Trial - Ross Harris #6

[blue22]

I do wonder if Leanna's resistance to the divorce/cheating questions comes from a place of guilt or shame.

I honestly couldn't care less why or when she got divorced. To me, that plays no part in her being credible or not.

It bothers me that she lied on stand that she didn't know about the women he was texting with. It bothers me even more that when presented with proof she knew about it, she fake cried and had to be ordered to answer.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

Those were NOT her words, that she "wasn't shocked by any of the testimony "heard by this jury..


She said she wasn't shocked to find out he had stepped outside their marriage, given the problems they were having. Period.

She also said she would have walked out the door if she had known even about the prostitute.

And, RH is not a "known killer." He hasn't been convicted of anything, and may not be for any of the charges relating to Cooper's death, for that matter.

He most certainly is a known killer. He put Cooper in that car, and Cooper died there because JRH didn't remove him from the car.

 

[catpatrol]

I honestly couldn't care less why or when she got divorced. To me, that plays no part in her being credible or not.

It bothers me that she lied on stand that she didn't know about the women he was texting with. It bothers me even more that when presented with proof she knew about it, she fake cried and had to be ordered to answer.

I understand. Does it bother you that the police lied in sworn statements?

 

[blue22]

I understand. Does it bother you that the police lied in sworn statements?

Why wouldn't it?

I'm talking about Leanna now, because she is the one currently testifying. I'm not forgetting about all other testimony, this is just the one I'm focused on.

 

[catpatrol]

Why wouldn't it?

I'm talking about Leanna now, because she is the one currently testifying. I'm not forgetting about all other testimony, this is just the one I'm focused on.

I know. My original post #291 was me comparing Stoddard's lies to Leanna's. That's the one you replied to.

 

[blue22]

I know. My original post #291 was me comparing Stoddard's lies to Leanna's. That's the one you replied to.

I think we're both in agreement that witnesses should be completely truthful and answer questions transparently. lol

 

[arkansasmimi]

Catching up... had to go spend time with my little gobblins. Leaving you some treats ... Happy Safe Halloween to you and yours!

 

[Hope4More]

I do wonder if Leanna's resistance to the divorce/cheating questions comes from a place of guilt or shame.

I think it came from the place of not being able to say IMO what was the flat out truth, which would have been-- I was in shock because my baby died, then I was under suspicion myself for months, and even after LE finally cleared me a large segment of the public still thought i was involved in killing my baby, and so yeah, it was entirely clear to me that if I went ahead with a divorce it would send a message I didn't want to send, that I no longer believed it was an accident.

And btw, hello, there's a difference between divorcing a husband who shares a house and a child neither of us wanted to harm by divorcing, and a husband who is locked up in jail waiting for trial relating to the death of our son.


She couldn't say that, and what I saw was someone who doesn't lie trying to figure out what she could say that was truthful and answered the question. Jmo

 

[RANCH]

I understand. Does it bother you that the police lied in sworn statements?

Apparently it's no problem if the State purposely misleads the jury. If the defense calls a witness who is caught in a lie it is a problem.

To me it's much worse when the State does such things. The jury may tend to believe that LEO and prosecutors would never misrepresent the evidence. JMO

 

[arkansasmimi]

I had to leave early and didn't get to finish the day out so will have to finsh watching. I was surprised when right before I had to leave Boring asked LH ... and she admitted to watching some of the trial! I have strong gut feelings she isn't the only one. SMH

 

[Hope4More]

He most certainly is a known killer. He put Cooper in that car, and Cooper died there because JRH didn't remove him from the car.

He is responsible for Cooper's death and has never denied it. That is different from being a killer, at least how I understand the word, which is, that RH acted with intent. Of course, given that it's possible to be convicted as a murderer in GA for the accidental death of one's child, maybe my definition is just quaint.

 

[TexMex]

Maybe he couldn't answer pre-mortum just how Cooper was treated..Abuse doesn't always have physical signs. However, mother maybe should know IF her husband was. I do NOT believe he physically abused his child..until he knowingly left him to die in a VERY VERY Hot vehicle/strapped down in a carseat that was located inches from his shoulder and right arm!!

Don't believe for a minute Ross was some saddest and enjoyed torturing anybody..BUT his personal drive to get out from under responsibility both physically ( from marriage to someone he wasn't attracted to) and financially obligated to for the next 16 years! That was the bottomline line it appears as his motive for doing what he did..IMO :tantrum:

A father who checks out of the family, who can send lewd messages to teen girls while lying next to his son, who sends and posts pictures of his son to strangers on dating sites, who complains of being financially stressed yet spends in one month $375 that could be spent on his family or saved to buy the house they wanted or put into a college fund on a prostitute...is a sick sob

 

[Boodles]

Imo, he was obviously trying to imply that Leanna only divorced RH to help him out with this trial, and if she's willing to do that, she's willing to lie for him on the stand.

Problem for him is, that only gains traction if jurors don't find Leanna credible or sympathetic. I don't think Leanna gave any open minded juror a reason to disbelieve her, or to dislike her.

I just started following this case today. I know very little about it except that he was charged with murder. I very quickly started wondering about Leanne's motives and whether she might have been a co-conspirator. She impressed me as avoidant and having an agenda. I'm shocked by her devotion to him and concurrent lack of empathy for her child's suffering. I'm trying to be neutral, but I'm not finding her very likable because I feel she's trying to weave her own story which doesn't feel forthright and honest. JMO.

[Also, I really know hardly anything about this case. Was she a suspect at some point? I thought I heard an attorney ask her whether she became a suspect and she said yes. Was she cleared? Was she given immunity or any type of deal? It seems odd that she seems so invested in portraying him as an innocent person who just made a mistake. She seems overly concerned about his wellbeing. I don't think I'd be as benevolent if my husband let our child bake to death in such a horrific "oversight", never mind his extracurricular interests. It's very odd. But all of this is just my first impression. I may see things differently as I learn more. That is, if I can stand to follow this further. It's heart wrenching.]

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

It could go either way with the jury. I think it's a chance they had to take. I don't buy it, but you never know with a jury.

Having served on two juries (neither a criminal trial), I tend to approach any trial from a juror's perspective. I posted earlier how I reacted to Leanna's testimony today. Leanna did a fine job of humanizing Ross and promoting his positive relationship with their son. Her testimony took a downward turn with the prosecutor, and I lost respect that I gained for her while she testified for the defense. I don't know what my "fellow jurors" would feel or how they would react, but that's how I felt.

 

[just the facts pls]

I just started following this case today. I know very little about it except that he was charged with murder. I very quickly started wondering about Leanne's motives and whether she might have been a co-conspirator. She impressed me as avoidant and having an agenda. I'm shocked by her devotion to him and concurrent lack of empathy for her child's suffering. I'm trying to be neutral, but I'm not finding her very likable because I feel she's trying to weave her own story which doesn't feel forthright and honest. JMO.

[Also, I really know hardly anything about this case. Was she a suspect at some point? I thought I heard an attorney ask her whether she became a suspect and she said yes. Was she cleared? Was she given immunity or any type of deal? It seems odd that she seems so invested in portraying him as an innocent person who just made a mistake. She seems overly concerned about his wellbeing. I don't think I'd be as benevolent if my husband let our child bake to death in such a horrific "oversight", never mind his extracurricular interests. It's very odd. But all of this is just my first impression. I may see things differently as I learn more. That is, if I can stand to follow this further. It's heart wrenching.]

If memory serves correctly, Detective Stoddard stipulated that LH is on a list of persons of interest/suspects, but that she was not part of an active investigation at this time.

 

[DisneyFan]

I think it came from the place of not being able to say IMO what was the flat out truth, which would have been-- I was in shock because my baby died, then I was under suspicion myself for months, and even after LE finally cleared me a large segment of the public still thought i was involved in killing my baby, and so yeah, it was entirely clear to me that if I sent ahead with a divorce it would send a message I didn't want to send, that I no longer believed it was an accident.

And btw, hello, there's a difference between divorcing a husband who shares a house and a child neither of us wanted to harm by divorcing, and a husband who is locked up in jail waiting for trial relating to the death of our son.

She couldn't say that, and what I saw was someone who doesn't lie trying to figure out what she could say that was truthful and answered the question. Jmo

Additionally, more likely than not when RH was caught by the sexting texts, he probably minimized the deed. Remember LH did not know the full scope of his involvement with prostitutes, hook ups etc. I am sure those facts were overwhelming. Most cases of infidelity do not disclose the full details of their indiscretions. They usually admit only what they must. Infidelity is a slippery slope. The full disclosure of RH escapades were shocking to her I'm sure. She may have known "something" but it was a vanilla version of events.

 

[Hope4More]

I just started following this case today. I know very little about it except that he was charged with murder. I very quickly started wondering about Leanne's motives and whether she might have been a co-conspirator. She impressed me as avoidant and having an agenda. I'm shocked by her devotion to him and concurrent lack of empathy for her child's suffering. I'm trying to be neutral, but I'm not finding her very likable because I feel she's trying to weave her own story which doesn't feel forthright and honest. JMO.

[Also, I really know hardly anything about this case. Was she a suspect at some point? I thought I heard an attorney ask her whether she became a suspect and she said yes. Was she cleared? Was she given immunity or any type of deal? It seems odd that she seems so invested in portraying him as an innocent person who just made a mistake. She seems overly concerned about his wellbeing. I don't think I'd be as benevolent if my husband let our child bake to death in such a horrific "oversight", never mind his extracurricular interests. It's very odd. But all of this is just my first impression. I may see things differently as I learn more. That is, if I can stand to follow this further. It's heart wrenching.]

I'm confused how it is you think she didn't show any empathy for Cooper etc, if you haven't followed the case. She cried plenty of times in the stand-- did you think she was faking it? She divorced her husband- how does that demonstrate devotion to Ross?

She doesn't believe Ross killed their child on purpose. She thinks it was an accident. Do you find it impossible to believe she can't bear the fact RH is responsible for the death of their son, and can despise him for what he did to her, and still not believe it's right for him to go to prison for a crime he didn't commit?

 

[popsicle]

Having served on two juries (neither a criminal trial), I tend to approach any trial from a juror's perspective. I posted earlier how I reacted to Leanna's testimony today. Leanna did a fine job of humanizing Ross and promoting his positive relationship with their son. Her testimony took a downward turn with the prosecutor, and I lost respect that I gained for her while she testified for the defense. I don't know what my "fellow jurors" would feel or how they would react, but that's how I felt.

100% agree. I know others that were watching described it as Boring dismantling her testimony.

 

[AuntB]

It's my understanding that prospective witnesses are expected to refrain from reading, listening, watching, etc. testimony prior to their own appearance in court. I don't know if it's inherently wrong or not for them to do so.

Phil Holloway (Atlanta attorney) said that generally speaking LH is subject to the rule of sequestration that applies to witnesses, but there's an exception LH may have invoked because she is the next of kin of the victim. It's addressed about an hour in to this video at about the 1:09 mark.

Important to note that he is only guessing--he doesn't know that LH invoked this exception--but it would explain why she freely admitted to watching some of the trial--and Boring didn't freak out about that admission.

[video=youtube;MWzsQdG5fY4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWzsQdG5fY4&list=PLR2JAGZzf3U2ycgKgykad9TBcJ4yA93HE&index=2"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWzsQdG5fY4&list=PLR2JAGZzf3U2ycgKgykad9TBcJ4yA93HE&index=2[/video]

 

[Hope4More]

Having served on two juries (neither a criminal trial), I tend to approach any trial from a juror's perspective. I posted earlier how I reacted to Leanna's testimony today. Leanna did a fine job of humanizing Ross and promoting his positive relationship with their son. Her testimony took a downward turn with the prosecutor, and I lost respect that I gained for her while she testified for the defense. I don't know what my "fellow jurors" would feel or how they would react, but that's how I felt.

Is it possible you were influenced by your already existing dislike of Leanna? I imagine I was by the empathy I've felt for her from the first days of reading about Cooper's death.