Trial - Ross Harris #5

[JudyBolton]

Imply? No need for that.

We've heard the testimony under oath.

Lowest setting on the car seat? Nope.- Middle setting - still improper for size of child.

Six-minute call? Nope - six minute call was logged on phone, JRH was observed talking on phone by witnesses at the scene (not just law enforcement) - if pocket dialed is this a LIE????

Posted a meme on Reddit about hating his kid? Nope. (The meme was on his phone followed by texting. Unable to tell who posted it. WHY reply to a meme if you don't agree with it - he was NOT disagreeing with it.)

Searched "child-free life"? Nope. (Didn't search but did go there)

Searched "hot car"? Nope. (watched video and told this to law enforcement)

Imagine all of those on one side of the scale and the body of little Cooper on the other side.

 

[MsMarple]

Imply? No need for that.

We've heard the testimony under oath.

Lowest setting on the car seat? Nope.
Six-minute call? Nope
Posted a meme on Reddit about hating his kid? Nope.
Searched "child-free life"? Nope.
Searched "hot car"? Nope.

I'm mainly just jumping off your post because of your list...

And thanks to our justice system (and yes, the defense team) the jury now knows that those things are not true. If I was on the jury it would be crystal clear to me that LE at best erred on the items and at worst lied outright so I wouldn't go into deliberations thinking that Ross searched hot car deaths, etc.. But if you look at the list, apart from the strap position all the items have to do with technology. Speaking only for myself, my first thought would be that Cobb County LE are woefully ignorant on how the internet and technology in general works and need to get some classes pronto - not that there was some sort of LE cabal formed for the express purpose of framing Ross.

 

[LyndyLoo]

No, not entirely. Staley ruled that a dead child plus cause of death unknown plus LE finding a parent responsible for the dead child present at the scene equalled probable cause to search the car, RH's phone, the Harris home, and to seize, but not search (several) of RH's computers.

Searching the contents on his computers required separate search warrants, (issued June 24), on which date the affadavits' narrative had been edited, and now included the blatant lie about the position of Cooper's seat belt straps (though photos of the car and the carseat had already been taken).

COD for Cooper was obvious..BUT the first few hours..Detectives had no idea IF Ross maybe medicated Cooper or not..and his unusual behaviour heightened their suspicions. BTW~~ Isn't that Investigations work? Suspicions always force investigations to search/seek evidence to either refute or cooperate. Much defense of Ross suggesting corruption and biases is always the go to excuse.. But in my field..Investigations just want to gain as much informations as possible..which will exonerate or inculpate the accused!

Unfortunately, I did not hear ME's testimony..other than poor Cooper suffered and scratches to face meant he at least tried to get free of his bondage! a 22 month old child should never have to suffer such death!! A Father who was completely devoid of connection to his child ( talk is cheap) (pictures and smiles do NOT demonstrate connections/photo-ops)...Even his Daddy/Son breakfast didn't indicate interactions as he apparently was consumed with his tweets!! .

BTW~~ where can I find the ME report? Obviously no drugs found in Cooper or would have been topic/ but only OJ in his wee stomach bothers me..IF still in stomach actually speaks a lot to me..Fluid have no need for breakdown like FOOD does..so move thru Gi system much faster. This alone suggests..Cooper was DEAD when Ross went to that car after lunch~~ and his weird way of tossing lightbulbs into vehicle was actually indicative of Ross's aberrant need to voyeur his deed was accomplished...He didn't look nor bothered to look into his vehicle ( another weird anomaly IMO) I often put stuff in my vehicle..and always have view of front and back seat..even check floor sometimes incase of dropped items. BUT a 22 month old/carseat ..You wanna bet I would check that out for numerous reasons!!

Oh yeah, When people die..they ( especially elderly and children) when die often pass urine and stool.. WHY? because all sphincters RELAX~~ and some on scene mentioned odours ..some said urine other smell of death or maybe excrement! that was in outdoors..and Ross didn't smell it when entered his vehicle before going to meet buddies after work? Confined, enclosed hot space would have increased that smell+++++ ..But he drove away,, down road and did not react..THAT too points to him wanting to finding his child in a very populated area..That too for me indicates need to dramatize his victim ship persona! He's dumb like a fox ( dumb fox to boot)~~ Not buying any of his defence ~ rather more of a DRAMA KING and believed he could CON the LE since he believed he COULD ..why else would sign that waiver?

Ross truly does think much more of himself than anybody else ever did or will!!

 

[EquallyDivided]

Imply? No need for that.

We've heard the testimony under oath.

Lowest setting on the car seat? Nope.
Six-minute call? Nope
Posted a meme on Reddit about hating his kid? Nope.
Searched "child-free life"? Nope.
Searched "hot car"? Nope.

I see a few insignificant "Nope's" in contrast to the glaring "Yep's".

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

 

[minor4th]

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.

That is certainly what the State is hoping to accomplish.

 

[minor4th]

I know. But none of that is analogous to the current situation. He wasn't committing a crime that was unrelated to the death of his kid. In this case, the underlying felony would be criminal negligence or child cruelty. Without a strong showing of intent I think child cruelty is out. So we are left with criminal negligence. Is it criminally negligent to be obsessively texting/sexting while caring for and transporting a totally dependent, helpless kid, in a car? Bottom line.

Not every underlying felony for felony murder has to be a violent or aggressive one.

It has to be "inherently dangerous"

 

[EquallyDivided]

:judge: If I were a juror, I would feel the same as I would a sleuther. That is if the State is going to charge anyone with anything.. especially serious felonies then they should have solid evidence to prove the charges. Not manufactured evidence or manipulated. And to prove it to me as a juror, those charges beyond a reasonable doubt. And not overcharging. If you were RH would you not expect the same? And what about innocent until proven guilty in a court of law? I realize being judged in the public opening is different. But would you want to be judged on by false information that has happened in this case? Proven false by the State impeached witnesses testimony?

I'm just curious, I've seen errors in recounting evidence or gathering evidence. I really don't recall LE manufacturing or purposely manipulating evidence.

If we can believe RH's lame excuses, why is it hard to believe LE isn't perfect?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

 

[Hope4More]

No. That's why I asked. I haven't watched much of the trial at all. I've been reading the tweets and news reports.

Judge Staley absolutely did not want to grant the DT's motion for a change in venue. Not an atypical aversion, but hers was aversion on steroids. She granted it reluctantly and after playing chicken with the DT because she had no choice. She tried to seat an impartial jury, but that proved impossible.

She said in her ruling granting the motion that she'd witnessed jurors who said on their questionnares they could be impartial reverse themselves when questioned, saying they believed RH was guilty, and jurors who said on questionnaires he was guilty later claim they could be impartial. An astonishing number of jurors said they thought he was guilty, but were capable of being convinced by the DT that he was innocent. And she remarked as well at the depth of animosity towards RH expressed in voir dire.

It was quite the spectacle, and very much the product of media saturation, media whipped up by the incendiary--and false- claims made by LE, especially during the July 2014 probable cause hearing, but beyond that as well, a fairly constant stirring of the pot, imo, by the State.

 

[minor4th]

I know. But none of that is analogous to the current situation. He wasn't committing a crime that was unrelated to the death of his kid. In this case, the underlying felony would be criminal negligence or child cruelty. Without a strong showing of intent I think child cruelty is out. So we are left with criminal negligence. Is it criminally negligent to be obsessively texting/sexting while caring for and transporting a totally dependent, helpless kid, in a car? Bottom line.

Not every underlying felony for felony murder has to be a violent or aggressive one.

Child cruelty is the underlying felony. The culpable mental state for child cruelty is "criminal negligence."

If he's not found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of child cruelty (2nd degree), then he can't be found guilty of felony murder. There's no separate crime of criminal negligence and no negligent homicide statute. (That's why Georgia is very limited in how they can charge a homicide in unintentional cases)

 

[katydid23]

Imply? No need for that.

We've heard the testimony under oath.

Lowest setting on the car seat? Nope.
Six-minute call? Nope
Posted a meme on Reddit about hating his kid? Nope.
Searched "child-free life"? Nope.
Searched "hot car"? Nope.

I think that your answers above are taken out of context. SW's are applied for BEFORE much investigation is done. So there are often mistakes, misstatements, and inaccurate info included.

The six minute call----THere was evidence in the phone of a 6 minute call. That was true. Once things got sorted out, it seems it was not what it appeared. But it was not a lie or deceitful in any way.


The meme----at first LE thought he was the creator of the meme. However, when the used new software program they figured out he did not create that meme. BUT HE DID READ IT AND CLICK ON IT IN AGREEMENT. And he said he needed a break from family life and an escape from his kid at times. And complained his kid drained his bank account.

child free life----no, he didn't search that term as far as they can now tell. But they thought that he had. And they have now clarified it with the jury.

searched 'hot car'---- NO, not searched it---BUT clicked on video, AND COMMENTED on it, actually talking about the possibility of his kid being trapped in a hot car.So this was a relevant addition to this SW.



Just because some of what they claimed turned out to be incorrect, it does not mean that there are not serious issues with his behavior and actions during that time period.

 

[MsMarple]

COD for Cooper was obvious..BUT the first few hours..Detectives had no idea IF Ross maybe medicated Cooper or not..and his unusual behaviour heightened their suspicions. BTW~~ Isn't that Investigations work? Suspicions always force investigations to search/seek evidence to either refute or cooperate. Much defense of Ross suggesting corruption and biases is always the go to excuse.. But in my field..Investigations just want to gain as much informations as possible..which will exonerate or inculpate the accused!

Unfortunately, I did not hear ME's testimony..other than poor Cooper suffered and scratches to face meant he at least tried to get free of his bondage! a 22 month old child should never have to suffer such death!! A Father who was completely devoid of connection to his child ( talk is cheap) (pictures and smiles do NOT demonstrate connections/photo-ops)...Even his Daddy/Son breakfast didn't indicate interactions as he apparently was consumed with his tweets!! .

BTW~~ where can I find the ME report? Obviously no drugs found in Cooper or would have been topic/ but only OJ in his wee stomach bothers me..IF still in stomach actually speaks a lot to me..Fluid have no need for breakdown like FOOD does..so move thru Gi system much faster. This alone suggests..Cooper was DEAD when Ross went to that car after lunch~~ and his weird way of tossing lightbulbs into vehicle was actually indicative of Ross's aberrant need to voyeur his deed was accomplished...He didn't look nor bothered to look into his vehicle ( another weird anomaly IMO) I often put stuff in my vehicle..and always have view of front and back seat..even check floor sometimes incase of dropped items. BUT a 22 month old/carseat ..You wanna bet I would check that out for numerous reasons!!

Oh yeah, When people die..they ( especially elderly and children) when die often pass urine and stool.. WHY? because all sphincters RELAX~~ and some on scene mentioned odours ..some said urine other smell of death or maybe excrement! that was in outdoors..and Ross didn't smell it when entered his vehicle before going to meet buddies after work? Confined, enclosed hot space would have increased that smell+++++ ..But he drove away,, down road and did not react..THAT too points to him wanting to finding his child in a very populated area..That too for me indicates need to dramatize his victim ship persona! He's dumb like a fox ( dumb fox to boot)~~ Not buying any of his defence ~ rather more of a DRAMA KING and believed he could CON the LE since he believed he COULD ..why else would sign that waiver?

Ross truly does think much more of himself than anybody else ever did or will!!

:seeya: BBM. Here's the autopsy report:

http://media.wix.com/ugd/943520_7cd46570b4a9474b9e36c87173e7a14d.pdf

 

[just the facts pls]

I'm just curious, I've seen errors in recounting evidence or gathering evidence. I really don't recall LE manufacturing or purposely manipulating evidence.

If we can believe RH's lame excuses, why is it hard to believe LE isn't perfect?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

BBM. Well that's exactly the point isn't it? JRH is entitled to be as imperfect as he wants even to the point of baking his own child to death but LE can't make even a single mistake without being accused of railroading someone.

Again, affluenza. JRH is entitled to be as much of a selfish, irresponsible pervert as he wants and even have it work in his favor when his own son loses his life because of it.

 

[Maisiebelle]

Agree. But how was the setting actually known if Ross already took cooper out of the carseat.

Because the setting was pre-set by the parents. They stay the same till they are taken out and adjusted higher/lower. See this photo for an example of the settings. Low, medium and high. This isn't the same as Coopers seat. I'm just using it to show the strap settings. The lower the straps the smaller the child.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GA_Peach]

Just because some of what they claimed turned out to be incorrect, it does not mean that there are not serious issues with his behavior and actions during that time period.

Snipped for focus by me.

LE's shortcomings do not absolve Ross of his. I despise what this case has become. Ross deserves a fair trial so that he can be judged for his actions.

 

[EquallyDivided]

I think that your answers above are taken out of context. SW's are applied for BEFORE much investigation is done. So there are often mistakes, misstatements, and inaccurate info included.

The six minute call----THere was evidence in the phone of a 6 minute call. That was true. Once things got sorted out, it seems it was not what it appeared. But it was not a lie or deceitful in any way.


The meme----at first LE thought he was the creator of the meme. However, when the used new software program they figured out he did not create that meme. BUT HE DID READ IT AND CLICK ON IT IN AGREEMENT. And he said he needed a break from family life and an escape from his kid at times. And complained his kid drained his bank account.

child free life----no, he didn't search that term as far as they can now tell. But they thought that he had. And they have now clarified it with the jury.

searched 'hot car'---- NO, not searched it---BUT clicked on video, AND COMMENTED on it, actually talking about the possibility of his kid being trapped in a hot car.So this was a relevant addition to this SW.



Just because some of what they claimed turned out to be incorrect, it does not mean that there are not serious issues with his behavior and actions during that time period.

What she said. MOO

Quoting for double read on that bad boy.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

 

[kjpaw]

After the state presented its case I'm not fully convinced of malice murder but I also think it's interesting seasoned detectives and policemen/women he interacted with thought something was off with Ross before they knew a thing about his sexting...I'm very interested to see the defense case.

 

[EquallyDivided]

I conduct and read federal investigations on a daily basis. You will not find one free of error. It just doesn't happen. We compile hundreds and thousands of exhibits sometimes.

The question always has to be, how bad was it? Context is key.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

 

[arkansasmimi]

I don't believe Piper read him his rights while he was being detained. That whole process was ...curious.

As Staley has written, Harris COULD have been charged with the misdeamor offense of obstructing an officer of the law. But he wasn't. No charges, and legally and technically , he wasn't under suspicion (lol). He was just cuffed and detained in the back seat of a police cruiser.

Then comes Staley's reasoning for why the seizure of his phone at the scene wasn't illegal. After all, he hadn't been charged with anything at the scene . How could LE legally take his phone?

Because, said Staley, Piper COULD have charged him with obstruction, and if she had, she would have had the right to seize his phone , because the phone was the "instrumentality" of the arrest that didn't happen, as well as the reason why he was detained.

Then, there came the Stoddard related contamination, which was, it was legal to seize the phone because RH was talking on it (lie) to someone who might have been involved (lie), so it was reasonable to seize the phone out of an abundance of caution.

And yes, Piper's video of RH (she put him in car, then turned the camera to record him)was played in court, and I think 3 LE testified as to what was said and done before ,during, and after being cuffed and put in Piper's car (as she buttdialed HD/Little Aprons).

RBBM, and as Foglia testified:
Gallimore had told everyone to get back,
Kilgore Gallimore went over and started compression
Folgia: correct
Folgia: Gallimore asked if the baby had something in his mouth, the father came to baby side.. doesn't know where RH was (assuming she meant prior to Gallimore asking that)
Kilgore: If RH had been there could he have been one of the ones that Gallimore made the request?
Folgia: yes.
Folgia: Mr Harris was 5 yards away prior, she noticed him pacing around.
Kilgore: look nervous/upset?
Folgia: nervous
Kilgore: pacing, with hands over head? (kilgore puts hands on head) asks her like this
Folgia: she wasn't sure
Kilgore: well you saw enough to put in report had him step away. Gave RH a direct command back away.
Kilgore: did he go back to pacing right away?
Kilgore: after gave command ..RH a direct command back away.
Folgia: not sure if did right away or not
Kilgore: moments later he was asking for ID
Folgia; he didnt obey, started trying to make a phone call
Kilgore: arrested and put in cuffs
Folgia: not because ..
Kilgore: not attacked
Folgia: no
Kilgore: attitude
Folgia: yes
Kilgore: uncooperative?
Folgia: yes
Kilgore: but moments later he did obey command
Folgia: yes
Kilgore: if earlier hadn't obeyed, could have been arrested?
Folgia: could have - would have

STATE: Did RH try to help to assist
Folgia: no
State done with witness.

Which is not in context the truth. RH had tried, per the 1st person there TJ, then Hawkins came and told him to move. Then by Folgia testimony RH came back over.

And the State is using the word semantics in reference to the Defense?

 

[katydid23]

Snipped for focus by me.

LE's shortcomings do not absolve Ross of his. I despise what this case has become. Ross deserves a fair trial so that he can be judged for his actions.

I think he is getting a fair trial. He has a great team of high priced lawyers, working pro bono. They are doing a great job. And if the judge is using faulty legal precedents, he will win some appeals.

 

[kjpaw]

And ga falls under the 11th circuit and I'm not sure most understand how big a deal it is what circuit court you fall under. It makes all the difference in some cases.