase that's exactly where this is headed!! Unreal! At least the objections started in front of the jury and I hope the defense lets them have it on this topic in the closing!! Can they mention this and call attention to the fact they didn't want it heard? Anything goes in a closing right?

NO, the STATE Didn't call him for the very reasons they don't want the Defense to be able to question him. HE Lied in SW's beginning the very first day! 6/18/14

And you know the jury isn't stupid, and although they aren't suppose to research what going one they have to wonder or try read between the lines. Once a bell has been rung can't be unrung kind of thing. JMHO

 

[GA_Peach]

NO, the STATE Didn't call him for the very reasons they don't want the Defense to be able to question him. HE Lied in SW's beginning the very first day! 6/18/14

And you know the jury isn't stupid, and although they aren't suppose to research what going one they have to wonder or try read between the lines. Once a bell has been rung can't be unrung kind of thing. JMHO

Even if the jury does find out about this through outside means, it should have been heard in court. Once again, I don't think that any of those inaccuracies would affect Ross's guilt or innocence, but that information should not be kept from the jury. When they go to deliberate, the jury should have the entire set of facts and decide for themselves whether those SW "mistakes" are relevant. My level of disgust and anger is off the charts. I really need to step away....

 

[arkansasmimi]

Jesse Evans rises to argue against the defense request that the judge reconsider her ruling on Murphy's testimony.

The jury comes back into the courtroom for brief re-cross by Evans. Lumpkin does an even briefer re-direct, and the witness is excused.

There is a brief conference at the bench. "We have accomplished what is available to be accomplished for today," Staley Clark says. "It is Friday after all."

She dismisses the jury and hears additional arguments about the motion to exclude testimony by Det. Shawn Murphy.

Lumpkin asks the judge to declare a mistrial, saying the prosecution has sought to shift the burden of proof from the state to the defense.

Prosecutor Evans strongly denies that the state understands which side has the burden of proof and hasn't engaged in "burden-shifting."

Staley Clark, apparently without ruling on the motion for a mistrial, declares the court in recess.

http://www.ajc.com/news/local/minute-minute-the-justin-ross-harris-trial-oct/hxhLRIbpQMr4wj0AW6dk5N/

So did she or didn't she rule. I understood she did, I seeing that she did on Twitter.

Cathy ‏@courtchatter 53m53 minutes ago
#RossHarris - Defense stating the incorrect info (now known) that was used to obtain many search warrants. #hotcardeath

LawNewz ‏@law_newz 16m16 minutes ago
Judge sides w/ the state and Det. Murphy is dismissed. Court is in recess until Monday morning. #hotcarcase #hotcardeath #JustinRossHarris

Cathy ‏@courtchatter 20m20 minutes ago
#RossHarris - Judge dismisses jury for the weekend. Defense moves for a mistrial, again. Judge denies. Court is adjourned.

 

[DexterMorgan]

This is why the state should have just tried him for negligence or involuntary manslaughter .

Because now they are doing too much reaching with some things .

Now the judge decides the sentence .

So they could have made a simple case and let the judge hand down the sentence if found guilty .

But they are truly drawing outside of the box for the murder charge and this isn't right for jurors to have to process some exaggerated/opionated lies.

Especially since negligence or involuntary manslaughter is much easier to prove . jmo

 

[Hope4More]

That's what I thought. I think that the evidence presented to this point proves beyond a reasonable that Ross is guilty of counts 6-8 and is guilty of felony murder. However, I am absolutely outraged by the ruling this afternoon. I feel highly confident that Ross's right to a fair trial has been compromised, and with the ruling this afternoon, I feel that he has been steamrolled. It's infuriating. I can only imagine how Ross and his attorneys are feeling right now.

Cooper deserves justice, and that can only happen with a fair trial.

ETA - I will be shocked if this case is not overturned on appeal.

IMO RH's due process rights have been violated from June 18, 2014 on through today, and the evidence of that is written in great big neon letters all over the State of Georgia.

But....though I'm not an attorney , I have read enough criminal case appeals from various states to appreciate just how difficult it is to win a state-level, non- DP appeal.

GA is a state , one of very few, that had just recently decided that it's ok to convict someone of murder even if that person had no intent whatsoever. I'm going to take a wild guess and say I doubt GA's appellate courts are going to be doing any special second guessing of Judge Mary Staley.

I'm thinking RH would have much better odds of winning an appeal in federal court, but realistically, doubt he could possibly afford even the down payment on that cost. Jmo

 

[gitana1]

What does it mean to be a hostile witness and how do they behave differently?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the judge allows you to deem a witness you call to be a "hostile" or adverse witness, then you can essentially ask them leading or cross exam style questions. It's a benefit for the defense if they are allowed to do that.

 

[ScotAng]

The crown of his head is higher than the back of his carseat. jmo

A shock of blonde hair on it's own should grab attention. Blonde on bright-red combination, even more so.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Quote Originally Posted by arkansasmimi View Post
NO, the STATE Didn't call him for the very reasons they don't want the Defense to be able to question him. HE Lied in SW's beginning the very first day! 6/18/14

And you know the jury isn't stupid, and although they aren't suppose to research what going one they have to wonder or try read between the lines. Once a bell has been rung can't be unrung kind of thing. JMHO

Even if the jury does find out about this through outside means, it should have been heard in court. Once again, I don't think that any of those inaccuracies would affect Ross's guilt or innocence, but that information should not be kept from the jury. When they go to deliberate, the jury should have the entire set of facts and decide for themselves whether those SW "mistakes" are relevant. My level of disgust and anger is off the charts. I really need to step away....

RBBM. Respectfully how in the heck are the jury suppose to decide on facts if they are not given all the FACTS of the case as known? These flipping SW are what got the information that the Defendant is charged with! False information! False infortation that was testified under oath as true, live streamed. archived, written about , saturated the local area so much that they had to move the trial 300 miles away to try get an unbias jury for a fair trial? And now can't use that false information fact? Giving a password on 6/18/14 to look into phone, then they used that information with FALSE information to get the iPhone 5 SW! That is BS. Sorry, not meaning towards you Peach personally.

ETA: I pray the jury does not do anything the Judge has ordered them not to. That would be very hard I would think. But still hope they heed to her orders.

 

[gitana1]

Catching up- this is total BS! The state has already called him! He is on the whitness list. His name is on some of the warrants no? Why wouldn't they be able to discuss the warrants?!! Is this judge trying to get this reversed on appeal and make the county pay for a second trial becuase that's exactly where this is headed!! Unreal! At least the objections started in front of the jury and I hope the defense lets them have it on this topic in the closing!! Can they mention this and call attention to the fact they didn't want it heard? Anything goes in a closing right?

Maybe because the warrants have to do with probable cause. Not guilt. They would be relevant to the probable cuase hearing not to trial. And the judge already issued rulings related to the discrepancies in the search warrants.

 

[Hope4More]

NO, the STATE Didn't call him for the very reasons they don't want the Defense to be able to question him. HE Lied in SW's beginning the very first day! 6/18/14

And you know the jury isn't stupid, and although they aren't suppose to research what going one they have to wonder or try read between the lines. Once a bell has been rung can't be unrung kind of thing. JMHO

The argument the defense is trying to present to this jury isn't about "mistakes" LE made on individual SW's, or a catalog of "mistakes" made in the collective sum of their dozens of warrants obtained.

Their argument is the mistakes on SW's reveal an absolute pattern (it's obvious, imo) of mistatements being used to obtain one batch, those misrepresentations being "corrected" on the next, only to be replaced by new misrepresentations, and so on til the end, ALL of the mistatements being inflammatory and made public, which ultimately poisoned the jury pool of Cobb County.

The "mistakes" were most relevant (imo, this the heart of the defense's case for reasonable doubt based on LE), because they in fact reveal the mindset of tbe case's lead investigator, and the fact of how quickly he assumed guilt, and how that slanted and prejudiced LE's investigation from beginning to end.

 

[gitana1]

RBBM. Respectfully how in the heck are the jury suppose to decide on facts if they are not given all the FACTS of the case as known? These flipping SW are what got the information that the Defendant is charged with! False information! False infortation that was testified under oath as true, live streamed. archived, written about , saturated the local area so much that they had to move the trial 300 miles away to try get an unbias jury for a fair trial? And now can't use that false information fact? Giving a password on 6/18/14 to look into phone, then they used that information with FALSE information to get the iPhone 5 SW! That is BS. Sorry, not meaning towards you Peach personally.

ETA: I pray the jury does not do anything the Judge has ordered them not to. That would be very hard I would think. But still hope they heed to her orders.

But the jury doesn't get to decide whether the search warrants were valid or legal or not. That was determined by the judge, pre-trial. The jury is not deciding the validity of the warrants. Which have to do with probable cause. Which was already ruled on. This is about guilt or innocence.

A better argument would be that if LE was dishonest in their warrants then their credibility as a whole should be in question, including everything they testified to. But I don't know what he defense argued and what the judge's reasoning was.

 

[Hope4More]

But the jury doesn't get to decide whether the search warrants were valid or legal or not. That was determined by the judge, pre-trial. The jury is not deciding the validity of the warrants. Which have to do with probable cause. Which was already ruled on. This is about guilt or innocence.

A better argument would be that if LE was dishonest in their warrants then their credibility as a whole should be in question, including everything they testified to. But I don't know what he defense argued and what the judge's reasoning was.

Gitana, I can't type it out yet again...post #235, a partial explanation from Staley's denial of the DT's Motion to Suppress (all evidence obtained from RH's computers and phones).

The argument today boiled down to the defense asserting Staley had improperly interpreted the rules on hearsay (has been used by the State to prevent the defense from impeaching state LE witnesses by referring to collaborations between witnesses and Stoddard, lead investigator) AND, that the due process rights of RH should be supreme.

The State: your rulings on hearsay suit us just fine and are correct, and we've already litigated the heck out of the SW mess, that's been resolved, and the SW have no direct bearing at this point to the matter at hand, this trial, guilt or innocence.