1539 users online (276 members and 1263 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 4 of 38 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 14 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 559
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    466
    Quote Originally Posted by Inthedetails View Post
    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.
    I just wanted to add, kind of as a reminder to myself and others...that premeditation is something that doesn't need to be PLanned out way in advance.
    To me , it happened as soon as he shut that suv door after he came out at lumch time to chk on Cooper.
    And I feel that he did do this horrible deed in a passive -aggressive way by being a 'selfish jerk' ,etc. jmo. Just as you stated inthedetails...

    Lock him up!!!

  2. #47
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Avalon
    Posts
    13,612
    Quote Originally Posted by JenMom View Post
    I live in Georgia and have followed this case since the day Cooper died. I am just curious if there are any posters who believe it is possible that RH is just dim, distracted and although a morally corrupt person didn't intentionally allow Cooper to die?

    This extensive article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifest...a52_story.html ) on other hot car car deaths and the explanation of the "swiss cheese theory" of forgetfulness just made me curious...
    Quote Originally Posted by al66pine View Post
    Before reading that article - months ago - my initial thought re child-in-hot-car events generally was that they probably involved
    parents and drugs or alcohol. I no longer think that as my initial knee jerk reaction to hot car events, whether injury or death.

    I follow idea of Swiss Cheese Theory - many factors lining up for a 'perfect storm' and parental forgetfulness being the last critical ingredient.
    IDK what consequence is approp for parent(s) in those cases.

    But I do not see Ross as one of the cases and 'innocent' or 'not guilty' based on true 'forgetfulness' and perfect convergence of factors.

    BTW, if anyone has not read linked article, I highly recommend it, no matter which side of the fence you are on.
    Thank you for prompting me to read that article, here is another section in there I found interesting:

    Two decades ago, this was relatively rare. But in the early 1990s, car-safety experts declared that passenger-side front airbags could kill children, and they recommended that child seats be moved to the back of the car; then, for even more safety for the very young, that the baby seats be pivoted to face the rear. If few foresaw the tragic consequence of the lessened visibility of the child . . . well, who can blame them? What kind of person forgets a baby?

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifest...a52_story.html

    Perhaps we do need to revisit those rules somehow .. considering the airbags issue, I'm not sure what can be done to prevent more of these deaths.

    Still on fence in regards to this case.
    You don't get a medal for switching alliances just before the result, as it becomes apparent the other team is set to win.

  3. #48
    hey I'm a new poster here and have been following crime stuff on the ID channel for close to a year now. I think he did it but the question is more what was going on in this guys head? I mean he works in IT, he can't be that stupid. If he really wanted to avoid prosecution, or at least only get a half dozen years in the can, he would have come back at around nine or ten in the morning to check on him and then it wouldn't be that obvious.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    8,177
    Quote Originally Posted by BillyKunstlerFan View Post
    hey I'm a new poster here and have been following crime stuff on the ID channel for close to a year now. I think he did it but the question is more what was going on in this guys head? I mean he works in IT, he can't be that stupid. If he really wanted to avoid prosecution, or at least only get a half dozen years in the can, he would have come back at around nine or ten in the morning to check on him and then it wouldn't be that obvious.
    Welcome!

    I don't think RH was that smart, and he didn't even get to work until well after 9am.....not the most ambitious person in the world. He spent the morning watching cartoons and eating fast food. His lack of drive is one reason I don't think he's capable of premeditating murder. He doesn't think ahead. He doesn't do much of anything except goof off.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    6,423
    I am not sure yet if RH is guilty as charged, but innocent he is definitely NOT.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    6,423
    Quote Originally Posted by greenpalm View Post
    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.

    "On purpose" implies premeditation. We have to keep in mind that in legal terms "premeditation" and "planned in advance" are not necessarily the same thing. Planned in advance implies consciously putting into motion an event or series of events that leads to a desired end. Premeditation can mean that but can also be a conscious decision in a matter of seconds to do/not do something that results in a desired end. Both are "on purpose" and both are premeditated murder in most jurisdictions.

    However, felony murder--which is what RH is charged with--is a death that is caused by a perp who engages in an act that results in a death, even if the perp did not intend or even want the person to die.

    If you go into a bank to rob it not intending for anyone to die but someone does, you can be convicted of felony murder. The felony is the bank robbery. The murder is not intentional but that does not matter because the felony that led to the death was intentional. You wouldn't even have to be the one who pulled the trigger--if you had a partner who did it you can still be charged because the death was a result of a felonious act that you intentionally engaged in.

    I believe the state has evidence that they feel can prove RH engaged in a felony, that he did so willfully and with intent, and they hope to prove that Cooper died as a result. I think that is where this case differs from other "I forgot" cases. Other parents might be distracted by life/work issues, or whatever. In this case, LE believes this parent was distracted by something else altogether--and he was charged because that something else is a felony per Georgia law.

    Cooper's death may not have been "on purpose." And it does not have to be to get a murder conviction. I just hope that the state has enough evidence to punish this guy if his baby died while he was engaged in felonious activity that caused him to be so distracted that he "forgot" about the child in his care that morning. Because IMO even if he did truly forget under those circumstances, it was no accident.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    State of Disbelief. SC
    Posts
    12,075
    Quote Originally Posted by gngr~snap View Post
    "A local psychologist and criminal profiler agree police will be looking at Justin Ross Harris’ habits, his testimonies and the evidence he left to determine who Harris was before he was arrested June 18"

    http://www.mdjonline.com/view/full_s...analyze-Harris


    That was a bit of a downer. Wasn't RH deaf in the RIGHT ear?

    Why did the psych totally ignore the fact that he sexted someone under 18.?
    wow.
    All posts are MOO
    I really wish that people interviewed about cases would actually KNOW a little bit of the facts before they comment
    Say what you mean, mean what you say, but don't say it mean.
    We are all just trying to make sense of an unimaginable crime.

  8. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by krkrjx View Post
    "On purpose" implies premeditation. We have to keep in mind that in legal terms "premeditation" and "planned in advance" are not necessarily the same thing. Planned in advance implies consciously putting into motion an event or series of events that leads to a desired end. Premeditation can mean that but can also be a conscious decision in a matter of seconds to do/not do something that results in a desired end. Both are "on purpose" and both are premeditated murder in most jurisdictions.

    However, felony murder--which is what RH is charged with--is a death that is caused by a perp who engages in an act that results in a death, even if the perp did not intend or even want the person to die.

    If you go into a bank to rob it not intending for anyone to die but someone does, you can be convicted of felony murder. The felony is the bank robbery. The murder is not intentional but that does not matter because the felony that led to the death was intentional. You wouldn't even have to be the one who pulled the trigger--if you had a partner who did it you can still be charged because the death was a result of a felonious act that you intentionally engaged in.

    I believe the state has evidence that they feel can prove RH engaged in a felony, that he did so willfully and with intent, and they hope to prove that Cooper died as a result. I think that is where this case differs from other "I forgot" cases. Other parents might be distracted by life/work issues, or whatever. In this case, LE believes this parent was distracted by something else altogether--and he was charged because that something else is a felony per Georgia law.

    Cooper's death may not have been "on purpose." And it does not have to be to get a murder conviction. I just hope that the state has enough evidence to punish this guy if his baby died while he was engaged in felonious activity that caused him to be so distracted that he "forgot" about the child in his care that morning. Because IMO even if he did truly forget under those circumstances, it was no accident.
    Wonder how they would sort it all out? RH did a lot in those seven hours, he no doubt had a lot of conversations and encounters with people in addition to the sexting. Maybe he and LH were in the midst of an argument in the morning, maybe there were work issues, conversations about the business he was starting, etc., etc. Wouldn't all of those things also become part of the "distraction", since the distraction continued throughout the entire day? I know RH says he was not on his cell phone between CFA and work, but only time will tell on that one. IMO, he was on his phone and that is what triggered the downward slide. If he was engaging in a felonious activity during this particular time frame, I think he's up a creek.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Houstonia
    Posts
    603
    Quote Originally Posted by Lovejac View Post
    I really wish that people interviewed about cases would actually KNOW a little bit of the facts before they comment
    I wanted to make this very comment but I sincerely hate having to sign up just to post to a site I likely will not visit again.

    But it speaks to sloppy reporting across the board. Even before I signed up here, I read. And on other forums at which I post, it is an ongoing point of contention that the media has gotten progressively sloppier with its reporting.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    State of Disbelief. SC
    Posts
    12,075
    Quote Originally Posted by Evie Ivy Over View Post
    Wonder how they would sort it all out? RH did a lot in those seven hours, he no doubt had a lot of conversations and encounters with people in addition to the sexting. Maybe he and LH were in the midst of an argument in the morning, maybe there were work issues, conversations about the business he was starting, etc., etc. Wouldn't all of those things also become part of the "distraction", since the distraction continued throughout the entire day? I know RH says he was not on his cell phone between CFA and work, but only time will tell on that one. IMO, he was on his phone and that is what triggered the downward slide. If he was engaging in a felonious activity during this particular time frame, I think he's up a creek.
    I think we're going to find out that sexting was a normal, every day work place thing.

    And I agree, even though RH said he wasn't on his cell phone on the way to work, LE has already confirmed or disproven that.

    I think RH was sexting that morning while he was laying in bed watching cartoons with Cooper. JMO
    Say what you mean, mean what you say, but don't say it mean.
    We are all just trying to make sense of an unimaginable crime.


  11. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    8,281
    How does one get distracted within seconds of buckling and kissing ones child?

    Wasnt distracted enough to forget ones cup, cell and other work things.

  12. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by Lovejac View Post
    I think we're going to find out that sexting was a normal, every day work place thing.

    And I agree, even though RH said he wasn't on his cell phone on the way to work, LE has already confirmed or disproven that.

    I think RH was sexting that morning while he was laying in bed watching cartoons with Cooper. JMO
    And if that's the case, the sexting wasn't a distraction to him that day...it was the norm.

    As far as the phone calls/sexting at CFA, Stoddard said he didn't know when the texting activity started--he knew when it stopped, but not when it started. Plus, the whole issue of RH and the "off-the radar" texts...like the one that he had with LH that Stoddard hadn't seen.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    In my treehouse, empty nesting.
    Posts
    12,854
    The only truth he told was food, carseat, work buddy text and movie isnt it?
    He lied about EVERYTHING ELSE!!!

    All posts are MOO
    ~ my opinion only

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    In my treehouse, empty nesting.
    Posts
    12,854
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilSoup View Post
    I wanted to make this very comment but I sincerely hate having to sign up just to post to a site I likely will not visit again.

    But it speaks to sloppy reporting across the board. Even before I signed up here, I read. And on other forums at which I post, it is an ongoing point of contention that the media has gotten progressively sloppier with its reporting.
    I tweet the person that wrote it .
    Well I did to Chris King. I know it was about the Dermonds. He reported something wrong . I knew he knew better about. He just typed it wrong. He changed it immediately and tweeted me back a quick thanks and apology.

    I'm a lefty and I have messed up left and right all my life.
    I'm surprised I didn't mess up my map. (Or I did and no one told me.)

    All posts are MOO
    ~ my opinion only

  15. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by gngr~snap View Post
    The only truth he told was food, carseat, work buddy text and movie isnt it?
    He lied about EVERYTHING ELSE!!!

    All posts are MOO
    People who cheat on their wives seem to have a tendency to be chronic liars.........in my experience, anyway.

Page 4 of 38 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 14 ... 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