Trial - Ross Harris #9

[EquallyDivided]

The testimony of RH's friends reminded me of my ex-BIL, who is a narcissist/sociopath. He is a successful engineer for a large corporation, and was known as a larger-than-life man with many friends, a devout church-goer and a family man who dearly loved his wife and children. What no one realized at the time was that the only person he is really capable of loving is himself and when he decided he wanted to be free to pursue his sexual fantasies, he walked away from the family he "loved" and barely has a relationship with his children. He "loved" them as long as they met his needs. When the novelty wore off, he moved on.

I think this is what Ross wanted to do, but there was one thing holding him back - LeAnna. She didn't want Cooper to grow up in a broken home as she had, and she was going to do everything she could to fight for her marriage. She had already done that when she caught Ross viewing *advertiser censored*, and she most certainly would do it if Ross told her that he wanted a divorce. LeAnna would have insisted that she and Ross discuss this with their church groups and ask for their guidance and prayers, as well as seek marital counseling, and I think Ross didn't want to once again be forced to bare his soul and endure the feelings of humiliation and judgment. As a narcissist, he would not let her shame him again. Once Cooper was deceased, he would be able to approach the subject of divorce again under the guise of a bereaved parent who'd drifted apart from his spouse and, if he were really lucky, she would be so angry at him that she would initiate the divorce and he could be the victim.

All of the above is JMO. I am not a psychologist and I am in no way trying to diagnose Ross. I am also aware that no mental-health professional has testified to his mental state. I realize that he triggers a personal bias in me and, for that reason, I would probably not make a very objective juror in this case.

This is a rough crowd (which is why I usually just lurk), and won't be surprised if I'm chastised for having this opinion, but for me it explains why a "loving" father would choose fillicide over divorce. Although I believe there are legitimate instances of FBS, I don't think this is one.

JMO

Nope, I completely agree with you and have said almost exactly the same thing in earlier threads. I think you are spot-on and thank you for sharing.

I believe we all have great understanding of different things. Some of us are really good at interpreting the law, some of us are good as being very neutral and non-commital, some of us are good at reading human behavoirs, and some of us are good at interpreting intent and cayse/effect, some of us are good at "themes". Some of this is science, and some of it is art.

I have an entire BOOK based on "interrogation themes". You basically pick which crime was committed, and offer different excuses for a suspect to grab onto while you interrogate. This gives the suspect an "out". A way to admit the crime while mitigating the reason. This way, a suspect will admit to the crime with reasoning that makes them seem like a decent person.

I just deleted a huge dissertation, I don't want to give away secrets BUT, I will say I'm passionate about Behavioral Science. It helps that's what I DO for a living.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

 

[EquallyDivided]

gitana - his mannerisms and his over-explaining are red flags to me. I am a teacher and I guess over the years I've become ultra sensitive to tip-offs that a student is lying to me. One of those is over-explaining, too much detail, & irrelevant information.

I believe LE officers do that, too, but of course under much different circumstances. They have a "hinky meter" that goes off if something is just not right. I believe that happened with JRH and then other pieces of information began to pile up.

Another poster (sorry, I forgot who) said that IF JRH is innocent and this all just happened - he is one of the unluckiest people on the face of the earth. For that many things to converge on him all at once in a perfect storm...it just goes beyond what I can comfortably accept. But, that's just me!

Yes Judy, "Hinkey meter" is the slang for anything inconsistent with their baseline behavoir. We even take classes at the Federal Law Enforcement Center in Brunswick, GA regarding this subject, which still cracks me up. What a coincidence!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

 

[SuperTmo]

And what if cooper saw RH and weakly cried out to him for help and RH closed the door on him AGAIN?

This is what I think happened. RH deserves to spend his life in prison. Poor Cooper.

 

[RANCH]

Respectfully - I completely disagree. His behavior was not like every other parent who has done this. And I think the majority here feel that his behavior in the videos WAS suspicious and bizarre.
JMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm glad that Websleuths allows all opinions in these case's and not just the majority. I've been with the majority on some cases here and in the minority on others. It is much easier to post with the majority than with the minority.

I call them how I see them is all I can say. JMO

 

[JudyBolton]

I'm glad that Websleuths allows all opinions in these case's and not just the majority. I've been with the majority on some cases here and in the minority on others. It is much easier to post with the majority than with the minority.

I call them how I see them is all I can say. JMO

And don't we all do that? I would hope so!

Which side do you think is the majority here on WS in this case? I don't honestly see a big divide like say JA or CA. It seems pretty even and several continue to state they are waiting for further testimony (and some, now, for the closing) to make a final determination.

 

[dlkutac]

The testimony of RH's friends reminded me of my ex-BIL, who is a narcissist/sociopath. He is a successful engineer for a large corporation, and was known as a larger-than-life man with many friends, a devout church-goer and a family man who dearly loved his wife and children. What no one realized at the time was that the only person he is really capable of loving is himself and when he decided he wanted to be free to pursue his sexual fantasies, he walked away from the family he "loved" and barely has a relationship with his children. He "loved" them as long as they met his needs. When the novelty wore off, he moved on.

I think this is what Ross wanted to do, but there was one thing holding him back - LeAnna. She didn't want Cooper to grow up in a broken home as she had, and she was going to do everything she could to fight for her marriage. She had already done that when she caught Ross viewing *advertiser censored*, and she most certainly would do it if Ross told her that he wanted a divorce. LeAnna would have insisted that she and Ross discuss this with their church groups and ask for their guidance and prayers, as well as seek marital counseling, and I think Ross didn't want to once again be forced to bare his soul and endure the feelings of humiliation and judgment. As a narcissist, he would not let her shame him again. Once Cooper was deceased, he would be able to approach the subject of divorce again under the guise of a bereaved parent who'd drifted apart from his spouse and, if he were really lucky, she would be so angry at him that she would initiate the divorce and he could be the victim.

All of the above is JMO. I am not a psychologist and I am in no way trying to diagnose Ross. I am also aware that no mental-health professional has testified to his mental state. I realize that he triggers a personal bias in me and, for that reason, I would probably not make a very objective juror in this case.

This is a rough crowd (which is why I usually just lurk), and won't be surprised if I'm chastised for having this opinion, but for me it explains why a "loving" father would choose fillicide over divorce. Although I believe there are legitimate instances of FBS, I don't think this is one.

JMO

BBM. If you ascribe to this theory, then you cannot then attach to the idea that any of his texting was done in a permanent sense. Nor could you buy that the red-haired girl with apparent emotional issues (name escapes me atm) was motive for wanting to be child free. He was obviously willing to say anything to get laid. His conversation tailored to each new candidate. That is one of the problems in this case. There has been no solid evidence that he was looking for a drastic change. He already was sexting, having sex on the side, plus appearing to live a "normal" life, which was also important to him. I don't see compelling evidence that proves he wanted to rock his world to this extreme.

 

[Paige SC]

I've had some time to reflect on my earlier prediction that RH will be found not guilty of murder. Of course, that's still a *very real* possibility but I don't think I'm giving the jury enough credit. I'm a bit jaded after the Casey Anthony verdict BUT sometimes I forget that for one Casey Anthony there are a dozen Susan Smiths.‎‎

‎Dudes like *advertiser censored*, they cheat, they lie. They might even complain & say they hate being married & need a break from their kid, but get real peeps! It doesn't mean they actually want to be divorced or without kids. So, like, DUH!

Clicking on 'child free anything' doesn't mean he actually, yanno, wanted to BE child free or anything. Furthermore, stumbling on 'hot car death of any breathing organism' certainly doesn't mean he wanted his kid to die in a hot car. I mean 'cmon! I'd hate to think what they'd find in MY search history. I once researched why my female dog humps my arm and I wound up trolling a beastality forum (true story.) WELL... I can promise you that's no fetish of mine!
‎
Having repeated discussions about 'hot car deaths' so much so that it was an admitted fear of RH's could be just plain 'ole bad luck. Real, real bad luck. Like, REALLY BAAAD. You know what they say, sometimes people create their own worst fears!‎

He could have forgotten to take his toddler to day care after a 40 second car ride. Never mind having JUST eaten breakfast with the little fella. Not probable but indeed not statistically impossible. I mean, I once bought a box of chocolate covered strawberries, drove home, left them in the car and 8 hours later they were beyond salvagable. TOTALLY RUINED. Either way, 40 seconds or 40 miles, what's the difference?!‎ You need to look at the BIG PICTURE. When taken in context there's absolutely NO difference between chocolates and children. NONE. ‎

He could have overlooked his child in the car at lunch (one step above completely impossible but that step is nothing short of a MOUNTAIN of possibility.) After all, not like he was expecting him to be IN the car. So tired of having to state THE OBVIOUS. ‎
‎
Amid the distinct & unmistakable odor of death, he could have, I don't know? just not smelled ANTHING UNUSUAL? He could have even failed to detect his son's stiff corpse while driving IN the stench filled car. Okay, okay, FULL DISCLOSURE: Statistics on this one have to be at MINUS-MINUS-0%-AS-IN-ZERO-PERCENT, but whatever. As far as I know there's nothing in the Universal Book of Absolutes stating it's humanly IMpossible, so THERE!

By the way and FYI--> Rear facing cars eats aren't *ALWAYS* a good thing. They CAN make you instantly forget you have a baby in one. And I mean instantly as in the blink of an evil eye. This isn't hyperbole, folks. Time to demand warning labels, flashing lights and sirens. IMMEDIATE CALL TO ACTION.
‎
After dragging his dead toddler in full rigor out of the car and onto the scalding hot asphalt, some observers found his overall behavior to be somewhat suspicious...but not ALL observers. Keyword is ALL, folks. A-L-L. SPELL IT!‎

I mean the list goes on and on but you get the gist.

Any one of these things is indeed possible, some things like infidelity are commonplace and really have no bearing on whether someone would kill their baby. Other things listed have happened before, it's not like this is the first time a child has died in a hot car.

But after giving the guy a pass a half dozen times, the picture just doesn't get any clearer. The only conclusion one can *reasonably* draw is that the man intended, with malice and a depraved heart, to kill his baby.

It's just not humanly possible to rationalize RH's behavior in the weeks leading up to the events of June 18th, but even if I could I'm still left with trying to justify that fateful day as little more than coincidental, perpetually missed happenstance. The totality of it all is just too much to overcome. Too, too much.

True, there is no smoking gun. A gun is helpful but not critical to a successful procesuction. The evidence presented in this case is pretty much based on what we know about human behavior, abnormal human behavior, motive, character, etc. Yes, the state has the burden and it's a MAJOR one - as it should be. But people HAVE been convicted on far less (sometimes even decades after a crime.)‎
‎
So, with all that said I am upping my odds to 80/20 in favor of guilty of malice murder.‎

All the above is MOO.
**

 

[NCTeacher]

I've had some time to reflect on my earlier prediction that RH will be found not guilty of murder. Of course, that's still a *very real* possibility but I don't think I'm giving the jury enough credit. I'm a bit jaded after the Casey Anthony verdict BUT sometimes I forget that for one Casey Anthony there are a dozen Susan Smiths.‎‎

‎Dudes like *advertiser censored*, they cheat, they lie. They might even complain & say they hate being married & need a break from their kid, but get real peeps! It doesn't mean they actually want to be divorced or without kids. So, like, DUH!

Clicking on 'child free anything' doesn't mean he actually, yanno, wanted to BE child free or anything. Furthermore, stumbling on 'hot car death of any breathing organism' certainly doesn't mean he wanted his kid to die in a hot car. I mean 'cmon! I'd hate to think what they'd find in MY search history. I once researched why my female dog humps my arm and I wound up trolling a beastality forum (true story.) WELL... I can promise you that's no fetish of mine!
‎
Having repeated discussions about 'hot car deaths' so much so that it was an admitted fear of RH's could be just plain 'ole bad luck. Real, real bad luck. Like, REALLY BAAAD. You know what they say, sometimes people create their own worst fears!‎

He could have forgotten to take his toddler to day care after a 40 second car ride. Never mind having JUST eaten breakfast with the little fella. Not probable but indeed not statistically impossible. I mean, I once bought a box of chocolate covered strawberries, drove home, left them in the car and 8 hours later they were beyond salvagable. TOTALLY RUINED. Either way, 40 seconds or 40 miles, what's the difference?!‎ You need to look at the BIG PICTURE. When taken in context there's absolutely NO difference between chocolates and children. NONE. ‎

He could have overlooked his child in the car at lunch (one step above completely impossible but that step is nothing short of a MOUNTAIN of possibility.) After all, not like he was expecting him to be IN the car. So tired of having to state THE OBVIOUS. ‎
‎
Amid the distinct & unmistakable odor of death, he could have, I don't know? just not smelled ANTHING UNUSUAL? He could have even failed to detect his son's stiff corpse while driving IN the stench filled car. Okay, okay, FULL DISCLOSURE: Statistics on this one have to be at MINUS-MINUS-0%-AS-IN-ZERO-PERCENT, but whatever. As far as I know there's nothing in the Universal Book of Absolutes stating it's humanly IMpossible, so THERE!

By the way and FYI--> Rear facing cars eats aren't *ALWAYS* a good thing. They CAN make you instantly forget you have a baby in one. And I mean instantly as in the blink of an evil eye. This isn't hyperbole, folks. Time to demand warning labels, flashing lights and sirens. IMMEDIATE CALL TO ACTION.
‎
After dragging his dead toddler in full rigor out of the car and onto the scalding hot asphalt, some observers found his overall behavior to be somewhat suspicious...but not ALL observers. Keyword is ALL, folks. A-L-L. SPELL IT!‎

I mean the list goes on and on but you get the gist.

Any one of these things is indeed possible, some things like infidelity are commonplace and really have no bearing on whether someone would kill their baby. Other things listed have happened before, it's not like this is the first time a child has died in a hot car.

But after giving the guy a pass a half dozen times, the picture just doesn't get any clearer. The only conclusion one can *reasonably* draw is that the man intended, with malice and a depraved heart, to kill his baby.

It's just not humanly possible to rationalize RH's behavior in the weeks leading up to the events of June 18th, but even if I could I'm still left with trying to justify that fateful day as little more than coincidental, perpetually missed happenstance. The totality of it all is just too much to overcome. Too, too much.

True, there is no smoking gun. A gun is helpful but not critical to a successful procesuction. The evidence presented in this case is pretty much based on what we know about human behavior, abnormal human behavior, motive, character, etc. Yes, the state has the burden and it's a MAJOR one - as it should be. But people HAVE been convicted on far less (sometimes even decades after a crime.)‎
‎
So, with all that said I am upping my odds to 80/20 in favor of guilty of malice murder.‎

All the above is MOO.
**

Completely agree with everything you said. Except I feel like the odds for highest conviction are 30% malice, 40% felony, 20% child cruelty, 10% hung--notice I have 0% for not guilty. Out of 12, I believe at least one person will hang this jury before conceding "not guilty," for the reasons you stated.

 

[RANCH]

And don't we all do that? I would hope so!

Which side do you think is the majority here on WS in this case? I don't honestly see a big divide like say JA or CA. It seems pretty even and several continue to state they are waiting for further testimony (and some, now, for the closing) to make a final determination.

I think that you're not understanding the point I'm making. It shouldn't matter who is is the majority or who is in the minority. All opinions matter here. JMO.

 

[JudyBolton]

I think that you're not understanding the point I'm making. It shouldn't matter who is is the majority or who is in the minority. All opinions matter here. JMO.

OK - I read your quote out of context. I see what you were referring to now. Sorry:shame:

 

[GA_Peach]

But after giving the guy a pass a half dozen times, the picture just doesn't get any clearer. The only conclusion one can *reasonably* draw is that the man intended, with malice and a depraved heart, to kill his baby.

It's just not humanly possible to rationalize RH's behavior in the weeks leading up to the events of June 18th, but even if I could I'm still left with trying to justify that fateful day as little more than coincidental, perpetually missed happenstance. The totality of it all is just too much to overcome. Too, too much.

Snipped by me for space. BBM

I am giving your entire post a virtual standing ovation, but I especially agree with the part above. :loveyou:

 

[jennapuppy]

BBM. If you ascribe to this theory, then you cannot then attach to the idea that any of his texting was done in a permanent sense. Nor could you buy that the red-haired girl with apparent emotional issues (name escapes me atm) was motive for wanting to be child free. He was obviously willing to say anything to get laid. His conversation tailored to each new candidate. That is one of the problems in this case. There has been no solid evidence that he was looking for a drastic change. He already was sexting, having sex on the side, plus appearing to live a "normal" life, which was also important to him. I don't see compelling evidence that proves he wanted to rock his world to this extreme.

I never thought the red-headed girl or any one person in particular was his motive for wanting to be child-free, and I don't even think that sexual pursuits were the primary motivation. I think that Ross' life was spiraling out of control and his needs (not sexual - but his emotional needs as a narcissist) were no longer being fulfilled by marriage and parenthood, and he wasn't going to allow LeAnna to emasculate him again by airing their dirty laundry in front of his friends, colleagues and family. The normalcy of his life was just a facade, and it was getting harder and harder to maintain that facade.

As I said, this is all JMO and I don't expect 12 jurors to reach the same conclusion that I did.

 

[CapitalBat]

I've had some time to reflect on my earlier prediction that RH will be found not guilty of murder. Of course, that's still a *very real* possibility but I don't think I'm giving the jury enough credit. I'm a bit jaded after the Casey Anthony verdict BUT sometimes I forget that for one Casey Anthony there are a dozen Susan Smiths.‎‎

‎Dudes like *advertiser censored*, they cheat, they lie. They might even complain & say they hate being married & need a break from their kid, but get real peeps! It doesn't mean they actually want to be divorced or without kids. So, like, DUH!

Clicking on 'child free anything' doesn't mean he actually, yanno, wanted to BE child free or anything. Furthermore, stumbling on 'hot car death of any breathing organism' certainly doesn't mean he wanted his kid to die in a hot car. I mean 'cmon! I'd hate to think what they'd find in MY search history. I once researched why my female dog humps my arm and I wound up trolling a beastality forum (true story.) WELL... I can promise you that's no fetish of mine!
‎
Having repeated discussions about 'hot car deaths' so much so that it was an admitted fear of RH's could be just plain 'ole bad luck. Real, real bad luck. Like, REALLY BAAAD. You know what they say, sometimes people create their own worst fears!‎

He could have forgotten to take his toddler to day care after a 40 second car ride. Never mind having JUST eaten breakfast with the little fella. Not probable but indeed not statistically impossible. I mean, I once bought a box of chocolate covered strawberries, drove home, left them in the car and 8 hours later they were beyond salvagable. TOTALLY RUINED. Either way, 40 seconds or 40 miles, what's the difference?!‎ You need to look at the BIG PICTURE. When taken in context there's absolutely NO difference between chocolates and children. NONE. ‎

He could have overlooked his child in the car at lunch (one step above completely impossible but that step is nothing short of a MOUNTAIN of possibility.) After all, not like he was expecting him to be IN the car. So tired of having to state THE OBVIOUS. ‎
‎
Amid the distinct & unmistakable odor of death, he could have, I don't know? just not smelled ANTHING UNUSUAL? He could have even failed to detect his son's stiff corpse while driving IN the stench filled car. Okay, okay, FULL DISCLOSURE: Statistics on this one have to be at MINUS-MINUS-0%-AS-IN-ZERO-PERCENT, but whatever. As far as I know there's nothing in the Universal Book of Absolutes stating it's humanly IMpossible, so THERE!

By the way and FYI--> Rear facing cars eats aren't *ALWAYS* a good thing. They CAN make you instantly forget you have a baby in one. And I mean instantly as in the blink of an evil eye. This isn't hyperbole, folks. Time to demand warning labels, flashing lights and sirens. IMMEDIATE CALL TO ACTION.
‎
After dragging his dead toddler in full rigor out of the car and onto the scalding hot asphalt, some observers found his overall behavior to be somewhat suspicious...but not ALL observers. Keyword is ALL, folks. A-L-L. SPELL IT!‎

I mean the list goes on and on but you get the gist.

Any one of these things is indeed possible, some things like infidelity are commonplace and really have no bearing on whether someone would kill their baby. Other things listed have happened before, it's not like this is the first time a child has died in a hot car.

But after giving the guy a pass a half dozen times, the picture just doesn't get any clearer. The only conclusion one can *reasonably* draw is that the man intended, with malice and a depraved heart, to kill his baby.

It's just not humanly possible to rationalize RH's behavior in the weeks leading up to the events of June 18th, but even if I could I'm still left with trying to justify that fateful day as little more than coincidental, perpetually missed happenstance. The totality of it all is just too much to overcome. Too, too much.

True, there is no smoking gun. A gun is helpful but not critical to a successful procesuction. The evidence presented in this case is pretty much based on what we know about human behavior, abnormal human behavior, motive, character, etc. Yes, the state has the burden and it's a MAJOR one - as it should be. But people HAVE been convicted on far less (sometimes even decades after a crime.)‎
‎
So, with all that said I am upping my odds to 80/20 in favor of guilty of malice murder.‎

All the above is MOO.
**

Yes!:loveyou:

 

[momoftwocrazies]

The testimony of RH's friends reminded me of my ex-BIL, who is a narcissist/sociopath. He is a successful engineer for a large corporation, and was known as a larger-than-life man with many friends, a devout church-goer and a family man who dearly loved his wife and children. What no one realized at the time was that the only person he is really capable of loving is himself and when he decided he wanted to be free to pursue his sexual fantasies, he walked away from the family he "loved" and barely has a relationship with his children. He "loved" them as long as they met his needs. When the novelty wore off, he moved on.

I think this is what Ross wanted to do, but there was one thing holding him back - LeAnna. She didn't want Cooper to grow up in a broken home as she had, and she was going to do everything she could to fight for her marriage. She had already done that when she caught Ross viewing *advertiser censored*, and she most certainly would do it if Ross told her that he wanted a divorce. LeAnna would have insisted that she and Ross discuss this with their church groups and ask for their guidance and prayers, as well as seek marital counseling, and I think Ross didn't want to once again be forced to bare his soul and endure the feelings of humiliation and judgment. As a narcissist, he would not let her shame him again. Once Cooper was deceased, he would be able to approach the subject of divorce again under the guise of a bereaved parent who'd drifted apart from his spouse and, if he were really lucky, she would be so angry at him that she would initiate the divorce and he could be the victim.

All of the above is JMO. I am not a psychologist and I am in no way trying to diagnose Ross. I am also aware that no mental-health professional has testified to his mental state. I realize that he triggers a personal bias in me and, for that reason, I would probably not make a very objective juror in this case.

This is a rough crowd (which is why I usually just lurk), and won't be surprised if I'm chastised for having this opinion, but for me it explains why a "loving" father would choose fillicide over divorce. Although I believe there are legitimate instances of FBS, I don't think this is one.

JMO

I think you might be right about him. I was thinking the same. He knew she would stay through almost anything and he wanted to not be married anymore.

 

[minor4th]

I've had some time to reflect on my earlier prediction that RH will be found not guilty of murder. Of course, that's still a *very real* possibility but I don't think I'm giving the jury enough credit. I'm a bit jaded after the Casey Anthony verdict BUT sometimes I forget that for one Casey Anthony there are a dozen Susan Smiths.‎‎

‎Dudes like *advertiser censored*, they cheat, they lie. They might even complain & say they hate being married & need a break from their kid, but get real peeps! It doesn't mean they actually want to be divorced or without kids. So, like, DUH!

Clicking on 'child free anything' doesn't mean he actually, yanno, wanted to BE child free or anything. Furthermore, stumbling on 'hot car death of any breathing organism' certainly doesn't mean he wanted his kid to die in a hot car. I mean 'cmon! I'd hate to think what they'd find in MY search history. I once researched why my female dog humps my arm and I wound up trolling a beastality forum (true story.) WELL... I can promise you that's no fetish of mine!
‎
Having repeated discussions about 'hot car deaths' so much so that it was an admitted fear of RH's could be just plain 'ole bad luck. Real, real bad luck. Like, REALLY BAAAD. You know what they say, sometimes people create their own worst fears!‎

He could have forgotten to take his toddler to day care after a 40 second car ride. Never mind having JUST eaten breakfast with the little fella. Not probable but indeed not statistically impossible. I mean, I once bought a box of chocolate covered strawberries, drove home, left them in the car and 8 hours later they were beyond salvagable. TOTALLY RUINED. Either way, 40 seconds or 40 miles, what's the difference?!‎ You need to look at the BIG PICTURE. When taken in context there's absolutely NO difference between chocolates and children. NONE. ‎

He could have overlooked his child in the car at lunch (one step above completely impossible but that step is nothing short of a MOUNTAIN of possibility.) After all, not like he was expecting him to be IN the car. So tired of having to state THE OBVIOUS. ‎
‎
Amid the distinct & unmistakable odor of death, he could have, I don't know? just not smelled ANTHING UNUSUAL? He could have even failed to detect his son's stiff corpse while driving IN the stench filled car. Okay, okay, FULL DISCLOSURE: Statistics on this one have to be at MINUS-MINUS-0%-AS-IN-ZERO-PERCENT, but whatever. As far as I know there's nothing in the Universal Book of Absolutes stating it's humanly IMpossible, so THERE!

By the way and FYI--> Rear facing cars eats aren't *ALWAYS* a good thing. They CAN make you instantly forget you have a baby in one. And I mean instantly as in the blink of an evil eye. This isn't hyperbole, folks. Time to demand warning labels, flashing lights and sirens. IMMEDIATE CALL TO ACTION.
‎
After dragging his dead toddler in full rigor out of the car and onto the scalding hot asphalt, some observers found his overall behavior to be somewhat suspicious...but not ALL observers. Keyword is ALL, folks. A-L-L. SPELL IT!‎

I mean the list goes on and on but you get the gist.

Any one of these things is indeed possible, some things like infidelity are commonplace and really have no bearing on whether someone would kill their baby. Other things listed have happened before, it's not like this is the first time a child has died in a hot car.

But after giving the guy a pass a half dozen times, the picture just doesn't get any clearer. The only conclusion one can *reasonably* draw is that the man intended, with malice and a depraved heart, to kill his baby.

It's just not humanly possible to rationalize RH's behavior in the weeks leading up to the events of June 18th, but even if I could I'm still left with trying to justify that fateful day as little more than coincidental, perpetually missed happenstance. The totality of it all is just too much to overcome. Too, too much.

True, there is no smoking gun. A gun is helpful but not critical to a successful procesuction. The evidence presented in this case is pretty much based on what we know about human behavior, abnormal human behavior, motive, character, etc. Yes, the state has the burden and it's a MAJOR one - as it should be. But people HAVE been convicted on far less (sometimes even decades after a crime.)‎
‎
So, with all that said I am upping my odds to 80/20 in favor of guilty of malice murder.‎

All the above is MOO.
**

Very clever and creative

 

[CapitalBat]

Watching the police interrogation tape again is illuminating. First, I note how casually Ross talks about himself as he is being frisked. Sorry, I didn't hear or read about one of the other parents acting this way. He says he worked for the police department, calm, conversational tone, as a dispatcher. He then says his job is going "great". Enthusiastic tone. Then, "I like my job." And he is a guitar player, "I'm the lead guitar player at [unintelligible]." Casual, calm tone. Around minute 27.

[video=youtube;vOkKqENIBww]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOkKqENIBww[/video]

But it's at 1:23:15, where he starts talking about his knowledge of FBS and how to prevent it, the dangers, etc. To me, it is clear that he is trying to get the detectives to associate his case with the case he just saw on the news, trying to explain it away. Sort of like: "I'm a good, concerned dad. I would never do something like that. But there was this news report and it happens." The context right before he made these statements was he was asked how he thinks this happened and was asked to explain how it happened and he started talking about how going into CFA with his son was different 'I never go into CFA" and how he just failed to turn to daycare and his mind just made him keep going. That's when he brings up this other case and the vet video. I think like many criminals he is not that bright:

"I would never leave him in the car. I just watched news reports, there was a news report of a guy who did this, just like me. And now he's an advocate for when you park, you turn around and look again and I've been doing that because the worst fear of my..for me is to leave my son in a hot cart. And then recently I saw a vet on the internet who said even if you have your windows rolled down and regardless, I;m going to show you how hot it can get in the car, if you think you can just leave your pets in the car, roll your windows down down, 5 minutes, you can't do that. And I watched that and [unintelligible] it would be terrible if my son were in the car, and I would hate that. When I was working for Cumberland Police, we had a canine officer leave his dog in the car, for 10 minutes...[his tone here is, to me, one used when someone is explaining to someone, step, by step, exactly how something simple works] um and dog died of heat exhaustion immediately upon [unintelligible] black suburban. Um, so that happened. [Explaining how this occurs]. I;m aware. I just can't believe... [incredulous tone. Wonderment. Not grief, anger or shock]."

http://lawnewz.com/video/watch-justin-ross-harris-police-interview-played-in-court/

Thank you very much for embedding that!

A lot of things jumped out to me on this second viewing.

 

[dlkutac]

I never thought the red-headed girl or any one person in particular was his motive for wanting to be child-free, and I don't even think that sexual pursuits were the primary motivation. I think that Ross' life was spiraling out of control and his needs (not sexual - but his emotional needs as a narcissist) were no longer being fulfilled by marriage and parenthood, and he wasn't going to allow LeAnna to emasculate him again by airing their dirty laundry in front of his friends, colleagues and family. The normalcy of his life was just a facade, and it was getting harder and harder to maintain that facade.


As I said, this is all JMO and I don't expect 12 jurors to reach the same conclusion that I did.

BBM. Part of me agrees with this to some extent, but I am fervently trying to stick to what has truly been proven by the evidence presented as I perceive it. I agree that many things play into an individual's perception of what has been proven by the evidence, and so I am very curious at this point as to how this will play out with the jury.

 

[Kittybunny]

Your whole post was great Paige SC but this is at the heart of it for me:

He could have forgotten to take his toddler to day care after a 40 second car ride. Never mind having JUST eaten breakfast with the little fella. Not probable but indeed not statistically impossible. I mean, I once bought a box of chocolate covered strawberries, drove home, left them in the car and 8 hours later they were beyond salvagable. TOTALLY RUINED. Either way, 40 seconds or 40 miles, what's the difference?!‎ You need to look at the BIG PICTURE. When taken in context there's absolutely NO difference between chocolates and children. NONE. ‎

Definitely not! Especially since Cooper, although the odds astronomical about it IMMEDIATELY fell into a deep comatose-state when mere minutes before he had been squirming and active, and was completely silent and still as the inanimate objects that are so easily forgotten...like a box of chocolates. SO you know, a babbling happy toddler in the car seat almost directly in Ross' right line of vision isn't a TRIGGER or anything.

 

[LyndyLoo]

BBM. If you ascribe to this theory, then you cannot then attach to the idea that any of his texting was done in a permanent sense. Nor could you buy that the red-haired girl with apparent emotional issues (name escapes me atm) was motive for wanting to be child free. He was obviously willing to say anything to get laid. His conversation tailored to each new candidate. That is one of the problems in this case. There has been no solid evidence that he was looking for a drastic change. He already was sexting, having sex on the side, plus appearing to live a "normal" life, which was also important to him. I don't see compelling evidence that proves he wanted to rock his world to this extreme.

BBM~~ Actually on the contrary..he often mentioned to his fellow bloggers and sexting folks..HE would never leave his wife due to Cooper..and it also came out the LeAnna had already mentioned she discussed the dreaded "D" word..So he already knew his marriage was on the rocks..and IF divorce happened..he would for forever tied to the next 16+ years to Cooper. So sorry, but HE knew full well, his preferred lifestyle wasn't working..and his wife would never agree to actual physical affairs (quickies) and she was willing to divorce. No way, would Ross agree to that..and the ONLY barrier was COOPER!! Thinks this goes to motive..but inability due to lack of psychiatric testings/PET scan's No body can prove it! But Circumstantially....YEPPER..Connect those dots..put the mosaic together..paint a very close picture as to what happened!!

So not buying his love for Cooper like some wish to believe..His love had limits as it appears..and decided that fateful morning of June 18th, 2014! Many just do not want to believe any father could do such a think..BUT Ross simply does not fit into that category of parent willing to give their life for their child !! He simply is nothing more than an empty vessel of humanity.. He seems to act out what he perceives as "Socially Acceptable" reactions..and believe me..Trained professionals sense the faux behaviour..just like "Bloodhounds" sense the scent of trail of target to find!!!

Laypeople sometimes want to disbelieve the possibility that any parent could be so driven and able to do just what ROSS did!!

 

[DeDee]

Yes!:loveyou:

:loveyou: Ditto :loveyou: My favorite hat is tipped to you, Paige SC

Nothing finer than a great piece of well written satire to get things on the right track for Closing Arguments.