Trial - Ross Harris #5

[PaperDoll]

Trying to catch up today :crazy: Ok, so, not sure where we are at with the trial I will have to go to You Tube to check; in the meantime, I personally think the issue with the car seat being a few inches off in all directions is petty to me. I drive a SUV bigger than what Ross drove. I'm 5'4 - 5'5 and weight 120 and I tell ya, if I had a car seat in place the way Ross had Coopers, I would have NOTICED Cooper in the seat. Ross is 6'2 or so and weights more than I which tells me he would have to have his seat further back than I would, so if I could see a toddler in a car seat in my bigger SUV than Ross, than I KNOW he saw Cooper. There is just no way, IMO, that he couldn't see him. A few inches here and there makes no difference to me. I put things on my passengers seat and I have to look in that direction to get them and my vision can see parts of the back. Ross knew Cooper was in that car seat, MOO!!!!!!!!

 

[LyndyLoo]

So...Poor Ross was afflicted with his Sexual addiction and sexting obsessions and maybe his wifey wasn't quite so sexual as much as he wanted..So he develops a 2nd life style...OF course he may be depressed for just that alone..but also not getting a job or job promotion that would increase his pay..may too load onto that as well.. So he loses sleep because of his obsessiveness... WHY didn't defense seek "Psychological Testing"?? Nope..because he was an "Obsessive Compulsive" functional male..quite able to know RIGHT from WRONG so it wouldn't have helped him!

How about an alcoholic who due to his addiction, cannot abide by the mores of society ..and puts his child at risk...Do DUI's resulting in death get a break?? :Just an accident excuse...sounds more like defenders of Ross want to claim the "Twinkie" excuse..or how about the "Affluenza" excuse after killing multiple people driving under the influence. Justice sometimes boggles my mind :scared:

 

[arkansasmimi]

Let me start by saying this - the jury should know all the FACTS of the case. 100% agreement on that.

With respect to the SW, I need to dig deeper into the issue. Admittedly, it has been a while since I have read the SWs so I am not familiar with each discrepancy. Here are my general thoughts. If the SW accurately stated that the car seat straps were in the middle position versus the lowest setting, would that have really affected whether or not there was probable cause? I don't think so. Likewise, if Detective Stoddard stated that JRH simply returned to his car at lunch rather than stating that JRH placed his head into the frame of the car, would that have affected the existence of probable cause? I am not convinced. While I don't condone LE's actions and believe that they should be held accountable, I think that a case could be made that probable cause existed and was demonstrated even if those "misstatements" were thrown out. I would need to see each SW discrepancy to decide if that is actually the case, and right now, I am too ignorant on the matter to make an educated determination.

Having said all of that, those "misstatements" are part of this case and part of the investigation, and the State should be accountable for them. The jury has a right to know about each inconsistency and decide for themselves if it impacted the case. There is no excuse to hide this from the jury, and frankly, with this afternoon's ruling, I believe that this "trial" has become a farce. If the DT cannot make arguments to cast reasonable doubt on the State's claims or cannot attempt to impeach witnesses, it's nothing more than a circus. I believe that JRH should be locked up for years, but I also will adamantly defend his right to a fair trial. It's disgusting what is happening.

*****
I agree with the part in bold. The jury should be privy to the inconsistencies in the SW for exactly the reason you just mentioned. Do those inconsistencies affect any witness's credibility, and do those inconsistencies call into question the validity of the entire investigation? That sloppy work should not be allowed to be swept under the rug.

RBSBM

Start at the first. It broke on the news, it was a horrible tragic thing that happen to this sweet boy. Emotion grabber Headline news. All the media that happened then... Fast forward to the PC Hearing that at was live streamed. I watched the PC Hearing and the ones after that. I had not read articles prior. But after watching the live streamed hearings, that is why so many people have hate for this man. Yes he did disgusting things online with people already online looking for the same thing he was and they hooked up. Same with the prostitute. What she did was against the law and was caught in a sting.. she not charged with anything and yet she was on probation, had pot, and took the $ from a cop.

Everyone HATES this Defendant, the media has spread so many false things ... which not just the MSM doing their normal twist of information, but the LEO who are doing the investigation and the State who are prosecuting it. Then they go to start trial and after a hard battle yet won, get the Judge to agree on a change of venue. So now have the trial going and State witness upon witness testimony is impeached! Flipping Supervisors flap out not telling truths writing reports a year later, LEO doing the same. Lead Det doesn't recall anything, evidence tampered with. Over half a dozen women paraded through and people are angry with the DEFENSE for humiliating them. (not my words). Yet no evidence from anyone that RH didn't love his son very much. None of those ladies testified to that. Even the prostitute said that. Everything that was obtained was tainted and now the public finds out that these inflammatory things said were not factual.

RH never has said he didn't leave his child in his car. Defense is not claiming that. What has everyone so riled up comes from the beginning when live stream hearings with lies was spread from sea to shining sea. The disgust from all the messages on chats, the State has used to try to say that is why RH murdered his son. Its all twisted and wrong. I do not think the sexting has a dang thing to do with RH leaving that child in the car. (nothing through the day, he had already left him their that morning) I have formed my opening from watching the trial. I still trying to keep an open mind.. its real hard now. But I will try. Maybe the State has a big gotcha at Rebuttal.

JMHO But sadly, all the reasons people hate this man is because of the flipping investigation and lies in the beginning. Its because of reading posts here I say that and believe it. I don't know the man anymore than anyone else posting here. I don't try to justify his sexting, I personally think disgusting but there are people who do it and it was legal (other than the minors-yet again they only know about them from the false statements to get the search warrant to begin with). Someone on other thread called this a witch hunt. I think now that that is appropriate description of what it has been. From testimony and evidence presented in this trial/and out of jury presence. Unbelievable.

 

[Hope4More]

Yeah. I really can't say either. It will depend on the jury. But I wouldn't say it would be texting per se that is the proximate cause, but obsessive texting (possibly while exhausted from obsessive texting), while driving, caring for and transporting an extremely vulnerable child, who is helpless and trapped in a car seat with no means of fending for himself.

But is that a possible cause of a foreseeable risk of death? I don't know. I do know that there will be jurors who can't even accept any parent accidentally leaving a child in a car, so they might find that even if logically, it isn't really a foreseeable risk. I mean this is the era where any small accident involving a kid is considered a result of "negligence" on the part of the parents, because it is prima facie evidence that the parents weren't hovering sufficiently enough. Geez, even parents of kids who don't get hurt at all, but are left alone or allowed to play outside without an adult are subject to CPS removal of their kids, charges, etc.

So I venture to guess there will be extreme outrage on the part of many jurors at the thought that Cooper was left in that car, even if there is zero showing of recklessness, foreseeability, malice, intent, etc.

I would hope jurors who couldn't accept any parent accidentally leaving a child in a car told the truth in voir dire, and that they were promptly dismissed.

 

[PaperDoll]

So...Poor Ross was afflicted with his Sexual addiction and sexting obsessions and maybe his wifey wasn't quite so sexual as much as he wanted..So he develops a 2nd life style...OF course he may be depressed for just that alone..but also not getting a job or job promotion that would increase his pay..may too load onto that as well.. So he loses sleep because of his obsessiveness... WHY didn't defense seek "Psychological Testing"?? Nope..because he was an "Obsessive Compulsive" functional male..quite able to know RIGHT from WRONG so it wouldn't have helped him!

How about an alcoholic who due to his addiction, cannot abide by the mores of society ..and puts his child at risk...Do DUI's resulting in death get a break?? :Just an accident excuse...sounds more like defenders of Ross want to claim the "Twinkie" excuse..or how about the "Affluenza" excuse after killing multiple people driving under the influence. Justice sometimes boggles my mind :scared:

Even if his wife gave him tons of sex, Ross loved the thrill of having it was a stranger. Wife can't fill that need.. This is Ross' ego that needs filled and IMO nothing more..

 

[GA_Peach]

OK, I have calmed down a bit from this afternoon's ruling regarding the inadmissibility of the SW discrepancies.:blushing: Would any of the attorneys here be willing to explain the legal aspect of this afternoon's ruling? Detectives Stoddard and Murphy made and/or wrote misstatements under oath. However, those statements did not occur during the trial component of this case but rather in the application of the SWs and in the PC hearing. While I believe there will be vastly different opinions on whether or not those "misstatements" are material, they are "misstatements" nonetheless. I find it highly problematic that the jury is not able to hear the details of this.

Just to be clear, my concern is not whether or not the SWs were valid (there is a separate process to evaluate that). I believe that the jury should be able to hear this information in order to decide if 1) any of the witnesses should be impeached or 2) there was an overriding bias in conducting the investigation. However, it sounds like the SWs will not be admissible because the State did not enter them into evidence. Furthermore, the DT could not cross Detective Stoddard about this because he did not write the SW (hearsay), and they cannot question Detective Murphy because he was not the original source of the information that went in the SW (more hearsay). It seems extremely unfair to the defendant that his DT cannot introduce the SWs into evidence so that any inconsistencies can be presented to the jury. What am I missing?

Is the overriding legal thought that since the jury was never exposed to the inaccuracies in the first place that there is no need to impeach any witnesses or rectify the information? I admit that I am really struggling with this ruling.

As a side note, I am a strong proponent and supporter of LE. I do believe that LE has made some missteps along the way in this case, but I don't think that the charges against Ross are completely fabricated. For starters, Ross admitted that he was responsible for Cooper's death. I just wish that the jury was allowed to see everything in this case so that they could make an informed decision about Ross's guilt. At the end of the day, Ross's actions should be evaluated against the evidence, and I don't want external factors interfering with the jury's ability to do that. Cooper deserves justice.

 

[cavvy]

You have just put into words my thoughts exactly. Thank you.

 

[Hope4More]

RBSBM

Start at the first. It broke on the news, it was a horrible tragic thing that happen to this sweet boy. Emotion grabber Headline news. All the media that happened then... Fast forward to the PC Hearing that at was live streamed. I watched the PC Hearing and the ones after that. I had not read articles prior. But after watching the live streamed hearings, that is why so many people have hate for this man. Yes he did disgusting things online with people already online looking for the same thing he was and they hooked up. Same with the prostitute. What she did was against the law and was caught in a sting.. she not charged with anything and yet she was on probation, had pot, and took the $ from a cop.

Everyone HATES this Defendant, the media has spread so many false things ... which not just the MSM doing their normal twist of information, but the LEO who are doing the investigation and the State who are prosecuting it. Then they go to start trial and after a hard battle yet won, get the Judge to agree on a change of venue. So now have the trial going and State witness upon witness testimony is impeached! Flipping Supervisors flap out not telling truths writing reports a year later, LEO doing the same. Lead Det doesn't recall anything, evidence tampered with. Over half a dozen women paraded through and people are angry with the DEFENSE for humiliating them. (not my words). Yet no evidence from anyone that RH didn't love his son very much. None of those ladies testified to that. Even the prostitute said that. Everything that was obtained was tainted and now the public finds out that these inflammatory things said were not factual.

RH never has said he didn't leave his child in his car. Defense is not claiming that. What has everyone so riled up comes from the beginning when live stream hearings with lies was spread from sea to shining sea. The disgust from all the messages on chats, the State has used to try to say that is why RH murdered his son. Its all twisted and wrong. I do not think the sexting has a dang thing to do with RH leaving that child in the car. (nothing through the day, he had already left him their that morning) I have formed my opening from watching the trial. I still trying to keep an open mind.. its real hard now. But I will try. Maybe the State has a big gotcha at Rebuttal.

JMHO But sadly, all the reasons people hate this man is because of the flipping investigation and lies in the beginning. Its because of reading posts here I say that and believe it. I don't know the man anymore than anyone else posting here. I don't try to justify his sexting, I personally think disgusting but there are people who do it and it was legal (other than the minors-yet again they only know about them from the false statements to get the search warrant to begin with). Someone on other thread called this a witch hunt. I think now that that is appropriate description of what it has been. From testimony and evidence presented in this trial/and out of jury presence. Unbelievable.

Hear, hear, especially coming from you, because I know you have spent an incredible amount of time not only listening to every bit of testimony, but in cross referencing, double-checking, and fact checking testimony presented, down to the molecular level (), to follow and unravel the threads of inconsistent and untruthful testimony

 

[just the facts pls]

Trying to catch up today Ok, so, not sure where we are at with the trial I will have to go to You Tube to check; in the meantime, I personally think the issue with the car seat being a few inches off in all directions is petty to me. I drive a SUV bigger than what Ross drove. I'm 5'4 - 5'5 and weight 120 and I tell ya, if I had a car seat in place the way Ross had Coopers, I would have NOTICED Cooper in the seat. Ross is 6'2 or so and weights more than I which tells me he would have to have his seat further back than I would, so if I could see a toddler in a car seat in my bigger SUV than Ross, than I KNOW he saw Cooper. There is just no way, IMO, that he couldn't see him. A few inches here and there makes no difference to me. I put things on my passengers seat and I have to look in that direction to get them and my vision can see parts of the back. Ross knew Cooper was in that car seat, MOO!!!!!!!!

Yeah, the car seat being a few inches off doesn't change the fact that Cooper was still only inches away from JRH's head. The constant pedantic hair splitting from the defense is not only irrelevant, it's unreasonable and insulting to everyone's intelligence. Everyone with a functioning brain knows just by looking at the car and where the car seat was that there was no way JRH "forgot" a talkative two year old he spent thirty seconds in the car with when he got to work.

 

[arkansasmimi]

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.

RBBM.
Thanks. And on the bold part, Defense has been arguing that from the beginning. Judge has shot them down time and time again. I haven't heard her give reason for most anything. Pretrial and its been worse at trial than it was at the hearings. JMHO from watching trial and rewatching

 

[Jewels53]

So...Poor Ross was afflicted with his Sexual addiction and sexting obsessions and maybe his wifey wasn't quite so sexual as much as he wanted..So he develops a 2nd life style...OF course he may be depressed for just that alone..but also not getting a job or job promotion that would increase his pay..may too load onto that as well.. So he loses sleep because of his obsessiveness... WHY didn't defense seek "Psychological Testing"?? Nope..because he was an "Obsessive Compulsive" functional male..quite able to know RIGHT from WRONG so it wouldn't have helped him!

How about an alcoholic who due to his addiction, cannot abide by the mores of society ..and puts his child at risk...Do DUI's resulting in death get a break?? :Just an accident excuse...sounds more like defenders of Ross want to claim the "Twinkie" excuse..or how about the "Affluenza" excuse after killing multiple people driving under the influence. Justice sometimes boggles my mind :scared:

Thank you for excellent post, and I 100% agree with you!

Cooper Harris is the victim here not RH and I think sometimes that get muddled in all of the other stuff!

 

[just the facts pls]

So...Poor Ross was afflicted with his Sexual addiction and sexting obsessions and maybe his wifey wasn't quite so sexual as much as he wanted..So he develops a 2nd life style...OF course he may be depressed for just that alone..but also not getting a job or job promotion that would increase his pay..may too load onto that as well.. So he loses sleep because of his obsessiveness... WHY didn't defense seek "Psychological Testing"?? Nope..because he was an "Obsessive Compulsive" functional male..quite able to know RIGHT from WRONG so it wouldn't have helped him!

How about an alcoholic who due to his addiction, cannot abide by the mores of society ..and puts his child at risk...Do DUI's resulting in death get a break?? :Just an accident excuse...sounds more like defenders of Ross want to claim the "Twinkie" excuse..or how about the "Affluenza" excuse after killing multiple people driving under the influence. Justice sometimes boggles my mind

After today's testimony, I really do think this is another "affluenza" case where an upper class man is going to be given much more leniency than someone of lesser means and privilege.

I'm pretty sure we're going to hear from "experts" that JRH was too depressed, too unhappy, too distracted by all those teenage temptresses and because of that he just couldn't be bothered with adult responsibilities. We will be told we should pity him instead of hold him responsible to the fullest extent of the law.

JRH will love all the adoring sympathy and attention, because once again even in his own son's death, everything becomes all about him and his life and to hell with Cooper. Once again Cooper's life and tragic death will be lost, and that's how JRH wanted it in the first place.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Quote Originally Posted by Bc007 View Post
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?

They made a huge tactical error in not asking these questions on cross. That would've been the time to do it. I recall some surprise that their cross was limited. (I think it was of this witness). And someone said,"well they can call him as their own witness). But I thought that was dangerous. What these witnesses saw and heard that went into the warrants was testified to on direct. They could've impeached them with the warrants if they testified to something different, on cross. That would be the time to do it and it would been allowed.

But to wait and try to get that out on direct as your own witness, is hard. Because they had no way of knowing whether the court would allow them to call the witness as adverse or hostile, and now stuff like lying or exaggerating or making mistakes on a search warrant may not be relevant. Before, when they were crossing him though, they could've impeached him with it then. At least if he testified differently about it on direct.

I would never give up cross, banking on being able to call someone as a hostile witness. You never know what the judge will rule and cops are supposed to be neutral, believe it or not.

RBBM
I am catching back up so this has probably already been discussed but... The State did not call this witness. That is why the Defense called him. His testimony if able to give would totally impeach all of the other witnesses more than they have been already. Fact not jmho. (no snark intended)

 

[SuperTmo]

This case hurts my heart just like it does for everyone here. When it first was reported I thought it was just another tragic, preventable accident. Very soon afterward, I read of the father's arrest, the supposed internet searches by both parents on child car death, and the seemingly odd reactions by the parents to their baby's death. As the facts unfold, doubt on the accuracy of some of the initial reporting seems evident.

Since then I had my own beloved son die suddenly without warning. That is still hard for me to even write. If someone had told me before hand that I would lose one of my beloved sons, I would have told them to not bother worrying about me, that I could not survive that. My life would just wither up and die. I have since learned that shock is a very odd emotion that allows one to mask the grief and pain and agony that is inside. The face I showed and continue to show to the world is not what I would have expected and most likely isn't the one anyone else expected either. I have learned to not judge what grief looks like, that it is not a prediction of how someone's heart is breaking. I know now that PTSD is not something that just happens to those in combat.

I've gone back and forth on my feelings about this case. I have had to dismiss what I feel about RH as a man, as a husband and even a father to distinguish between his guilt as a murderer from that of his guilt of adultery, sexting minors and of being just generally dis-likable and hypocritical.

The other evening I went to the website of KidsInCars.org. I read every single heartbreaking story of the parents that left their children in a car. While most of them did have a significant break in their normal routine that explained the false memory of dropping their child off at the sitters or daycare, some did not. Some were sleep deprived, stressed, worried. One father ran into a co-worker and became so distracted with conversation with him that he left to go on job site with him, forgetting the baby in his car. Others had similar distractions and lack of sleep and stress were predominate in their stories. .

Near my town we had a recent tragic car death. The mother was an attorney for a large school district. Her routine was to take the baby to the day care and then begin her 45 min commute to the school administration office. On this day she forgot to take the baby to daycare and drove on to work. Whether she had a phone call that distracted her or had her mind on a stressful meeting awaiting her or any other distractions, I do not know. All I know is that she reportedly left work that afternoon and went into the daycare center to pick up her child. That is when she was told her child was not there and she realized he was still in the car.

From all accounts this was a child cherished by her and her husband. His sweet obituary said they they had struggled with infertility before being blessed with this baby. Her Instagram showed happy, loving pictures of a motherly pride in showing off her baby at his recent first birthday.

We would all like to believe this can only happen to other people, to bad parents, to someone that didn't care or love their child enough to protect them. Someone like RH. But I don't believe that to be true. After reading the heart rendering stories of real parents that have suffered this nightmare, I believe that the many pressures on working parents, the increased distractions of technology and even the policies regarding the rear facing car seats (which I know protects and is recommended) has lead to these babies dying.

I am leaning toward believing that RH was so addicted to sex and his mind was so all consumed with what his next texting escapade was going to be that his mind either provided him a false memory of taking his child to daycare or the baby was just was forgotten all together.

While this is not as easy to accept as that of a parent that had a change in routine or a stressful meeting at work, I think it was just a big of a mental distraction. I think he is an immoral, immature, self centered human being but I don't think that necessarily means he murdered his child. I think that his personal history makes it much easier to believe he planned this out as an escape from an unhappy marriage and obligations. But I am left with reasonable doubt if that is the truth.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/new...h-in-car-in-Dayton-coincides-with-9240494.php

I am so so sorry. A close friend lost her healthy 12 year old daughter a week ago today. She just didn't wake up for school. Based on how bad I feel about that, I literally cannot imagine how you or my friend feel. I appreciate you sharing.

 

[gitana1]

And if you only read some comments here - you would assume that is exactly what happened! What would happen if SW were disregarded if there were even the slightest mistake (head leaned inside car or head outside of car?)

At some point we either trust LE to make reasonable judgements or we consider everything they say and do to be suspect. Sadly, I see that attitude more and more in our country. If a 22 month old has baked to death in a car and LE with years of experience believe something is wrong - should they not have some leeway to investigate?

If a child dies in a hot car, that's enough probable cause for the records of the people responsible for the care of the child to be scoured, regardless if what the suspect does or says or how they react, etc. IMO. It's a dead child. Everything related to what was going on, what the context was, whether there were distractions, if there was malice or recklessness, all of it, should be open to a search warrant just based on the mere fact that a child baked to death in a hot car. I think the judge in this case indicated as much.

 

[just the facts pls]

Even if his wife gave him tons of sex, Ross loved the thrill of having it was a stranger. Wife can't fill that need.. This is Ross' ego that needs filled and IMO nothing more..

At this point, I don't think his problem with marital sex life has anything to do with LH. JRH repeatedly shows a pattern of behavior for sexual preference of teenage girls. That's something a thirty-something wife cannot satisfy even if she wanted to.

There are many married people who have claimed their spouses didn't give them sex in order to gain sympathy and justification for cheating. It doesn't make it true, and more to the point, since JRH has an established record of lying I don't think we should believe him without question.

 

[FinallyRegistered]

And if you only read some comments here - you would assume that is exactly what happened! What would happen if SW were disregarded if there were even the slightest mistake (head leaned inside car or head outside of car?)

At some point we either trust LE to make reasonable judgements or we consider everything they say and do to be suspect. Sadly, I see that attitude more and more in our country. If a 22 month old has baked to death in a car and LE with years of experience believe something is wrong - should they not have some leeway to investigate?

Leeway to investigate? If you are asking for 'leeway to investigate' then you are saying that it is okay for LE to disregard our Constitutional Rights. Please don't do that.

 

[LyndyLoo]

After today's testimony, I really do think this is another "affluenza" case where an upper class man is going to be given much more leniency than someone of lesser means and privilege.

I'm pretty sure we're going to hear from "experts" that JRH was too depressed, too unhappy, too distracted by all those teenage temptresses and because of that he just couldn't be bothered with adult responsibilities. We will be told we should pity him instead of hold him responsible to the fullest extent of the law.

JRH will love all the adoring sympathy and attention, because once again even in his own son's death, everything becomes all about him and his life and to hell with Cooper. Once again Cooper's life and tragic death will be lost, and that's how JRH wanted it in the first place.

I can only HOPE that the Jury uses common sense...But will see..I do fear this faux excuses somehow has taken hold within a certain un-evolved sector of society. I cannot believe that at my age I would consider myself some sort of weirdo by those who swallow such OLD thinking!!

Let's Hope aberrant types can't ever use OLD thinking in order to excuse obvious negligence and total abandonment of responsibilities!! Especially when such behaviour and attitude causes such an excruciating death of a total innocent! There's a reason that laws have progressed to enhance charges when children get harmed or killed by negligence!!

 

[gitana1]

Conspiracy was your term, not mine. And I too like facts and evidence,. In fact, I can be quite pesky on that subject. There is nothing mutually exclusive, though, about liking and even insisting upon facts and evidence, and marshalling facts and evidence to make an "emotional argument ," though in truth, I don't think I did anything of the sort.

What is being railroaded? Being railroaded in this case is about unchecked bias, which began within minutes, based on subjective notions of behavior , a f-ck you to a short cop, and RH trying to call his wife, and infected the investigation and then the State's case from that point on.

I don't have 2 hours to review for you the entire pretrial sequence of search warrants being used as fishing expeditions in search of evidence to prove an apriori conclusion of guilt, how reports suddenly materialized, how the info in reports was based on conclusions Stoddard wanted reached......there's simply too much to summarize, sorry, even before trying to recap weeks of trial.

I understand what you're saying about impeachment. Have you followed the trial closely enough to be familiar with how the State has used hearsay objections to impede the defense's cross of witnesses who are LE, and who worked with and for other LE witnesses who have testified at this trial on matters brought up on direct?

Yes. I indeed used the term conspiracy. There is no evidence of some wild conspiracy. Your post, however, indicated that there was in fact such evidence. But so far I haven't seen that.

 

[FinallyRegistered]

Yes. I indeed used the term conspiracy. There is no evidence of some wild conspiracy. Your post, however, indicated that there was in fact such evidence. But so far I haven't seen that.

No disrespect, but you should probably take the weekend and watch the trial on YouTube.