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

[lndigo]

But if he thinks he dropped Cooper off at daycare, there's no reason for it to trigger his memory-

“Some people think, ‘Okay, I can see forgetting a child for two minutes, but not eight hours.’ What they don’t understand is that the parent in his or her mind has dropped off the baby at day care and thinks the baby is happy and well taken care of. Once that’s in your brain, there is no reason to worry or check on the baby for the rest of the day.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...e0fe3a-f580-11e3-a3a5-42be35962a52_story.html

I'm not saying RH is innocent, just that the email from the daycare doesn't prove he knew Cooper was in the backseat nor that it necessarily would have made him remember he never dropper Cooper off.

 

[tlcya]

Even if he didn't open any emails, we know he was accessing his phone for sexting throughout the day, up until around 3pm, the email came about 1:30. When I'm on my phone, a pop up letting me know comes across the top of the screen letting me know I have a new email and who it is from. If my screen is off, hen I turn it back on, if I don't enter the mail all, the screen still tells me I have mail. They are settings you can change, so obviously his phone could be different but I highly doubt he had his phone set so he had no notifications of email whatsoever.

Exactly why I feel it will be a big factor in trial exactly what devices he was using in his day and if and how they were synced and how the settings were selected on each regarding notifications. These are all variables that I feel are going to come into play and be used by the prosecution to illustrate that he had an awareness of that daycare email and further that it was or should have been a prompt to "remember" his son yet somehow it wasn't and the child remained in that carseat for hours after the email.

IMO it will be just one of MAY facts which are used to illustrate that RH and thereby Cooper was no victim of something as benign as that thing now being termed "forgotten baby syndrome"

 

[tlcya]

It will be interesting to see at trial in RH interviews and interactions with LE if he ever once described a false memory of dropping Cooper off at daycare that morning. Because thus far all we've heard is "what about me? I will lose my job. Why am I being punished. There was no malice"

Nothing about believing he had dropped him at daycare. Simply that he forgot, woe is me.

Now maybe he did tell LE that. But til I see or hear it I am not factoring a false memory into this equation.

 

[EvilSoup]

I'm sorry, I do believe this one was an accident and I feel badly for the mom, but she was just soooo darn careless and negligent! First of all, I don't care how badly I had to use the bathroom, I would wet AND soil myself before I went inside without my baby, ESPECIALLY if I had to park "up the street," away from my home! Would it bother me to ruin my clothes and walk up the street past construction workers with wet and poopy pants? A little, but in my mind it couldn't be helped. I'm betting no one would even notice, and Thank God for washing machines! I'm pretty sure I've embarrassed myself much worse for lesser reasons. Maybe I'm just a nasty with no pride (or shame)!

Secondly, if she really thought she had put the baby down for a nap, why on earth didn't she check on her/wake her up/ask a neighbor to watch her before leaving to pick up her boys?? Makes me think she may have had a pattern of leaving the baby napping in her crib while she went to pick up her other children. . I know the aunt is trying to facilitate sympathy for the mom, but the details she provides hint at a possible pattern of parental negligence, I'm afraid. The aunt says that the mom accepts blame for the tragedy, so hopefully she has learned an important lesson that will benefit her remaining children. The funding page set up for the family met its goal within 24 hours of the child's death and is still going strong, so the organizers have raised the goal. Perhaps they can put the extra money toward an awareness campaign.

Yes. Sorry, but that story rings false to me. If she was in the habit of asking the neighbor to watch the baby while she picked up the boys, why not THIS day?

I don't know what to feel about that.

 

[EvilSoup]

I have absolutely no idea what processes men to believe their stuff is pretty or why a photo of it would be arousing.

I've never met a woman that admitted to being aroused by a "dic-pic"

I do realize men adore their naughty bits...

All IMO

I wouldn't be enticed by a pic from some random man, but I confess I do find my husbands naughty bits quite lovely and very sexy.

If RH were sending pics of his stuff to LH, I wouldn't bat an eye. My DH had never sent me those kind of pics, but if he did, I would probably chuckle, then sneak a peek again later.

However, if one is married or in a committed relationship and texting weenie pics to other people.... then, ewww.

But again, I rather think my DH's "junk" is very attractive. And I hope he thinks mine is as well.

 

[EvilSoup]

That makes some sense. So most women don't like to see picture's of male genitalia. Thanks.

Again, I am late to the party, but I find my husband's body (all of it) quite sexy.

I do not think, however, I would find sexy some random pics of random dics. It seems seamy and stripped (forgive the word) of any eroticism if the sender and recipient have no previous romantic or erotic relationship. But then, I am older than dirt, so what do I know?

 

[EvilSoup]

Well... I hope you aren't looking for surveyors ... I left my measuring stick in my other purse

lol

Lucky for you, I have my travel measuring tape!

 

[New1]

JMO, but 1:30 pm seems rather late to send an email about a child being absent from day care. Cooper was probably dead before then.

 

[SmartSassyBBW]

JMO, but 1:30 pm seems rather late to send an email about a child being absent from day care. Cooper was probably dead before then.

There was prior info that the daycare sent out a daily email about your child's activities for that day.

 

[MissJ]

No strange man's privates interest me and I'd gag if I saw such a thing. My own husband yes.

 

[LisaB]

[modsnip] 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.

As a general response to the culpability of the carrier for the users sending illegal images... I have heard of MANY people being charged with sending and receiving "kiddie " over the internet, but have never ONCE heard of someone filing charges against the internet provider one of these individuals used to obtain the material. I suppose you could argue that ISPs should restrict access to certain websites, and it is possible that some do, but when the file sharing is done between individuals over email, it's hard to control.

 

[LisaB]

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.

Would it matter? If I have been telling myself for weeks that I really need to go to the City website to pay my water bill, and an email shows up toward the end of the work day titled "Water Main Break - Detour" with information relevant to those of us leaving work, the subject line "Water Main" would remind me, whether it was from the City Water Department, a co-worker, or Human Resources. I would not need to OPEN the message to be reminded that I still needed to pay my water bill.

 

[PaperDoll]

Would it matter? If I have been telling myself for weeks that I really need to go to the City website to pay my water bill, and an email shows up toward the end of the work day titled "Water Main Break - Detour" with information relevant to those of us leaving work, the subject line "Water Main" would remind me, whether it was from the City Water Department, a co-worker, or Human Resources. I would not need to OPEN the message to be reminded that I still needed to pay my water bill.

I have no idea what the email said so I can't say if it really matters. What I'm saying is, the defense can claim he didn't see the email if it wasn't opened, but if it were opened then he would have seen it. Since he was at work he may not have seen the email, I really don't know.

 

[curioser]

I have no idea what the email said so I can't say if it really matters. What I'm saying is, the defense can claim he didn't see the email if it wasn't opened, but if it were opened then he would have seen it. Since he was at work he may not have seen the email, I really don't know.

It really doesn't matter at all if he opened it or even saw it. The whole problem in these cases (as a whole) is that the parent thinks their child is where they are supposed to be (daycare). They can look directly at pictures of their child, read an email from daycare, talk to the other parent, remotely turn off their car alarm (that the child had set off from inside)- NOTHING is going to "remind" them that they left their kid in the car because they don't know they left their kid in the car.

 

[SStarr33]

It really doesn't matter at all if he opened it or even saw it. The whole problem in these cases (as a whole) is that the parent thinks their child is where they are supposed to be (daycare). They can look directly at pictures of their child, read an email from daycare, talk to the other parent, remotely turn off their car alarm (that the child had set off from inside)- NOTHING is going to "remind" them that they left their kid in the car because they don't know they left their kid in the car.

TY for posting this.

 

[PaperDoll]

It really doesn't matter at all if he opened it or even saw it. The whole problem in these cases (as a whole) is that the parent thinks their child is where they are supposed to be (daycare). They can look directly at pictures of their child, read an email from daycare, talk to the other parent, remotely turn off their car alarm (that the child had set off from inside)- NOTHING is going to "remind" them that they left their kid in the car because they don't know they left their kid in the car.

I understand what you are saying, however I believe that RH KNEW Cooper was left in the car, I believe he intended for this to happen. He would have remembered day care, it should have triggered his memory at some point he didn't take Cooper to day care, something would seem off to him. Going to day care would be a production in itself. Hard to forget after strapping him in the car, making a production to take him to Chick-fli-A then less than a minute he forgets??? really?

 

[screecher]

...they don't know they left their kid in the car.

RSBM

It isn't because they "don't know", it's because that's exactly where the adult wants the small, car seat sized child to be.

How many cases have there been of "cold car deaths"?

 

[Hippiemomof5]

RSBM

It isn't because they "don't know", it's because that's exactly where the adult wants the small, car seat sized child to be.

How many cases have there been of "cold car deaths"?

This is actually a good question! Maybe the children don't die because of the weather year round, but during the winter months, are there children forgotten for 4-8 hours in a car while parents work??

 

[al66pine]

This is actually a good question! Maybe the children don't die because of the weather year round, but during the winter months, are there children forgotten for 4-8 hours in a car while parents work??

BBM

Looking for specific data about child hypothermia deaths in car
- esp car seat age kids or preschool kids, but not finding yet.

DEATHS
This 2011 chart displaying US Child Nontraffic Fatalities by Type, 2006-2010
shows heat stroke account for ~16 % of deaths.
Hypothermia may be included in Other category, which is 4%.
So it seems (imo) there are fewer hypothermia deaths than hyperthermia deaths, whether intentional or accidental.






INJURIES
This undated chart displaying Non-Fatal US Child Nontraffic Incidents by Type, 2006-2010 separates -
- Left Alone (Cold) = 7%,
- Left Alone (Hot) = 24%
- Left Alone =19% (ed: NO temperature injuries?)

So it seems (imo) there are fewer hypothermia injuries than hyperthermia injuries, whether intentional or accidental



ETA:
Graphic displaying data another way, where we can see US Child Nontraffic Fatalities by Type, 2001-2010, sorted by year,
and see the Heatstroke and Other, which may include Hypothermia.


Hope this helps.

 

[Evie Ivy Over]

As a general response to the culpability of the carrier for the users sending illegal images... I have heard of MANY people being charged with sending and receiving "kiddie " over the internet, but have never ONCE heard of someone filing charges against the internet provider one of these individuals used to obtain the material. I suppose you could argue that ISPs should restrict access to certain websites, and it is possible that some do, but when the file sharing is done between individuals over email, it's hard to control.

It seems that the responsibility for monitoring sexting activity by teens falls on the parents. I don't think there have been charges against internet providers--most parents or any other interested private party couldn't afford to butt heads with an ISP or a cell phone company, and they would never win anyway because those companies are, let's just say, major players you don't mess with. Actually, it looks like penalties for sexting by minors may even be easing up to some degree in order to lessen the lifelong repercussions of a guilty verdict.

Now, if these same companies decided they wanted to start selling cigarettes, the government would be coming out of the woodwork...