Small Details that are interesting in the Cooper Harris case, #2

[Ruby]

bbm In order for me to continue I have to ask, Is it your opinion that a image of a vagina on a cell phone is ? It's a yes or no TIA

Elley Mae, I know you did not ask me - but I do not think it's a yes or no question.

A picture of a vagina (or any private body part) could be considered to some, and to others just a picture. It could go into the debate, Is it art?

Me personally, I think it would depend on the intent of the picture, or how the picture is viewed.

Picture of vagina/penis either or, could be used in the examples.

If it was being looked at for the intent of sexual arousal then it would be - sexting a private body part picture would fall into this catagory (IMO).
If it was being looked at for a medicinal purpose - between doctors, patient and doctor, in a medical book to show human body. Not (IMO).
If it was being looked at for the pleasure of artistic value - nude model in an art class, picture taken to draw later. The statue of David, pictures in museums. Not (IMO).

I guess for me, since sexting is a form of sexual communication, I would have to say, that the picture of wee willie winkie is a form of .
The picture of the 16yr/now17yr female breasts, would then be considered child (Federal offense).

Thanks for letting me jump in on the conversation :seeya:
I have yet to delve into the sexting portion of this case :blushing:

 

[tlcya]

pretty sure RH is not a medical professional and his penis photo was not used for purposes of medical illustration when sent to a minor or any female. That is my only contribution to the current discussion about what constitutes and whether sexting falls into that category.

 

[Elley Mae]

Elley Mae, I know you did not ask me - but I do not think it's a yes or no question.

A picture of a vagina (or any private body part) could be considered to some, and to others just a picture. It could go into the debate, Is it art?

Me personally, I think it would depend on the intent of the picture, or how the picture is viewed.

Picture of vagina/penis either or, could be used in the examples.

If it was being looked at for the intent of sexual arousal then it would be - sexting a private body part picture would fall into this catagory (IMO).
If it was being looked at for a medicinal purpose - between doctors, patient and doctor, in a medical book to show human body. Not (IMO).
If it was being looked at for the pleasure of artistic value - nude model in an art class, picture taken to draw later. The statue of David, pictures in museums. Not (IMO).

I guess for me, since sexting is a form of sexual communication, I would have to say, that the picture of wee willie winkie is a form of .
The picture of the 16yr/now17yr female breasts, would then be considered child (Federal offense).

Thanks for letting me jump in on the conversation :seeya:
I have yet to delve into the sexting portion of this case :blushing:

I understand, to me is more then an image of ones private parts, it's a sexual act, one or more people have sex, (in one or more ways), I for one have never had/have a negative view of the human body so a pic of a duck on a cell would not be to me, it would be stupid. I understand about the under age girl and the sexting, (talking dirty) and sending pics. That's a charge that I am sure will be addressed at the right time. IIRC this happened in the casey anthony case, she got out on the existing charges and when she was let out they then threw new charges against her and rearrested her. IIRC could have been another case.

 

[Ruby]

I understand, to me is more then an image of ones private parts, it's a sexual act, one or more people have sex, (in one or more ways), I for one have never had/have a negative view of the human body so a pic of a duck on a cell would not be to me, it would be stupid. I understand about the under age girl and the sexting, (talking dirty) and sending pics. That's a charge that I am sure will be addressed at the right time. IIRC this happened in the casey anthony case, she got out on the existing charges and when she was let out they then threw new charges against her and rearrested her. IIRC could have been another case.

maybe if he added a santa hat and smiley on it, he could of considered it art? :santahat:

no smileys were harmed in the making of this post :shame:
did not mean to offend and no underage smileycons were used.
now back to our regular schedule postings :blushing:
sorry for the OT.

 

[cady]

I wonder what RH is doing all day. He must be going bonkers without all his electronic devices. And alleged baby killers are frowned upon even in jails/prisons. I'm guessing that there is little to no contact with Leanna, if she knows what's good for her. Just wondering, like everyone else...... JMO

 

[Evie Ivy Over]

It's been real today, folks! I'm outta here to do some kid stuff, and out of town tomorrow. Don't miss me too much!!! LOL!!

:floating:

 

[tlcya]

yes, the lack of devices would probably be hard for someone whose very living was in the field of web design and who seemed very involved in social media. Must be a very big change for someone like that

 

[newone]

I enjoy reading everyone's posts and really don't have anything fresh to add to the forum.

There's one thing that is 'too obvious' for me to ignore though. I believe we have all had ''duh'' moments where we intended to do something and 'forgot' UNTIL something small and insignificant as an email reminder jolts us back into reality....(something like an email reminder that your car insurance premium is due for example KWIM?)

There is no way ((JMHO)) that the email from the daycare could not have jolted JRH into remembering his son.

I have been humbled by reminders but jump on them with both feet to deal with it.((we all get busy))

This ''small'' detail is the one that is too obvious for me.

People ignore bill pay reminders WHEN they have no money or intention to pay by due date etc. He had no intention of dealing with 'daycare and/or son' that day. (JMO)

 

[PaperDoll]

Regarding the email from day care, did RH actually open it? I'm not always at my computer checking email (I'm too busy with WS, lol) and I don't have email sent to my cell phone.

 

[newone]

Regarding the email from day care, did RH actually open it? I'm not always at my computer checking email (I'm too busy with WS, lol) and I don't have email sent to my cell phone.

we didn't hear at the PCH if (a) he opened it or (b) was it to him directly or (c) if it was a ''group'' email.

Nonetheless, I don't believe that he wouldn't have ''scanned'' his incoming emails without noticing 'daycare' at some point during his day and did the faceslap UNLESS he chose to block out the association of daycare & son.

JMO

 

[Cinnamon]

we didn't hear at the PCH if (a) he opened it or (b) was it to him directly or (c) if it was a ''group'' email.

Nonetheless, I don't believe that he wouldn't have ''scanned'' his incoming emails without noticing 'daycare' at some point during his day and did the faceslap UNLESS he chose to block out the association of daycare & son.

JMO

IIRC, it was stated during the PCH that it was group email. I'll find the link and post shortly.

ETA, snip from CNN hearing transcript:

UNIDENTIFIED PROSECUTOR: During this day, did the defendant get any e-mails from the daycare?

STODDARD: Yes. He received a group from the -- his teacher, Cooper's teacher, michelle Gray, and that came in around 1:30 p.m.

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1407/03/wolf.02.html

 

[tlcya]

I think his awareness of that email from daycare will be key in trial and so I hope that his outlook or whatever emailing software is used at his work is looked at to determine if he had those little hovering "you just got an email" notifications were turned on and if he clicked on it, opened it or even simply marked it read without reading. the sender would be clear to him if he took any of those actions IMO and I agree, that email, if noted in any way by RH that day, should have prompted him to "remember" even if he suffers from the now apparently epidemic ailment of "forgotten baby syndrome"

JMO

 

[AuburnTxTiger]

Regarding the email from day care, did RH actually open it? I'm not always at my computer checking email (I'm too busy with WS, lol) and I don't have email sent to my cell phone.

Since RH is such a tech oriented person, it would surprise me if he did not have his email, even his work email, linked to his phone. I would also guess he would at least scan his emails even if he did not open the emails, he would see it was from the daycare and think about CH. Just my thoughts.

 

[tlcya]

yes, I wonder if his phone was synced with work calendar and email and contacts etc.

 

[sorrell skye]

Here we go again...this comment was part of a conversation where the idea of sexting being considered as was being disputed by several members. I happen to think it is and made a couple of comments to that effect.

According to most reports, "sexting" is a problem with underage cell phone users that hasn't yet been sorted out legally.

If sexting by minors was to be classified as , cell phone companies / internet companies may find themselves in a precarious position. Are you familiar with the consequences to companies who produce a product that comes under public scrutiny? I could go into more detail, but that's kind of O/T to this forum.

The conversation was about whether or not sexting is classified as , not whether the phone company was responsible for RH's sexting.

GG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Personally, I don't give two hoots about what the so-called conversation was about.

This case is about a toddler who died of hyperthermia in his father's car.

While the toddler was suffering unimaginable torture as he died, his father was sending sexually explicit photos of himself and sexting with up to 6 different females (one of whom was reportedly 16 years old when the initial alleged sexting & exchange of sexually explicit photos commenced), which may lead to additional charges being filed against RH.

RH was NOT a minor when he allegedly sent photos of his private parts to a 16/17 year old or when he allegedly received photos of a 16/17 year old.

Teens sexting with other teens IS NOT the issue here and has no bearing whatsoever on this case.

Regarding the sexting between RH and a 16/17 year old: the Georgia (and perhaps Federal) legal definition of what constitutes sexual exploitation of a minor or what constitutes lewd & lascivious behavior on the part of an adult is what is relevant, in terms of whether or not RH may face future charges related to the sexting and the images he was sending/receiving.

The bottom line is: RH is not the "leader" that his wife has claimed he is - far from it. He is not the devoted family man that he has tried to portray himself to be. He's anything but a "leader" and a devoted family man.

Devoted family men don't cheat on their wives. They don't sext other women, nor do they send photos of their private parts to other women and to teenaged girls.

RH was devoted to one person and one person only: himself.

 

[Linda7NJ]

we didn't hear at the PCH if (a) he opened it or (b) was it to him directly or (c) if it was a ''group'' email.

Nonetheless, I don't believe that he wouldn't have ''scanned'' his incoming emails without noticing 'daycare' at some point during his day and did the faceslap UNLESS he chose to block out the association of daycare & son.

JMO

In fairness, IME schools, camp and I would imagine daycare bombard parents with e-mails daily.
So many it desensitizes and I often never bothered to even open them...oh and the robo calls....arghhhh enough to drive a parent bonkers after awhile.
But IMO RH wasn't a parent anywhere long enough to start ignoring the "junk" mail. That comes after years of being bombarded.

All IMO

 

[newone]

In fairness, IME schools, camp and I would imagine daycare bombard parents with e-mails daily.
So many it desensitizes and I often never bothered to even open them...oh and the robo calls....arghhhh enough to drive a parent bonkers after awhile.
But IMO RH wasn't a parent anywhere long enough to start ignoring the "junk" mail. That comes after years of being bombarded.
All IMO

bbm

Totally!!!

 

[SnoopyDawgDawg]

This one?

I think those pictures are photo shopped as a joke.
It's called Yearbook Yourself.

All posts are MOO

Think you're right because those are definitely 70's sideburns going on there!

 

[MzOpinion8d]

small detail that I feel will be made into a huge one at trial. RH alleged "no sense of smell" comment made to a coworker.

I don't think this is true. If it were, Kilgore would have whipped it out at the PCH like he did the "no hearing in right ear" argument. He was feeling pretty pleased with himself for that "shocker." Which actually works against JRH imo, since he didn't volunteer the info to LE when asked if he had any medical conditions.

 

[tlcya]

I think that did not come from defense attorney at the PCH because it is simply a statement made in the press by a coworker. MOO, this defense attorney was not well prepared by his client for much of what came up in the PCH and was therefore a bit taken aback by some of what he then had to try to refute.

ETA trial will be different because I think he now has a much better feel for the case the prosecution is attempting to make.