1194 users online (189 members and 1005 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 2 of 38 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 559
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    In my treehouse, empty nesting.
    Posts
    12,854
    Quote Originally Posted by PaperDoll View Post
    Ok, you don't believe this was intentional on RH's part and yet he manages (didn't forget) to take Cooper to Chick-fli-a, get him out of the car, walk into Chick-fli-a, walk him back out, strap him in his car seat, kiss him, closes the door, goes to the drivers side, start car, drives out of parking lot and in less than a minute decides to drive straight to work?????? You don't think that was intentional???? I'm sorry, but he seems remembers other things like going to work, why didn't he forgot to go to work? I'm just trying to figure this out..
    He remembered his drink/cup from Chick fil a...took it inside with him.

    All posts are MOO
    ~ my opinion only

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Northern Adirondack Mountains
    Posts
    4,335
    Quote Originally Posted by gngr~snap View Post
    He remembered his drink/cup from Chick fil a...took it inside with him.

    All posts are MOO
    Yup. Small thing, yet very big. Saying that, I have difficulty with my "pro" and "con" list of what might be excused and what may not. There's much more info coming and I know I need to wait on that before deciding for myself if this was intentional or not. I already know he's negligent.
    My posts are my opinion only.....

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    510
    atlanta journal constitution ran a piece in the last few days that zeroed in on problems with stoddard's initial testimony. i knew it was only a matter of time.

    the original witness in this case has not changed his story from the first moment despite being criticized for it.

    i believe there is a strong possibility that LE is not telling the truth. they saw a loser, a cheater, a liar....and they decided to make him an intentional murderer, too. nobody can tell me worse things don't happen on a regular basis in this country. bc they absolutely do.

    if he is guilty, the case will hold up under great scrutiny. if not, i hope people don't forget that he was crucified in the press by the entire world, based on the words of LE.

    i agree with those above regarding punishment if he's proven guilty.

    moo.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    11,853
    Quote Originally Posted by doubt View Post
    atlanta journal constitution ran a piece in the last few days that zeroed in on problems with stoddard's initial testimony. i knew it was only a matter of time.

    the original witness in this case has not changed his story from the first moment despite being criticized for it.

    i believe there is a strong possibility that LE is not telling the truth. they saw a loser, a cheater, a liar....and they decided to make him an intentional murderer, too. nobody can tell me worse things don't happen on a regular basis in this country. bc they absolutely do.

    if he is guilty, the case will hold up under great scrutiny. if not, i hope people don't forget that he was crucified in the press by the entire world, based on the words of LE.

    i agree with those above regarding punishment if he's proven guilty.

    moo.
    I don't excuse him of any guilt. He forgot about Cooper. Plain and simple. Other things on his mind...jmo

    10 to 15. moo

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    3,145
    I do not think he is innocent. I do believe he premeditated Cooper's death. I won't go into my reasons (unless asked) since the thread is for people to discuss innocence rather than guilt.

    Sent from my KFAPWI using Tapatalk

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    In my treehouse, empty nesting.
    Posts
    12,854
    They knew early on he had worked with LE, he probably told them about his brother. IMO they are prosecuting a man for a criminal act KNOWING LE in another state is watching their every move. They have a solid case with plenty of evidence the will get them a true bill and a conviction.


    All posts are MOO
    ~ my opinion only

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    6,630
    Quote Originally Posted by gngr~snap View Post
    They knew early on he had worked with LE, he probably told them about his brother. IMO they are prosecuting a man for a criminal act KNOWING LE in another state is watching their every move. They have a solid case with plenty of evidence the will get them a true bill and a conviction.

    All posts are MOO
    Let's not forget the nation is watching too. The charges are brilliant, imo- no need to prove intent.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    29,161
    I've removed all the off topic posts and the snark. If you don't want to discuss the possibility of innocence, then move out of this thread.

    Stay on topic.

    Salem

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    556
    At this point in time, if I had to make a choice - I'd go with, he did not intentionally kill his son.

    I'm sure the prosecution has more than what's been reported, and the defense has their means to counter react.

    I need to have more evidence, that can not be explained any other way except for, he wanted this child dead. Before I state he wanted to kill his son.

    He's not innocent in the death of his son, but he may be innocent of murder. moo

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    6,630
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruby View Post
    He's not innocent in the death of his son, but he may be innocent of murder. moo
    RSBM: The felony murder charge does not need intent, just negligence. Forgetting is not an excuse, imo- it is still grossly negligent to "forget" your child in a car for so long that he dies.


  11. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    556
    Quote Originally Posted by momrids6 View Post
    RSBM: The felony murder charge does not need intent, just negligence. Forgetting is not an excuse, imo- it is still grossly negligent to "forget" your child in a car for so long that he dies.
    According to Charges Thread, my understanding is that intent may not be needed but willful or wanton does.

    Did he intend to kill, did he want his son dead, did he willfully kill his child???
    I guess lawyers and the courts can and will distinguish the difference.

    At this time, for me - in my opinion, I can not judge this man a murderer, who wanted his son dead.

    All we have is the information from reporters and the probable cause hearing - he has yet to be indicted, I see no reason why it will not pass the Grand Jury.
    So when it comes to trial, there will be more to review. There will also be a definite charge and what punishment they are seeking.
    At that time, I can decide - maybe my opinion will change, or it may stay the same?

    moo

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    6,630
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruby View Post
    According to Charges Thread, my understanding is that intent may not be needed but willful or wanton does.
    Wanton Grossly careless or negligent; reckless; malicious.



    The term wanton implies a reckless disregard for the consequences of one's behavior. A wanton act is one done in heedless disregard for the life, limbs, health, safety, reputation, or property rights of another individual. Such an act is more than Negligence or gross negligence; it is equivalent in its results to an act of willful misconduct. A wanton injury is one precipitated by a conscious and intentional wrongful act or by an omission of a known obligation with reckless indifference to potential harmful consequences.



    http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Wanton

  13. #28
    greenpalm's Avatar
    greenpalm is offline I don't say much unless I've really thought it through. Then I go on and on.
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    The Jungle of Nool
    Posts
    1,028
    I am not 100% convinced that he premeditated Cooper's death.

    I read the Pulitzer Prize winning Washington Post article by Gene Weingarten, linked in the thread opener, long long ago. I've shared it on my Facebook thread and have passed it around my mommy friends amd I've even re-read it, because I thought it was a brilliant-well-written-thought-provoking piece. I understand completely that hot car deaths can be accidents. I don't think parents who accidentally harm their children this way should be charged with a crime. I get it how we as parents can get distracted. The article haunted me. It's specifically relevant to this case because it discusses directly whether or not hot car accidents should be charged as crimes.

    I appreciate that the state was trying to show a motive (desire for a child-free life) when they brought up the sexting. But even without the sexting, the case looked pretty convincing to me from the beginning.

    That said I completely agree that LE can be wrong, and they haven't convinced me of premeditated murder. (But I agree with the judge that they supported probable cause!) Given the charges, they don't have to prove premeditation. So, I think he's guilty as charged. I think it's possible he was dumb and distracted rather than malicious, but the charges could still stick anyway.

    If, when I hear the remainder of the evidence and testimony, I am not convinced that this was premeditated, then I will be disappointed that LE exaggerated and prosecuted him for what ultimately is found to be an accident.

    But I think he is technically guilty of what they've charged him with… they've yet to prove it was on purpose. But I think it could be on purpose, we'll see when we learn more.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    556
    Quote Originally Posted by momrids6 View Post
    Wanton Grossly careless or negligent; reckless; malicious.



    The term wanton implies a reckless disregard for the consequences of one's behavior. A wanton act is one done in heedless disregard for the life, limbs, health, safety, reputation, or property rights of another individual. Such an act is more than Negligence or gross negligence; it is equivalent in its results to an act of willful misconduct. A wanton injury is one precipitated by a conscious and intentional wrongful act or by an omission of a known obligation with reckless indifference to potential harmful consequences.



    http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Wanton
    Thank you for the definition - final outcome will be decided when it goes to trial.

    bbm - that by definition to me, means what I am saying and the underlined is what you are saying.

    At this time, for me - in my opinion, I can not judge this man a murderer, who wanted his son dead.
    With what has been reported and from the hearing, I still have questions about the evidence and would not be able to condemn a person to death, or LWOP.

    Agree to disagree on our view points - no problem.
    I know my opinion has no bearing on the outcome of this case, no chance I'll be on the jury

    moo etc.,

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    8,134
    I think RH is 100% responsible for his son's death, but I do not think it was premeditated.

    My hunch (reserving the right to change my mind) is that he knew Cooper was in the car at HD parking lot. He left him there "just for short time" while he made an appearance at work, and he fully intended to return within a safe period and bring Cooper to daycare. I think he has done something similar in the past either at work or elsewhere.

    I came to this conclusion by considering RH's personality and behavior. He's lazy, takes risks, lives in the moment, is selfish and immature, likes to be with people, doesn't have a good work ethic or ambition, avoids problems with distractions rather than taking action to solve problems. I do not think it crossed his mind to murder his child. If he did want out of the marriage, he would do so (and was doing so) in a passive-agressive way by being a selfish jerk whose wife either put up with him or left.

    I also don't see where he makes any goals and then actually does anything to achieve them. He wants to be VP at HD, but shows up late, leaves early and sexts on the job. He wants a start-up business but he and his buddies go to the afternoon movies rather than busting butt to get the company off the ground. He wants a new house, but spends money rather than saves it.

    I really don't think he has it him to want to murder his child or to actually make a plan and follow it.

    What I do think is that he got distracted by his dingaling at work and forgot his child was in the car. I think he knew either before lunch or at lunch, but - in his problem-avoiding way - neglected to do anything about it. I think his "discovery" was fake and when he walked away to talk on the phone, it was once again his passive problem avoiding characteristic showing. The guy can't face up to any responsibility.

    But he didn't plan it this way. He did, however, let it happen. It was his inaction rather than his action that caused the death of his child.

    JMO, all speculation and hunches.
    Last edited by Inthedetails; 07-24-2014 at 01:42 PM. Reason: typo

Page 2 of 38 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Famous Atheist Now Believes in God
    By VespaElf in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-12-2004, 10:01 PM

Tags for this Thread