Trial - Ross Harris #7

[GA_Peach]

But, if I understand their theory correctly, Ross decided to kill Cooper because he WAS stressed and " at the breaking point" to use the words in a RH text the State has emphasized, and hence in need of an "escape."

I am not sure that the State has put forth one theory. Thet have floated a few theories and will see what sticks. I see some validity in each theory.

 

[DeDee]

But, if I understand their theory correctly, Ross decided to kill Cooper because he WAS stressed and " at the breaking point" to use the words in a RH text the State has emphasized, and hence in need of an "escape."

Although Opening Statements are not admitted into evidence, Boring addressed this matter in his OS. Boring stated that JRHs desired child-free lifestyle is a possible motive for murder. I honestly don't recall CB mentioning stress as being a factor for Cooper's death. As a matter of testimony, one witness testified that JRH was laid back, would-talk-to-strangers kind of guy. We've learned how JRH reacts to deadlines and punctuality with a lackadaisical attitude.

If JRH was stressed, it was from trying to keep his private life hidden from those who loved and trusted him most. Frankly, I've never had an addiction but I love Cokes. I cannot imagine being addicted to sex with strangers. What an icky feeling that must be for JRH. It is not normal traditional marriage but the sexual urges consumed him while he had ED with his wife.

The 19yo testified, in mid-October, iirc, about sending images and sexting with JRH when she was 15yo and their fling lasted for two years; swapping images until just weeks before Cooper's death. A two year fling! And another two year fling with Jaynie that may just have been more serious than we will ever know.

 

[SuperTmo]

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,...........

I wholeheartedly agree with this. I have no doubt my daughter's dad loves her to the best of his ability. He is a sociopath though, and he seems incapable of having any actual connection with anyone. Regardless of how he feels about her he is an absolutely atrocious dad. Along the same line, lots of druggies love their kids too.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Interesting article about another Judge in Cobb County Ga that Lumpkin and many others have filed claims against .... :thinking:

Cobb judge too chummy with prosecutors, defense attorneys claim
LOCAL By Bill Rankin - The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Posted: 4:48 p.m. Thursday, June 9, 2016
Snip:
A motion filed by Marietta lawyer Bryan Lumpkin refers to comments Green made during a calendar hearing on Jan. 14. Talking with Cobb prosecutors, Green said, talking about an upcoming case, “Hopefully this jury does the right thing. Had some unusual cases lately. Unusual juries.”

In his motion, Lumpkin said his reading of the conversation leads him to believe that one of the cases involving “unusual juries” included his client, David Reid, who was tried for murder in November 2015. Reid was found not guilty of the murder charge but convicted of aggravated offense and other charges.

Lumpkin, who is filing a motion for new trial on Reid’s behalf, wrote he was concerned whether Green could be impartial in hearing that motion if he believed the jury’s verdict was not “the right thing.”

 

[SuperTmo]

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.

I'm sure whatever he says will be accompanied by a lot of fake shame and pretend tears from RH.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Looking for something else came across some interesting articles on Judge Mary Staley Clark. Sadly one was that her husband passed away Jan 2016. He too was a lawyer and was from Brunswick GA, the town the trial is being held in. Thought that was an interesting tidbit.

 

[gitana1]

Negligently distracted? I don't think that's a thing. Even for criminal negligence, there has to be some purposeful activity that is inherently dangerous to human life.

Would incessantly playing video games while your kid dies in a car that you transported him in, while he was in your care, be considered a purposeful activity that is inherently dangerous to human life? If so, then sexting while your kid dies in a car that you transported him in, while he was in your care, might be also considered a purposeful activity that is inherently dangerous to human life.

Both are similar to the distraction one would have from being on drugs or drunk. Not quite the same but similar. I;m not sure what the jury will think though.

 

[gitana1]

I predict the jury will not be hung. There will be a conviction or acquittal on the murder charges.

I predict he will not be convicted of counts 1 or 2. But I can see the case being hung on other counts. Depends on Diamond and the jury instructions, IMO.

 

[DeDee]

Here's what I would want to see as a jury in order to be firmly convinced of pre-meditated murder in this case:

1. Some actual research and interest in getting rid of a child and making it look like an accident

2. Strong evidence of a motive to leave his family - like a serious real relationship with a child-less woman who has made it clear she won't commit to Ross because he has a kid

3. Planning for the day of the event and an obvious attempt to hide his actions. e.g. parking in a very remote location where Cooper could not be saved, somewhere completely illogical; not going to a movie that day; not tossing light bulbs in the car at lunch - but actually getting in the car for some amount of time to check on Cooper. Secretly docking away thousands of dollars to start a new life with a specific and compelling love interest. Evidence that he specifically deleted and tried to hide incriminating evidence on his phone.

4. Distancing himself from Cooper leading up to the event.

5. Some kind of planning for after the event, including not talking to the police so much; definitely not yelling F you at police. Not sexting minors that police will obviously discover on his confiscated phone.

6. Literally showing no reaction or emotion.

7. A history of expressed discontent with his child and being a father.

8. Some kind of really suspicious behavior that is so obviously bizarre and unreasonable. (Like making concrete anchors in the garage and going fishing on Christmas Eve).

Those things together might be the kind of circumstantial case that paint a clear picture of a father who doesn't want his son and has planned his murder.

The evidence that has been presented doesn't come close. All we have is a string of unrelated tidbits that at most raise suspicion. Enough to lead a person that believe it's possible Ross planned this and murdered his child. But the evidence doesn't come close to excluding all other reasonable inferences and interpretations of the evidence.

Sincerely, minor4th, why such a long list of demands for premed? You and I both know that premed can happen in an instant. It takes only one second to make that fatal decision for it to be considered premeditated murder.

That being what it is, I've noticed very lenient sentences given down for hot car deaths. One guy recently plead guilty to charges, received a stiff sentence, for a girlfriend's 2yo's hot car death, which was mostly forgiven, in lieu, he'll serve only six months.

While every baby matters, Cooper deserves more justice than his father receiving a 6mth slap on the back. jmho

 

[Bc007]

I think acquittal on the felony murder charge is only going to be possible if jurors understand their jury instructions. If they vote to convict on child cruelty in the 2nd degree, no further burden of proof need be met to convict on felony murder, correct?

I can easily imagine jurors mistakenly believing that if they convict on (the predicate felony of ) 2CC they MUST convict on felony murder.

They still have to show his behavior was wreckless in regards to his parenting and concern for the safety of his child - not his marriage, as it pertains to 2CC.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Although Opening Statements are not admitted into evidence, Boring addressed this matter in his OS. Boring stated that JRHs desired child-free lifestyle is a possible motive for murder. I honestly don't recall CB mentioning stress as being a factor for Cooper's death. As a matter of testimony, one witness testified that JRH was laid back, would-talk-to-strangers kind of guy. We've learned how JRH reacts to deadlines and punctuality with a lackadaisical attitude.

If JRH was stressed, it was from trying to keep his private life hidden from those who loved and trusted him most. Frankly, I've never had an addiction but I love Cokes. I cannot imagine being addicted to sex with strangers. What an icky feeling that must be for JRH. It is not normal traditional marriage but the sexual urges consumed him while he had ED with his wife.

The 19yo testified, in mid-October, iirc, about sending images and sexting with JRH when she was 15yo and their fling lasted for two years; swapping images until just weeks before Cooper's death. A two year fling! And another two year fling with Jaynie that may just have been more serious than we will ever know.

RBBM this comes from the false statements from the beginning that RH researched Child Free. And Jaynie "fling" well all I can say on that is go back and listen to her testimony Direct AND Defense. It ain't like Boring insinuated about her in his OS... if you listen to the FULL CONTEXT of their texts/chats.

 

[Bc007]

Yes, but that's my point. If I understand correctly, the felony murder is a separate charge that must be voted on separately. So, even if the jury votes guilty on 2CC and COULD just check off guilty on that felony murder charge , without futher deliberation, doesn't mean they MUST.

Correct- felony murder they have to prove intent. 2CC they have to prove a willing recklessness or disregard for the child's safety that one could reason may potential lead to injury or death. That's my understanding anyways.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Quote Originally Posted by minor4th View Post
Here's what I would want to see as a jury in order to be firmly convinced of pre-meditated murder in this case:

1. Some actual research and interest in getting rid of a child and making it look like an accident

2. Strong evidence of a motive to leave his family - like a serious real relationship with a child-less woman who has made it clear she won't commit to Ross because he has a kid

3. Planning for the day of the event and an obvious attempt to hide his actions. e.g. parking in a very remote location where Cooper could not be saved, somewhere completely illogical; not going to a movie that day; not tossing light bulbs in the car at lunch - but actually getting in the car for some amount of time to check on Cooper. Secretly docking away thousands of dollars to start a new life with a specific and compelling love interest. Evidence that he specifically deleted and tried to hide incriminating evidence on his phone.

4. Distancing himself from Cooper leading up to the event.

5. Some kind of planning for after the event, including not talking to the police so much; definitely not yelling F you at police. Not sexting minors that police will obviously discover on his confiscated phone.

6. Literally showing no reaction or emotion.

7. A history of expressed discontent with his child and being a father.

8. Some kind of really suspicious behavior that is so obviously bizarre and unreasonable. (Like making concrete anchors in the garage and going fishing on Christmas Eve).

Those things together might be the kind of circumstantial case that paint a clear picture of a father who doesn't want his son and has planned his murder.

The evidence that has been presented doesn't come close. All we have is a string of unrelated tidbits that at most raise suspicion. Enough to lead a person that believe it's possible Ross planned this and murdered his child. But the evidence doesn't come close to excluding all other reasonable inferences and interpretations of the evidence

.

Sincerely, minor4th, why such a long list of demands for premed? You and I both know that premed can happen in an instant. It takes only one second to make that fatal decision for it to be considered premeditated murder.

That being what it is, I've noticed very lenient sentences given down for hot car deaths. One guy recently plead guilty to charges, received a stiff sentence, for a girlfriend's 2yo's hot car death, which was mostly forgiven, in lieu, he'll serve only six months.

While every baby matters, Cooper deserves more justice than his father receiving a 6mth slap on the back. jmho

Respectfully, De, what has the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt this happened and what was it they have proved? TIA

 

[RANCH]

I'm trying to grasp how RH could have premeditated Coopers death in mere seconds with the evidence that we have. I don't see it. JMO

 

[Hope4More]

Correct- felony murder they have to prove intent. 2CC they have to prove a willing recklessness or disregard for the child's safety that one could reason may potential lead to injury or death. That's my understanding anyways.

The felony of 2nd degree child cruelty does not require the State to prove intent.

If the jury finds RH guilty of 2nd degree child cruelty, then a new law in GA makes it possible for the jury to also find RH guilty of felony murder, again without the State having to prove intent.

 

[PenElaine]

IMHO there are lots of parents on this board. My (now) 22-year old DS was a blue--eyed tow-head like Cooper. I was so paranoid of LOCKING HIM IN MY CAR by accident that I sourced a key ring I could put around my wrist. I talked to him and sang along to Disney music on on every single car ride or chatted away to keep him occupied. There couldn't have been a distraction in the world - even being exhausted at times - that would make me forget my precious boy for even one second. Even 22 years later I worry about him driving and getting to school/work safely every day. And I own a restaurant with a ton of stressful distractions but he is always on my mind. I'm. not religious but God bless this poor sweet boy who died a horrible death because his Dad had his own private life to urgently attend to.

I understand FBS for some - but not this time. No way.

 

[TexMex]

Count 1 - Malice Murder

Count 2 - Felony Murder - Felony is count 4

Count 3 - Felony Murder - Felony is count 5

Count 4 - Cruelty to Children in the First Degree - "..maliciously caused Cooper Harris cruel and excessive physical pain"

Count 5 - Cruelty to Children in the Second Degree - "..with criminal negligence caused Cooper Harris cruel and excessive physical pain"

Counts 6-8 relate to sexting with a minor

Count 6 - Criminal Attempt to Commit a Felony - "..the accused did request that a minor female...provide a photograph and visual medium involving a lewd exhibition of her genital and pubic area..."

Count 7 - Dissemination of *advertiser censored* to Minors - "..accused did knowingly disseminate and furnish a minor female printed matter containing explicit and detailed verbal descriptions and narrative accounts of sexual excitement and sexual conduct..."

Count 8 - Dissemination of *advertiser censored* to Minors - "..accused person did knowingly disseminate and furnish to a minor female a photograph and visual image of a portion of the human body which depicted sexually explicit nudity, to wit: a photograph and visual image of uncovered male genitals in a discernibly turgid state.."

March 2016 indicted on 8 additional counts involving more minors

 

[DeDee]

Originally Posted by minor4th
I predict the jury will not be hung. There will be a conviction or acquittal on the murder charges.

I predict he will not be convicted of counts 1 or 2. But I can see the case being hung on other counts. Depends on Diamond and the jury instructions, IMO.

Just for clarity, the 8 count indictments filed against JRH are:

 

[SuperTmo]

How do we know he's court appointed? In any event, this guy is extremely wealthy. His firm benefits from this case regardless of how much he is paid.



Count 1 - malice murder = intent (with malice aforethought)
Count 2 - felony murder = in essence, intent to harm, not to kill, must be shown (underlying charge supporting felony murder is cruelty to children in the first degree, which means malice)
Count 3 - felony murder = no intent. Reckless disregard for safety must be shown. Specifically, must show that through criminal negligence, he committed cruelty to children (underlying charge supporting felony murder is cruelty to children in the second degree, which means criminal negligence. Criminal negligence = Criminal negligence is an act or failure to act which demonstrates a willful, wanton, or reckless disregard for the safety of others who might reasonably be expected to be injured thereby. http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-16/chapter-2/article-1/16-2-1
See also, https://www.pagepate.com/child-cruelty-georgia-law/
Count 4 - cruelty to children in the first degree = intent in essence must be shown as state must prove that he intentionally caused his child cruel or excessive physical or mental pain.
Count 5 - cruelty to children in the second degree = willful, wanton or reckless disregard for his son’s safety.
http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wgcl/harris_indictment_2.pdf



Oh I totally disagree. There is a reason why top-named defense attorneys routinely take cases that don't pay well or don't pay at all. Man, they even seek them out. Businesses like to expand, no matter how thriving and lucrative they are. Many of these firms have dozens of attorneys on staff and make an ever-increasing killing.

Thank you for explaining the charges!

 

[arkansasmimi]

JMHO whomever the State is going to call as Rebuttal witness again has to do with the information that Stoddard got from FBI Behavioral Analysis Unit on Hot Car Deaths/Dr Diamond. (Too bad it couldn't be someone from Houch team.. Dr Spencer Reid maybe :silly: love that show)

“The proper function of rebuttal evidence is to contradict, impeach or defuse the impact of the evidence offered by an adverse party.” Peals, 535 F.3d at 630 (quoting United States v. Grintjes, 237 F.3d 876, 879 (7th Cir. 2001) (internal quotation marks omitted)). Under this standard, “Testimony offered only as additional support to an argument made in a case in chief, if not offered ‘to contradict, impeach or defuse the impact of the evidence offered by an adverse party,’ is improper on rebuttal.” Peals, 535 F.3d at 630 (quoting Grintjes, 237 F.3d at 879). On the record, the trial court did not err.

The Peals case serves as a useful reminder on the necessity of calling witnesses during a party’s case in chief and limiting rebuttal evidence to that which responds to evidence offered by the opposing party. http://federalevidence.com/blog/200...t-be-used-clarify-evidence-offered-case-chief