GA - Suspicion over heat death of Cooper, 22 mo., Cobb County, June 2014, #13

[Elley Mae]

The fact that officials from the district attorney’s office — not detectives — staged the simulation is unusual, Pugh said, but not unheard of.

“In this case, I would applaud prosecutors for doing this.”

http://mdjonline.com/view/full_stor...tin-Ross-Harris--car?instance=home_lead_story

 

[MissJ]

That is NOT what he said. I believe what he did say has been pointed out multiple times.

I'll go back and look. It was on the previous thread and in transcripts.

 

[popsicle]

The fact that RH has child will bring him charges and he should have been aware that was illegal since he goggled the age of consent. jmo

 

[Sincerely]

We know he allegedly txt.her @ 3:16pm He allegedly called her for 1 min @4:04 pm

We know he left HD @4:16 pm
after calling his movie buddies to say he would be late.

We know @4:24 pm he was at Akers Mill on his cell yet again saying our child is dead (something similar)

@ 4:51 pm Leanna shows up at daycare.

What are the chances that @ 4:24 pm he did get her cell, but it went straight to voice mail?

What he was saying could have not even registered with her when she checked her vm.
She gets to daycare, no Cooper, "Ross must have left
him in the car"- like she's coming to grips with it.

Just because we haven't heard about a voice mail doesn't mean there wasn't one prior to her going to the daycare.
We know that the police took his phone, so she may not have been able to get through.
We haven't been told that she never responded have we?
We are just assuming that aren't we? I am not sure anymore.
They didn't have cell phones records yet.
"Did you say too much" makes total sense to me.
Ross sounds like someone that would talk your ear off if you let him.
Anytime someone over explains they start looking guilty.

I guess it will all be explained in 2016. I can see reasons why she would say some things, and I can see why they point to her knowledge as well.

I have also thought maybe she had heard the VM and it was registering. That would be the ONLY thing that would make sense for such a definite response to that thought...besides her being involved. I still don't get not wanting to go to her baby...deceased or not. A mother has to be there...well all of the ones I have seen in my twelve years of healthcare...I'm sure I will hear different shortly experiences shortly? Well, that's my experience. Her reaction has been odd to say the least...but I'm open minded about her and still waiting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[EvilSoup]

I am looking and I don't see anything else around here.
I believe he was talking/texting to a girl in Alabama in May 2013, but she could be a relative for all I know.
His Twitter has been suspended so I can't even look back.
It wouldn't surprise me if there are a few counties calling Cobb about RH.



All posts are MOO. Sent via Insignia Flex Tablet.

Good point. Atlanta metro alone encompasses 5 counties. And factor in any nasty business he may have been engaged in with someone from AL.....my guess is there are lots of LE agencies with LOTS of dirt on ole Ferris.

 

[Sonya610]

The fact that RH has child will bring him charges and he should have been aware that was illegal since he goggled the age of consent. jmo

Edited -- I misunderstood your post. Well JH probably never thought the sexting would come out, the fact he googled age of consent strongly implies he did plan to meet this girl though.

 

[ReadyorNot]

That is not the part I was referring to but thanks.

Where else could it be? That is when Stoddard testified. He never said anything "protruded between the seats".

 

[Sincerely]

I think forgotten child defenses should be looked at from the past... no proof it was murder...sympathy...supporters. I wonder if any others were actually murdered? But...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[popsicle]

The thing is...Cooper isn't that 50th percentile dummy just laying in the carseat. He was alive, awake, happy, chatty and moving. How do you forget or miss that?

 

[Sincerely]

Please do not misunderstand me. I do not buy that he forgot, because I dont believe Cooper would have been silent the entire time. Which obviously cant be proved. So what does that leave? it leaves the big picture, but you and I both know the defense will have an excuse for everything.

They will probably call the entire day a series of unfortunate events. The most obvious to me will be that he was late to work, and I can surmise although he did think it appropriate to stop and eat that he did it only for Cooper because he had already missed breakfast at daycare. Then they will probably claim when he got back to the car and realized the time he became panicked over getting there as soon as possible.

See what I am saying? The big picture isnt so powerful when each negative thing has an opposing innocent explanation that creates a lot of reasonable doubt.

Unfortunately this guy is probably going to get away with murder...and we will see a rise in child car deaths...what a sad and unsettling thought


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[NancyA]

Please do not misunderstand me. I do not buy that he forgot, because I dont believe Cooper would have been silent the entire time. Which obviously cant be proved. So what does that leave? It leaves the big picture, but you and I both know the defense will have an excuse for everything.

They will probably call the entire day a series of unfortunate events. The most obvious to me will be that he was late to work, and I can surmise although he did think it appropriate to stop and eat that he did it only for Cooper because he had already missed breakfast at daycare. Then they will probably claim when he got back to the car and realized the time he became panicked over getting there as soon as possible. Almost everyone can relate to that!

See what I am saying? The big picture isnt so powerful when each negative thing has an opposing innocent explanation that creates a lot of reasonable doubt.

So what do we do? Give up? Tell ourselves "Well, he's gonna get off anyway so why bother prosecuting at all?" NO. I applaud the prosecution in this case for NOT going the usual route of suspecting foul play but thinking it's too hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. If nothing else it might make someone else think twice before considering disposing of a child this way. It's just not reasonable to me that that the totality of evidence in this case or any other like it can be explained away by allowing ourselves to run down infinite warrens of rabbit-holes of excuses spun by a disingenuous and misleading defense case. We have to start scrutinising and treating these cases much more severely and send out a strong message that 'forgetting' is NOT an acceptable excuse or we'll just get more and more disengaged parents thinking this is a convenient and foolproof way to dispose of unwanted children. At no other time, except in cases like these it seems to me, is forgetting a viable excuse or get out of jail free card. From being schoolkids we're told that 'forgetting' our homework will lead to detentions, fail grades - punishment of some kind - and yet, I'm sure there are times when someone genuinely did forget the homework they spent hours doing the night before. It needs emphasising that actions and inactions have consequences and failure to focus on the task in hand - in this instance being responsible for the welfare of a child - WILL earn one a severe penalty.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Reading back today, someone said they don't feel bad for someone sexting with a married man, however that man could have said anything to them. He could tell him he was divorced, his wife didn't care if he did it, He was not married.

That married man made the vows. And now he is using another girl for his satisfaction so to me, She is not the enemy. She is part of the issue but not at all the cause of the trouble. That would be the spouse.

 

[Irisha]

Please do not misunderstand me. I do not buy that he forgot, because I dont believe Cooper would have been silent the entire time. Which obviously cant be proved. So what does that leave? It leaves the big picture, but you and I both know the defense will have an excuse for everything.

They will probably call the entire day a series of unfortunate events. The most obvious to me will be that he was late to work, and I can surmise although he did think it appropriate to stop and eat that he did it only for Cooper because he had already missed breakfast at daycare. Then they will probably claim when he got back to the car and realized the time he became panicked over getting there as soon as possible. Almost everyone can relate to that!

See what I am saying? The big picture isnt so powerful when each negative thing has an opposing innocent explanation that creates a lot of reasonable doubt.

It was stated that Ross and Cooper watched cartoons around 7 am. They didn't leave until 8:30 am. I find it hard to beleive a 22 mo. old would go 2 hrs. after awaking to eat, without asking for something to eat..I think he was already fed, then Ross got him a snack from CFA, to put his plan in motion. JMO

 

[kjpaw]

At first, I thought so too. But then I thought about it some more and I think I get it. I'm having a hard time putting it into words, but it seems to me that sexting is problematic because it can so easily be shared with anyone and everyone. If a 16 year old consents to sex, unless there are cameras, there's a reasonable expectation that there is privacy. It can stay behind closed doors. Sexting seems to open a person up to a lot of different kinds of vulnerability and exploitation. That picture can be reproduced and shared without your consent. Sexting also seems to cross over into and the world of child --which obviously the state has a compelling interest in eradicating. The state has a far-less compelling interest in regulating the sex lives of 16 year olds. That's why I think there's a difference in the ages for the two activities. I think it provides a level of protection for minors that's probably helpful. The law acknowledges that 16 year olds do consent to sex, but also acknowledges how easily exploited a 16 year old could be and affords some protection.

I have one question though--A lot of states might have an age of consent at 16, but there's also a clause about age gaps--for instance, it's still illegal if the other person is an adult of 4+ years etc. Is Georgia just straight-up 16 with any adult?

JMO

Once a person is 16 they are considered legally able to consent and sex with anyone over the age of 16 is legal. There is a special law that prevents teachers and school staff from having sex with any students even if the student is an 18 year old senior.

There is an age gap rule in my experience for kids that are 14 or 15... If they're having sex with a persin that is less than 3 or 4 years older than them (15 year old having sex with a 17 year old for example), my experience is the police either don't prosecute or charge as a misdemeanor. The crazy thing is that per the law, if they wanted to the police could charge 2 15 year olds having sex each with stat rape because they're both having sex with a person that can't consent! I've never seen that happen but I always tell kids that in hopes it will cut down on their sexual activities !

BTW I know this because I work in a middle school not for some creepy reason!

 

[MissJ]

Where else could it be? That is when Stoddard testified. He never said anything "protruded between the seats".

I'm not going to argue with you since I can't find where I read it. But I heard it myself.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Please do not misunderstand me. I do not buy that he forgot, because I dont believe Cooper would have been silent the entire time. Which obviously cant be proved. So what does that leave? It leaves the big picture, but you and I both know the defense will have an excuse for everything.

They will probably call the entire day a series of unfortunate events. The most obvious to me will be that he was late to work, and I can surmise although he did think it appropriate to stop and eat that he did it only for Cooper because he had already missed breakfast at daycare. Then they will probably claim when he got back to the car and realized the time he became panicked over getting there as soon as possible. Almost everyone can relate to that!

See what I am saying? The big picture isnt so powerful when each negative thing has an opposing innocent explanation that creates a lot of reasonable doubt.

In this case he does not have what other parents who have done this have. That one moment when he remembers and goes running to the car.

The problem here is he texted about the kid. His little buddy... Right?! There is your trigger right there. That should have been enough.

I have 3 kids and I have babysat more than my share.

They can say what they want this picture in this case is indeed powerful and strong.

 

[Karmady]

Reading back today, someone said they don't feel bad for someone sexting with a married man, however that man could have said anything to them. He could tell him he was divorced, his wife didn't care if he did it, He was not married.

That married man made the vows. And now he is using another girl for his satisfaction so to me, She is not the enemy. She is part of the issue but not at all the cause of the trouble. That would be the spouse.

That was me. I was going by the fact that the profile I'm aware of said he was married and at least one of the girls he was texting with knew it. It seems he was very open about it. I commented on the female's participation because that was the focus of the OP. In no way do I think the female participant is as bad as or worse then the married men. I think it's quite pathetic when wives blame the "other woman" actually.

 

[Lyra500]

That's why I was asking how tall the reporter was - it definitely was not protruding between the seats in that video.

The reporter made a point of stating that he was not very tall - I understood that RH was fairly tall and he is obviously quite large - a totally different build to the reporter.

 

[popsicle]

Reading back today, someone said they don't feel bad for someone sexting with a married man, however that man could have said anything to them. He could tell him he was divorced, his wife didn't care if he did it, He was not married.

That married man made the vows. And now he is using another girl for his satisfaction so to me, She is not the enemy. She is part of the issue but not at all the cause of the trouble. That would be the spouse.

Not to mention the only thing we know about this girl is that she was 16 now 17 yrs old. We don't know her mental age, what her life is like and above all of that why the h$ll would anything matter except she is a victim of RH.

 

[stmarysmead]

If a jury believes that RH can be so totally distracted in mere minutes that he forgets his own very AWAKE child....that he just strapped in and kissed...seriously, this man should not even have a drivers license! He could "forget" what side of the road he should drive on...he could forget what a red light means.

If we are to believe he can go so...blank....in seconds...he should never be left alone and unsupervised at all. He could forget to turn the gas range off....he could forget, in seconds, that he locked the door behind himself on a freezing day. He could forget that he only has his underwear on and never put on his pants.

The type of "forgetting" that RH is claiming here is akin to dementia. I defy the defense to find ONE other CASE where an awake child was "forgotten" seconds after contact between parent and child.