The Sidebar - Harris Trial

[Hope4More]

Well when the laugh was done, was when the Attorneys were getting the exhibits together. Everyone was informal and it was to the Jail person and the the court bailiff that he was speaking with. I sure if it was not okay then they wouldn't have been talking with him. He acted appropriately during court.

Well, this all began with folks finding his behavior odd and inappropriate, so how fitting it is that it ends on the same note.

 

[monkeypants]

Not meaning to sound snarky. But what is he suppose to be doing that would be acceptable.

Just like when Leanna was on stand, if she smiled looking or thinking of a happier time she was wrong, when she was emotional, she was fake. I just don't understand. JMHO,

I believe she used the word "jarring" not unacceptable etc. I think it was a stark reminder of how quickly RH is able to shift emotions and his ability to perhaps act as if his life isn't on the line. Standing and acting like you are hanging with your bros and having a grand old time is not what you would expect from someone that just witnsessed someone try to convince 12 people that he murdered his baby. 2 secs earlier he did his best to look forlorn and dejected to the jury. I would say the avg person would be solemn and hard to convince a smile out of given the exact same scenario.

I think of WS as a safe place where we can semi unfilteredly let loose all of our obsessive thoughts on a case...every movement, thought, word, action, emotion, description gets psycho analyzed by (mostly-some are the real deal!) wannabe detective/attorneys/puzzle solvers. It's not personal...just thoughts and opinions. For me, my DH thinks I am a lunatic and it's not healthy to be obsessed by a baby's death (or CA,SP,JA etc etc that I followed)..he might be right, however it doesn't change anything and my desperate need to get my thoughts out of my head into cyber space to the people I consider pseudo soulmates that also are weirdly obsessed like myself. I love hearing all sides and thoughts whether I agree or not..I feel bad that my opinion and unfiltered thoughts may cause some to put me on ignore but it won't stop me and I'm sure it won't anyone else...let's just remember ...it's not personal...

 

[TexMex]

Well, this all began with folks finding his behavior odd and inappropriate, so how fitting it is that it ends on the same note.

JMO but this all began because Ross left his son in the car. "That's why we're all here, right?" (Trademark, Juan Martinez)

 

[GA_Peach]

Well, this all began with folks finding his behavior odd and inappropriate, so how fitting it is that it ends on the same note.

Actually this all began with a dead child in the back of a hot car. Justice for Cooper!

ETA - Texmex, I did not see your comment until after mine posted. 100% agree with you.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Originally Posted by arkansasmimi View Post
Depends if he is convicted on those (I have no doubt there) but then possible could get overturned on appeal. JMHO

So you think that would be a good or desirable outcome?

If by that you mean overturned? Depends on what the evidence shows. If the law states they got the information by fruits of the poisonous tree, then it was not legal. I am a big LEO supporter. But they have laws to follow just as we do. They are held to a higher standard.

SW for iPHone5 was to look up to see if RH researched for hot car deaths and child free ... not for other stuff they found (from what I understand) Hope4More stated prior and iirc it is on thread 1 about Motions filed by the Def.

Do a legal investigation. File charges for a solid conviction. There was much screwy stuff in this case. I watched the trial and if you missed anything its archived on youtube.

 

[NCTeacher]

Depends if he is convicted on those (I have no doubt there) but then possible could get overturned on appeal. JMHO

Agree. Future prospects of appeal are likely not on his mind right now. What should be on his mind is that they are no doubt going to return a guilty verdict on those charges, and likely guilty on 2nd degree child cruelty/felony murder, and possibly 1st degree child cruelty/malice murder. Granted the latter is IMHO around 30-40% in terms of probability, when the average person faces down such a gauntlet, I doubt one would find humor in much of anything. JMO. All of the characters in this case have been strange birds, all of them save Cooper who seemed to be quite the typical toddler: cute, precious, lively little guy.

 

[Hope4More]

JMO but this all began because Ross left his son in the car. "That's why we're all here, right?" (Trademark, Juan Martinez)

Well, yes and no, since JM is not around to insist on one or the other.

Yes, because RH left Cooper in his car. But no, because even though he left Cooper in the car, there was nothing inevitable about LE seizing his phone, or detaining him within minutes, or hauling him into the station, or charging him that very night, or not releasing him on bail.

Virtually all of that is a highly unusual way for LE to respond to hot car deaths. I think it's difficult to argue that the same charges would have been brought had LE done what most others have done - investigate first, charge later.

 

[NCTeacher]

a belly laugh while the jury deliberates. even scott peterson didn't sink that low.

Truth is stranger than fiction, it seems. Even the most creative fiction writer couldn't dream of such a detestable character .

 

[arkansasmimi]

Agree. Future prospects of appeal are likely not on his mind right now. What should be on his mind is that they are no doubt going to return a guilty verdict on those charges, and likely guilty on 2nd degree child cruelty/felony murder, and possibly 1st degree child cruelty/malice murder. Granted the latter is IMHO around 30-40% in terms of probability, when the average person faces down such a gauntlet, I doubt one would find humor in much of anything. JMO. All of the characters in this case have been strange birds, all of them save Cooper who seemed to be quite the typical toddler: cute, precious, lively little guy.

Respectfully, who are we as the public not involve but following from afar, to have any say in how he or anyone else acts? Not meaning to be snarky. But we are not his keeper or have a say on how he acts, or whom he interacts with. Not our place.

Strange by whose standards? Different than what we would think but we don't know anything but what we have been told. And only bits and pieces. Lots different that portrayed orig listening to PC Hearing and other Hearings. JMHO

 

[Estelle]

Well when the laugh was done, was when the Attorneys were getting the exhibits together. Everyone was informal and it was to the Jail person and the the court bailiff that he was speaking with. I sure if it was not okay then they wouldn't have been talking with him. He acted appropriately during court.

I thought he could be laughing because he felt relieved that it was over - at least for a while. Also maybe one of these men might have made a joke to make him laugh.

 

[PenElaine]

I'd like red wine. I don't do other drinks. :angel:

I'll have yours Bette. Please!

 

[gitana1]

See it? I not only saw it I heard it. It was loud. He has a distinctive voice and laugh. I take issue with him acting differently in front of the jury-


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not at all what was described in the past FBS cases that went to trial. Those people are described as devastated at trial. Sobbing.

 

[ScotAng]

Respectfully, who are we as the public not involve but following from afar, to have any say in how he or anyone else acts? Not meaning to be snarky. But we are not his keeper or have a say on how he acts, or whom he interacts with. Not our place.

Strange by whose standards? Different than what we would think but we don't know anything but what we have been told. And only bits and pieces. Lots different that portrayed orig listening to PC Hearing and other Hearings. JMHO

We don't have any say in it obviously. But we can comment on what we think of it 'till the cows come home. Forums are full of opinions, the whole of point of them, no?

 

[katydid23]

Ross is the master of compartmentalization. I don't find him laughing to be surprising.

I don't find it especially surprising either.

I do think he is lucky that the jury won't see his little joyful outburst though. Because it is a sign of compartmentalization. And that ids exactly what it takes to be able to rationalize the brutal decision to sacrifice one's child--for one's own desire for freedom from family burdens.

 

[gitana1]

Respectfully, who are we as the public not involve but following from afar, to have any say in how he or anyone else acts? Not meaning to be snarky. But we are not his keeper or have a say on how he acts, or whom he interacts with. Not our place.

Strange by whose standards? Different than what we would think but we don't know anything but what we have been told. And only bits and pieces. Lots different that portrayed orig listening to PC Hearing and other Hearings. JMHO

Human beings rightly judge the behaviors and facial expressions and body language of others, a thousand times a day. It's how we determine danger, risk, the next move we make. We are designed to be able to evaluate others, determine whether their behavior is "normal" and if not, assess whether there is danger to us. It's how humans survive.

Its also how we determine whether to date someone, whether to put our child in a certain preschool, whether to hire someone or rent property to them, enter into a contract with someone, etc. Etc. It's extremely necessary for successful and safe humans to be able to judge others in this way. That's who we are.

 

[JudyBolton]

If by that you mean overturned? Depends on what the evidence shows. If the law states they got the information by fruits of the poisonous tree, then it was not legal. I am a big LEO supporter. But they have laws to follow just as we do. They are held to a higher standard.

SW for iPHone5 was to look up to see if RH researched for hot car deaths and child free ... not for other stuff they found (from what I understand) Hope4More stated prior and iirc it is on thread 1 about Motions filed by the Def.

Do a legal investigation. File charges for a solid conviction. There was much screwy stuff in this case. I watched the trial and if you missed anything its archived on youtube.

Sorry I wasn't clear...I meant more from a moral standpoint than a legal one. I personally feel in the case of inappropriate sexual interaction with a minor - things are black and white rather than gray. Did he do it? Unequivocally -Yes! Should he be punished? I say -Yes - Do you say - "It depends?"

Is there anyone that really doubts that if he (somehow) walks out of jail - that he will immediately pick up his cell phone and seek out young girls again? I don't! :notgood:

 

[Hope4More]

I don't find it especially surprising either.

I do think he is lucky that the jury won't see his little joyful outburst though. Because it is a sign of compartmentalization. And that ids exactly what it takes to be able to rationalize the brutal decision to sacrifice one's child--for one's own desire for freedom from family burdens.

And compartmentalization is exactly how it's possible for one to have a hectic extramarital life, and yet to choose to keep on living a married with family life too. It happens all of the time, unlike killing one's own child.

 

[JudyBolton]

Respectfully, who are we as the public not involve but following from afar, to have any say in how he or anyone else acts? Not meaning to be snarky. But we are not his keeper or have a say on how he acts, or whom he interacts with. Not our place.

I think of WS as a safe place where we can semi unfilteredly let loose all of our obsessive thoughts on a case...every movement, thought, word, action, emotion, description gets psycho analyzed by (mostly-some are the real deal!) wannabe detective/attorneys/puzzle solvers. It's not personal...just thoughts and opinions. .

In case you have JDJ blocked - I agree and I thought that was part of the attraction of WS. I've watched trials here where we analyzed every raised eyebrow, discussed every wardrobe change, and more. If we have to censor our thoughts and act like we are real jurors....what's the fun in that???:gaah:

 

[NCTeacher]

Respectfully, who are we as the public not involve but following from afar, to have any say in how he or anyone else acts? Not meaning to be snarky. But we are not his keeper or have a say on how he acts, or whom he interacts with. Not our place.

Strange by whose standards? Different than what we would think but we don't know anything but what we have been told. And only bits and pieces. Lots different that portrayed orig listening to PC Hearing and other Hearings. JMHO

Respectfully in return... It is normal and natural for the brain to observe, analyze, and interpret what is received by the senses and then categorize and classify sensory details into our established schema. In the process of observing Ross and Leanna's behavior, my brain interpreted it (as did the majority of other brains viewing the same thing) as bizarre and strange. It is admirable for you to admonish me and determine it not to be "our" place to judge how others act but it is simply a tangential, moot digression as it is pointless to try and discredit something that is fundamentally the nature of one's brain.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Respectfully, who are we as the public not involve but following from afar, to have any say in how he or anyone else acts? Not meaning to be snarky. But we are not his keeper or have a say on how he acts, or whom he interacts with. Not our place.



In case you have JDJ blocked - I agree and I thought that was part of the attraction of WS. I've watched trials here where we analyzed every raised eyebrow, discussed every wardrobe change, and more. If we have to censor our thoughts and act like we are real jurors....what's the fun in that???:gaah:

If this was meant to me as having someone blocked, no I do not.