Trial - Ross Harris #4

[catpatrol]

But we have to remember that Dr Diamond is also a HIRED GUN for the Defense. So his theory will automatically fit every single defendant that hires him to testify.

The same could be said about any expert hired by the state or defense, IMO. They wouldn't be hired if they weren't able to testify on behalf of the side that hired them.

 

[catpatrol]

Twitter says the new piece of evidence from the State is a 3D scan of the interior of RH's SUV

 

[arkansasmimi]

WOW. The State had the reports and didn't figure it out until Cross of Grimstead that was off. Mr. Dustin got his info from Stoddard. Now the State is allowed to change their 3D animated because of testimony and took the 2 arms out of RH putting light bulbs in now no arms. Just standing there. SMH! :facepalm:

 

[cady]

So is Stoddard now saying that RH could have seen Cooper as he walked up to the car at lunch? Would that be through the front window? Not by looking at the photos of the car prior to the car seat being removed from orig position. MAYBE after was put in manipulated and doll put in (could see top of doll head in photos Grimstead took like that but that was with the door open not shut.

Think Kilgore going to go over what Boring asked about turning to left. JMHO I disagree with Boring on that one. So did Greg Sanders the HD Corporate Security witness. Jmho

Did RH NOT open the car door after lunch and toss in lightbulbs? JMO

 

[Hope4More]

That video was played in court Monday. here it is again:

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/ross-harr...ctives-about-charges_20161024161715/460157423

At one point during the video taken inside the interrogation room, Stoddard says, "Your actions caused his death." Harris responds, "How is that against the law?"

I do not hear RH say anything about malicious intent. Stoddard uses the term, not RH.

(You might want to scroll on by now if you are positive RH is guilty.
________
And, subjectively, I don't think it was suspicious for RH to say what he did. He was expressing what many find baffling and disturbing about the State being able to charge felony murder without intent.

"How is it against the law" is incomplete (only part of his sentence) and taken out of context.

Reality is, RH was charged around 10PM. He'd been up since 5:30AM, had slept for only 3 hours the night before, had found his baby dead 6 minutes after leaving work, and had been cuffed and put in a police car 7-8 minutes after pulling his dead baby out of the car, had his phone seized from him as he tried to reach his wife to spare her finding out her son had died from strangers (instead she got to watch the news on TV), had been taken to police headquarters and made to wait until 6, still not being allowed to contact his wife, then interrogated for an hour and a half as he tried to understand for himself as well how this could have happened, finally invoking, then spent 45 very emotional minutes (on his part) with Leanna, and was held somewhere for a couple of hours in between, before Stoddard telling him he was being charged with murder, 16 1/2 hours into a day more exhausting at every level than I can even begin (or want) to imsgine.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Twitter says the new piece of evidence from the State is a 3D scan of the interior of RH's SUV

Yes, because the State didn't catch that the car seat was manipulated .. when Stoddard was with them to do the scan on 7/2/14 (Grimstead didnt measure correctly, and took pics and left in car) But Stoddard also has testified that the car seat was not put back in on 7/2/14. It was, and was left in the car.

 

[JerseyGirl]

I do not hear RH say anything about malicious intent. Stoddard uses the term, not RH.

I believe Raissi's testimony was that once Ross mentioned he had no "malicious intent", that's when Rassi pulled out his cellphone:

Raissi: "He began questioning why he was being charged with (murder). He didn't understand. He said he had told us that it was nothing other than an accident. At that time he used the words 'malicious intent.' I was kind of surprised that he would know that language."

Raissi noticed that the interrogation room camera was turned off, so he started recording with his handheld camera.

ya'll need to stop twisting stories.

 

[Hope4More]

Yes, because the State didn't catch that the car seat was manipulated .. when Stoddard was with them to do the scan on 7/2/14 (Grimstead didnt measure correctly, and took pics and left in car) But Stoddard also has testified that the car seat was not put back in on 7/2/14. It was, and was left in the car.

So the DT is objecting....why? Was the 3D redone for accuracy? I'm confused.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Did RH NOT open the car door after lunch and toss in lightbulbs? JMO

Yes he did. total 5 sec is what the State contends whole thing was. The turning was when RH had already left and was walking back to office away from car. State contends that RH turns and looks back toward the man passing by as if to see if man got close to car. (that how I am understanding their argument)

At the car though, he never looks below the top of the SUV. Stoddard says RH "bends down a bit" at the car. Prior Stoddard insinuated that RH bent and looked into car and could have seen Cooper that way. (or from what I heard and understood)

 

[rob]

So on Rh SUV, how does that work as far as the State keeping it. I guessing the bank writes it off but does getting the search warrant give them rights to keep it or is another order done? Just curious. Anyone know how that works?

this is not the same but, my friends car was stolen and recovered a couple of weeks later in a neighboring state. She was contacted by LE, told her car had been found, undamaged, BUT a sexual crime had been committed in it and she had the option of taking it back or her insurance would total loss it. She took the total loss. And being nosy, tried her best to get the scoup, never did.

 

[cricket49]

Boring is very condescending when objecting to Kilgore today.

 

[Hope4More]

I believe Raissi's testimony was that once Ross mentioned he had no "malicious intent", that's when Rassi pulled out his cellphone:

Raissi: "He began questioning why he was being charged with (murder). He didn't understand. He said he had told us that it was nothing other than an accident. At that time he used the words 'malicious intent.' I was kind of surprised that he would know that language."

Raissi noticed that the interrogation room camera was turned off, so he started recording with his handheld camera.

ya'll need to stop twisting stories.

So it wasn't captured on video, and we are to take LE's word for it that RH said that , that they heard it accurately, and this fellow happened to be there with his camera, got suspicious, and started recording on his own initiative.

Ok, then. Please to forgive my scepticism, but this was the same crew writing search warrant affadavits that same night containing more than a few "erroneous" facts, including assertions about what RH had told them that he fact never did. And, ditto that for Leanna.

Twisted stories indeed.

 

[arkansasmimi]

I believe Raissi's testimony was that once Ross mentioned he had no "malicious intent", that's when Rassi pulled out his cellphone:

Raissi: "He began questioning why he was being charged with (murder). He didn't understand. He said he had told us that it was nothing other than an accident. At that time he used the words 'malicious intent.' I was kind of surprised that he would know that language."

Raissi noticed that the interrogation room camera was turned off, so he started recording with his handheld camera.

ya'll need to stop twisting stories.

:waitasec:

 

[rob]

Ouch is right! He hasn't hidden his disgust or bias in this case and that may turn off a juror. especially in the current environment as far as some people's view of LE.

I don't think so.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/am...gallup-poll-says/ar-AAjnHdB?OCID=ansmsnnews11

 

[arkansasmimi]

So the DT is objecting....why? Was the 3D redone for accuracy? I'm confused.

Because Dustin changed his video during trial, after Sanders and Grimstead Cross exams. It not the same one that the Judge orig allowed. She is going to allow very limited testimony from Dusting I am assuming. But Grimstead is suppose to be on stand after lunch. Per what said prior to jury coming in this morning.

Thing is State had the measurements in Grimstead report. Neither the State or Grimstead or Stoddard caught it once the Def caught it, they scrambled to get the 3D video done to match that. Remember too the one judge allowed at the Aug 19, 2016 had a figure that suppose to be RH putting 2 arms into the car suppose to be RH putting in light bulbs. Well since HD Security Sanders testimony and his testimony 1 arm, now the video just has RH figure standing at the door no arms in lol.

 

[ScotAng]

Yes, because the State didn't catch that the car seat was manipulated .. when Stoddard was with them to do the scan on 7/2/14 (Grimstead didnt measure correctly, and took pics and left in car) But Stoddard also has testified that the car seat was not put back in on 7/2/14. It was, and was left in the car.

I don't see scan images influencing the jury either way. They're unnecessary and time-consuming.

That the jury will see up close and personal the car size, and RH-to-baby seat distance, should answer any questions they may have in that regard.

 

[rob]

I also wanted to comment on the experts used in trials. As a citizen, a former juror and a trial follower, I think experts will say whatever they are paid to say. It's which ever side gets to them first. I would totally disregard just about anything the expert said.
After many trials, when the jury is asked did that testimony have any impact, they say no.
I will never forget the so-called experts in the Jodi Aries trail. OMG, really, experts?

I think those are so traumatized now, that they are no longer experts (just my funny)

 

[justkk]

Oh. So it wasn't captured on video, and we are to take LE's word for it that RH said that , that they heard it accurately, and this fellow happened to be there with his camera, got suspicious, and started recording on his own initiative. Ok, then.

Twisted stories indeed.

I just watched the video after Raessi testified and based on what is captured I think RH using the term Malicious Intent just previous (and being the reason the officer began recording) is very believable and fits in with everything else RH says that it captured on video. In fact, I think it is a big stretch for people to think this "made up".

I found Raessi to be a very good witness and I find no reason to believe he is lying about this!

I also thought it was a good point by the state that "Malicious Intent" is not a term used in Alabama where RH got all his police dept. training... But is a charge/term used in the state of Georgia. Hmmm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hope4More]

Because Dustin changed his video during trial, after Sanders and Grimstead Cross exams. It not the same one that the Judge orig allowed. She is going to allow very limited testimony from Dusting I am assuming. But Grimstead is suppose to be on stand after lunch. Per what said prior to jury coming in this morning.

Thing is State had the measurements in Grimstead report. Neither the State or Grimstead or Stoddard caught it once the Def caught it, they scrambled to get the 3D video done to match that. Remember too the one judge allowed at the Aug 19, 2016 had a figure that suppose to be RH putting 2 arms into the car suppose to be RH putting in light bulbs. Well since HD Security Sanders testimony and his testimony 1 arm, now the video just has RH figure standing at the door no arms in lol.

Serious LOL. Is the State really that sloppy? Or did they perhaps anticipate a less diligent and prepared DT and a sympathetic judge?

Serious question. For some reason I can't follow the convoluted tick tock of car seat related investigations.

 

[arkansasmimi]

I don't see scan images influencing the jury either way. They're unnecessary and time-consuming.

That the jury will see up close and personal the car size, and RH-to-baby seat distance, should answer any questions they may have in that regard.

Have you watched the 3D video? Serious question. I saw the one PRIOR, but the one in question now is totally different in few aspects.That why being argued now.