Trial - Ross Harris #7

[Bc007]

What do we know about the jurors? Is there somewhere to read about then?

 

[pocketaccent]

The defense keeps putting on witness after witness saying "Ross loved Cooper soooo much!" And then the pros just keeps asking "Did Ross seem like a good person/friend/co-worker/husband?" And reminding them all, every single time, every single juror, how Ross had two very different personalities. These witnesses are doing more harm than good, I think.

They can all say how amazing Ross was over and over again but have to admit they had no idea what he was doing in private. So to say he couldn't kill Cooper because he loved him so much is a completely invalid argument. He may have looked like he loved Cooper on the outside, but who *really* knows?? NO ONE!

IMO, RH loving Cooper doesn't mean he was a great dad.
Almost everybody loves their own children. It's an automatic reaction when they are born.

Being a great dad isn't automatic. It's about sacrifices one is willing to make, one's character, one's inner strength, setting good examples,...........

 

[PaperDoll]

With the parade of coached witnesses that make up the defense's case (if you can call it that), Boring has to do something to remind the jury who JRH really is.

I'm still picking my jaw up off the floor. lol

I agree! Ross deceived Leanna and the State is trying to get Leanna, IMO, to realize that Ross left Cooper in the car intentionally and that maybe he's deceiving her by claiming it was unintentional. Hope that made sense?

 

[Rayemonde]

I think it's scary, because it could so easily have been the perfect crime. If he had wanted to kill his son and had made sure there were no incriminating texts or messages, avoided swearing at LE, and avoided going into Chik-Fila - no one would have any reason to think it was anything but a complete accident on the part of a loving father. At worst, he may have got a couple of years in prison for neglect or manslaughter or whatever. If someone following this trial wants to kill their kid, they should be taking notes to make it as believable as possible that it is an accident. But you can't find RH guilty of malice murder without convincing evidence just to put off other people from doing it in future...

 

[blue22]

Wonder if the defense will call a sex addiction expert. They have gone on and on about it so I guess it could potentially happen. I'm sure they will end on Dr. Diamond. They are building that way it seems.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out.

The other Dr. on their list is a forensic psychiatrist. (Dr. Bhushan Agharkar.) He has been a defense expert for some pretty nasty defendants. I was curious to learn more about him, so I read about some of his cases and watched some of his testimony. IMO, He can definitely create narratives defense attorneys want. I expect he will address the sexual issues. I think the state cross could end up being a bit contentious.

 

[momoftwocrazies]

I think Leanna also might believe that if her own then husband intentionally killed Cooper, since she was so close to the situation, she could have prevented it. Wondering if it's a defense mechanics to not even consider that as a possibility. I think if she had been up there and said, well maybe, I don't know, then she'd be more credible. To me, her not even entertaining the idea makes her and everyone else look discredible.

Because the fact is NO ONE knew him. None of us here know him. None of us can really say for sure. The only thing we can go on is objective pieces and patterns in past behavior, which I think are pretty damning. This he was a good dad narrative doesn't work.

 

[PaperDoll]

I think it's scary, because it could so easily have been the perfect crime. If he had wanted to kill his son and had made sure there were no incriminating texts or messages, avoided swearing at LE, and avoided going into Chik-Fila - no one would have any reason to think it was anything but a complete accident on the part of a loving father. At worst, he may have got a couple of years in prison for neglect or manslaughter or whatever. If someone following this trial wants to kill their kid, they should be taking notes to make it as believable as possible that it is an accident. But you can't find RH guilty of malice murder without convincing evidence just to put off other people from doing it in future...

BBM: Some people may think the evidence is convincing

 

[monkeypants]

Believe what? The 'sex with a man' allegation? He's had sex with a prostitute and exchanged pornographic pictures with an underage teen. He's given us no evidence to show he has much in the way of sexual boundaries/taboos. I find the allegation to be believable when considering Ross's obsessive drive for risky sexual behavior.

Broken record alert:

Defense didn't object

 

[kjpaw]

One thing that shocked me today...JRH continued looking at inappropriate website even AFTER he knew his covenant friend was getting emails that he was looking at them. Why would he do that? Compulsion or maybe thought his friend wouldn't tell/or wasn't getting notified. I just find it so mind boggling that a person who knows they're being tracked online would continue to do such things on the computer with a tracking software.

 

[momoftwocrazies]

When does the Pros have to submit a rebuttal witness list? Any ideas on who's going to be called?

Also, remember people, we didn't see or hear the minors testimony which might have been very impactful since that will go to the felony murder charge. Can't discount it!

 

[monkeypants]

The defense keeps putting on witness after witness saying "Ross loved Cooper soooo much!" And then the pros just keeps asking "Did Ross seem like a good person/friend/co-worker/husband?" And reminding them all, every single time, evrery single juror, how Ross had two very different personalities. These witnesses are doing more harm than good, I think.

They can all say how amazing Ross was over and over again but have to admit they had no idea what he was doing in private. So to say he couldn't kill Cooper because he loved him so much is a completely invalid argument. He may have looked like he loved Cooper on the outside, but who *really* knows?? NO ONE!

One person does....

 

[Bc007]

The other Dr. on their list is a forensic psychiatrist. (Dr. Bhushan Agharkar.) He has been a defense expert for some pretty nasty defendants. I was curious to learn more about him, so I read about some of his cases and watched some of his testimony. IMO, He can definitely create narratives defense attorneys want. I expect he will address the sexual issues. I think the state cross could end up being a bit contentious.

Interesting! Thank you for the info!

 

[catpatrol]

I think my husband is a pretty great guy. However, if I find out he likes to murder prostitutes in his spare time I'm going to change my opinion of him and declare I never really knew him. On the other hand, if I find out he likes to play with paper dolls when no one is looking, I'm going to continue thinking he's a pretty good guy. You know what I mean?

I think if you think somebody is a loving husband and father and then you find out he likes to have sex with underage girls and get glory hole action, you'd probably think you never really knew them because the person you thought you knew would never do such horrible things. You'd probably wonder what else they were capable of and the answer would be anything since you don't really know them at all.

Are we really comparing RH to a person who murders prostitutes? And as far as I know, he sexted an underage girl - which is different than having sex. Really, I can't think of a worse analogy to a person cheating on their wife.

And if glory hole is consensual, then it doesn't bother me a bit different strokes....

 

[blue22]

Interesting! Thank you for the info!

He has had cases where he was on the stand for hours!

I'm more interested in his testimony than Dr. Diamond. It's pretty obvious (IMO) what he will say. I have no idea what the other guy will say, it should be extremely interesting.

 

[Bc007]

When does the Pros have to submit a rebuttal witness list? Any ideas on who's going to be called?

Also, remember people, we didn't see or hear the minors testimony which might have been very impactful since that will go to the felony murder charge. Can't discount it!

I thought we were given snippets from people inside the courtroom. They just weren't allowed to show her face or stream the testimony because she was a minor at the time. From what I remember her testimony was similar to the others but she was 16 and they were older. There is no way out of that charge. The jury would have to believe that somehow her age is evidence he murdered his son. IMO they should have severed the charges. It's muddying up the waters but that's just me...

 

[momoftwocrazies]

Are we really comparing RH to a person who murders prostitutes? And as far as I know, he sexted an underage girl - which is different than having sex. Really, I can't think of a worse analogy to a person cheating on their wife.

And if glory hole is consensual, then it doesn't bother me a bit different strokes....

It was just an analogy, I think. The point is sometimes you Dont know someone. Remember BTK? Had a loving family who would have never thought he was a sadistic serial killer for decades. She's saying the loving dad and husband narrative doesn't work here because it's very obvious that no one knew him at all since he was spending so so much time and energy doing the opposite. Just because Leanna won't or can't see this crime as a possibility knowing what she does now, doesn't make me think he's innocent because she can't possibly know! She didn't know about him then or now. Her opinion means nothing to me because she still isn't seeing the forest through the trees and won't even entertain the idea.

 

[momoftwocrazies]

I thought we were given snippets from people inside the courtroom. They just weren't allowed to show her face or stream the testimony because she was a minor at the time. From what I remember her testimony was similar to the others but she was 16 and they were older. There is no way out of that charge. The jury would have to believe that somehow her age is evidence he murdered his son. IMO they should have severed the charges. It's muddying up the waters but that's just me...

I don't believe her testimony was recorded or reported on at all... and it was lengthy.

 

[popsicle]

Are we really comparing RH to a person who murders prostitutes? And as far as I know, he sexted an underage girl - which is different than having sex. Really, I can't think of a worse analogy to a person cheating on their wife.

And if glory hole is consensual, then it doesn't bother me a bit different strokes....

Having sex would have been legal... what he did was not.

 

[catpatrol]

It was just an analogy, I think. The point is sometimes you Dont know someone. Remember BTK? Had a loving family who would have never thought he was a sadistic serial killer for decades. She's saying the loving dad and husband narrative doesn't work here because it's very obvious that no one knew him at all since he was spending so so much time and energy doing the opposite. Just because Leanna won't or can't see this crime as a possibility knowing what she does now, doesn't make me think he's innocent because she can't possibly know! She didn't know about him then or now. Her opinion means nothing to me because she still isn't seeing the forest through the trees and won't even entertain the idea.

The hyperbole on this thread is over the top. He cheated & lied to his wife, but the state hasn't presented an inkling of evidence to compare him to a murderer. IMO

 

[pocketaccent]

http://katv.com/news/local/expert-witness-family-of-naramore-testify-in-hot-car-death-trial
Naramore is charged with negligent homicide in the death of his son, Thomas, who was found dead after being left in a hot car back in July 2015.


The defense began Thursday by called their expert witness, David Diamond, Ph.D, neuroscientist and professor at the University of South Florida. Diamond is an expert in memory loss.

The defense touched on how Dr. Diamond worked and how he would be used in these types of cases. He is initially paid $5,000 to look into the case and investigate. Then, after he investigates, he is paid another $5,000. But Diamond said he will only testify in cases he determines to be accidents.


During his testimony, Diamond spoke about a theory he calls, "how we lose awareness of children in cars", a.k.a "Forgotten Baby Syndrome".


Diamond said there were several factors that relate to the Naramore case. One of the main factors he pointed to was a change in routine. He said there were a number of changes to the Naramore's routine that day.

Wade Naramore's wife normally got Thomas ready, but Wade said he got Thomas ready that morning. Diamond also spoke on the stop at McDonald's for breakfast, because he normally had a breakfast bar and a banana.


Diamond also spoke about possible sleep deprivation, along with stress or distractions.

The prosecution questioned Diamond's expertise in the case, and pointed out that most of his testimony is based off Naramore's description of that day.


Diamond's testimony took most of the day Thursday, with him being excused at 3 p.m.

I went to the link above. Read all related articles provided.
OMG, the dad's 911 call was so so so sad. The whole story is so very sad.