Ross Harris Trial Jury Selection - Tweets, News & Discussion (Brunswick)

[Hope4More]

Texting with minors shows JRH's lack of boundaries. If he is willing to break one law regarding children, then he's more likely to be willing to break other laws.

Probative versus prejudicial. The argument for inclusion by prosecutors was simply that Harris's sexting helped establish motive (which the State need not prove, btw). There is nothing in the fact Harris texted minors that goes to motive.

Courts routinely exclude evidence of prior bad acts if those bad acts have no direct bearing on the crime(s) being prosecuted. IMO, it remains a mystery why Staley wouldn't agree to sever the charges, and what her legal rationale was for denying the defense motion to do so.

 

[just the facts pls]

Probative versus prejudicial. The argument for inclusion by prosecutors was simply that Harris's sexting helped establish motive (which the State need not prove, btw). There is nothing in the fact Harris texted minors that goes to motive.

Courts routinely exclude evidence of prior bad acts if those bad acts have no direct bearing on the crime(s) being prosecuted. IMO, it remains a mystery why Staley wouldn't agree to sever the charges, and what her legal rationale was for denying the defense motion to do so.

BBM. If there had never been internet activity related to "child free living" before Cooper died, then I would agree. However, the texts are relevant in context to the broader picture of JRH's lifestyle interests. IMO

 

[SuperTmo]

BBM. If there had never been internet activity related to "child free living" before Cooper died, then I would agree. However, the texts are relevant in context to the broader picture of JRH's lifestyle interests. IMO

I agree w/ this and in the context of the entire situation, I feel the sexting is relevant. I am not sure how necessary it is to mention the fact that the people he was sexting were minors, because I believe its awful regardless of the age of the people, but I'm OK w/ them doing so.

 

[just the facts pls]

I agree w/ this and in the context of the entire situation, I feel the sexting is relevant. I am not sure how necessary it is to mention the fact that the people he was sexting were minors, because I believe its awful regardless of the age of the people, but I'm OK w/ them doing so.

I agree, sexting while married is a fairly bad thing to do regardless of circumstances, but as MzOpinion8d pointed out that this shows JRH's lack of boundaries concerning children. If he's willing to ignore the law when it deals with age of consent, then what other laws is he willing to ignore? Remember JRH himself admitted to one of the girls that he has no conscience. He said this while sexting with LH and CH in the room with him.

 

[Hope4More]

I agree, sexting while married is a fairly bad thing to do regardless of circumstances, but as MzOpinion8d pointed out that this shows JRH's lack of boundaries concerning children. If he's willing to ignore the law when it deals with age of consent, then what other laws is he willing to ignore? Remember JRH himself admitted to one of the girls that he has no conscience. He said this while sexting with LH and CH in the room with him.

Harris's lack of boundaries about children? I can't see the connection between breaking the law/crossing boundaries by sexting with a teenager and (allegedly) deciding to kill one's own toddler in a horribly painful way.

If the crossing of boundaries or prior violations of laws unrelated to the crime(s) being prosecuted was routinely considered legally acceptable, prosecutors would ask in every instance and judges would have no basis for denying their requests.

They don't and they don't because typically judges are cautious about allowing in such evidence, as inclusion may well provide DT's with legitimate grounds for appeal.

 

[GA_Peach]

His extensive "habit" of sexting is definitely relevant for multiple reasons, and I can't see any problem (legally) with it being brought up at trial.

It's the part about the fact he sexted with minors being brought in that I find problematic. The fact that he sexted (was sexting) with minors is IMO irrelevant to the charges he's facing related to leaving Cooper in his car to die.

In terms of guilt or innocence on the core charges, I can't see any reason why it should matter who he was sexting with, but it's just common sense to believe telling jurors Harris sexted with minors might well (further?) prejudice them against him.

The one possible benefit I see for his defense in having these charges introduced is that his attorneys might argue that Harris was aware he was breaking the law by sexting with minors, and that he felt guilty enough about it to be extremely worried and distracted, even going so far as to look up what life in jail would be like if he got caught, of if he confessed of his volition.

RBBM

I especially agree with you on the part I put in bold. I am just going to play devil's advocate for a minute. If it truly doesn't matter with whom JRH was sexting, why would it prejudice the jurors? From my viewpoint, the fact that he was sexting with a minor (versus a fully consenting adult) has absolutely no bearing on his guilt or innocence with respect to Cooper. In the context of Cooper's death, I find the sexting extremely troublesome because it was the main impetus for him leaving Cooper in the car. It also could show his desire for a "child-free" life.

On a related note, if the sexting is fully entered into evidence during Cooper's case, why not try both alleged crimes at the same time? I do believe that the sexting is an integral part of Cooper's case, and honestly, I am hard-pressed to believe that a juror will look at JRH more unfavorably after hearing about the sexting than (s)he would after hearing that Ross's actions led to his child's death.

As of right now, I have no opinion on whether JRH intended to kill Cooper, but based on what I have heard, I believe that JRH was negligent with respect to caring for Cooper. Based on what comes out at trial, my opinion could be swayed. I am just eager to see this case make it to trial.

ETA - I just saw your post about giving the DT a legitimate grounds for appeal, and I agree with you. 100% agreement.

 

[GA_Peach]

Probative versus prejudicial. The argument for inclusion by prosecutors was simply that Harris's sexting helped establish motive (which the State need not prove, btw). There is nothing in the fact Harris texted minors that goes to motive.

Courts routinely exclude evidence of prior bad acts if those bad acts have no direct bearing on the crime(s) being prosecuted. IMO, it remains a mystery why Staley wouldn't agree to sever the charges, and what her legal rationale was for denying the defense motion to do so.

It is my understanding that the charges were not severed based on the fact that the prosecution intends to argue that one of JRH's motives for killing Cooper was his desire for a "child free" life. Being able to freely interact with women was one part of that "child free" life.

BBM. If there had never been internet activity related to "child free living" before Cooper died, then I would agree. However, the texts are relevant in context to the broader picture of JRH's lifestyle interests. IMO

I agree with this. Also, JRH was sexting with this particular minor on the day of Cooper's death. Allegedly, Cooper's death and sexting with a minor were concurrent crimes. :crying:

ETA - Here is a link to the DT's motion to sever the charges:
http://media.wix.com/ugd/943520_a56ab7c1c66647a6ac2defd4cfc0797c.pdf

I think that a very compelling case can be made that the DT does not satisfy the conditions of #5 and that the two charges are actually part of one scheme, "child free" living. I also believe that not severing the charges gives the DT solid grounds for appeal.

 

[Hope4More]

It is my understanding that the charges were not severed based on the fact that the prosecution intends to argue that one of JRH's motives for killing Cooper was his desire for a "child free" life. Being able to freely interact with women was one part of that "child free" life.



I agree with this. Also, JRH was sexting with this particular minor on the day of Cooper's death. Allegedly, Cooper's death and sexting with a minor were concurrent crimes. :crying:

ETA - Here is a link to the DT's motion to sever the charges:
http://media.wix.com/ugd/943520_a56ab7c1c66647a6ac2defd4cfc0797c.pdf

I think that a very compelling case can be made that the DT does not satisfy the conditions of #5 and that the two charges are actually part of one scheme, "child free" living. I also believe that not severing the charges gives the DT solid grounds for appeal.

The DT's motion to sever states that the sexting charges (5-8) involve a different victim (obviously) and DIFFERENT DATES, which seems to suggest Harris wasn't texting or sexting with this minor on the day Cooper died. If not-- no nexus.

As for the "child free" thing. I think it's already been pointed out in the media that Harris didn't in fact Google any such term. And, IMO, there was nothing nefarious about his text that he loved his son but that they " both needed escapes." I can't count the number of times i've heard really good, loving mothers say the same thing. Newborns and toddlers take up lots of energy of every kind. IMO it's healthy for parents to recognize when a break is necessary.

As I've said, I think the State is entitled to bring in the sexting in, just not that Harris sexted with minors. Staley could just as easily allowed in everything but the age of the sexts' recipient(s), with no prejudice to the State.

 

[GA_Peach]

The DT's motion to sever states that the sexting charges (5-8) involve a different victim (obviously) and DIFFERENT DATES, which seems to suggest Harris wasn't texting or sexting with this minor on the day Cooper died. If not-- no nexus.

As for the "child free" thing. I think it's already been pointed out in the media that Harris didn't in fact Google any such term. And, IMO, there was nothing nefarious about his text that he loved his son but that they " both needed escapes." I can't count the number of times i've heard really good, loving mothers say the same thing. Newborns and toddlers take up lots of energy of every kind. IMO it's healthy for parents to recognize when a break is necessary.

As I've said, I think the State is entitled to bring in the sexting in, just not that Harris sexted with minors. Staley could just as easily allowed in everything but the age of the sexts' recipient(s), with no prejudice to the State.

Link to the general bill of indictment:

http://ftpcontent3.worldnow.com/waga/documents/Harris.pdf

If you look at count 6, which is one of the sexual exploitation of a minor charges, June 18, 2014 is end date for this crime. Based on that, I am assuming that JRH on the day of Cooper's death requested naked pictures of the (alleged) victim. Additionally, the DT motion to sever the charges states (in section 1) that these crimes occur between March 1, 2014 and June 18, 2014.

With respect to the "child free" living, the evidence presented during the trial will allow the jurors to determine whether JRH actually wanted a child free life. Much of the reporting and the statements surrounding what JRH searched, clicked on, and/or texted is nebulous at best. However, the prosecution's attempt to make JRH's desire for a child-free life part of the motive is not simply plucked from thin air.

For the record, it is not that I disagree with you about severing the charges. I think that a compelling case can be made on both sides with respect to severing the charges.

ETA - If JRH was not sexting or engaging in any way with this particular minor on the day of Cooper's death, I agree that the charges should have been severed. The specifics surrounding the timing will emerge during the trial. IMO the time frame of the sexting is key to whether these events are part of a "single scheme."

 

[Hope4More]

Link to the general bill of indictment:

http://ftpcontent3.worldnow.com/waga/documents/Harris.pdf

If you look at count 6, which is one of the sexual exploitation of a minor charges, June 18, 2014 is end date for this crime. Based on that, I am assuming that JRH on the day of Cooper's day requested naked pictures of the (alleged) victim.

With respect to the "child free" living, the evidence presented during the trial will allow the jurors to determine whether JRH actually wanted a child free life. Much of the reporting and the statements surrounding what JRH searched, clicked on, and/or texted is nebulous at best. However, the prosecution's attempt to make JRH's desire for a child-free life part of the motive is not simply plucked from thin air.

For the record, it is not that I disagree with you about severing the charges. I think that a compelling case can be made on both sides with respect to severing the charges.

ETA - If JRH was not sexting or engaging in any way with this particular minor on the day of Cooper's death, I agree that the charges should have been severed. The specifics surrounding the timing will emerge during the trial. IMO the time frame of the sexting is key to whether these events are part of one crime.

Thanks--I appreciate the links you've posted to docs (any way, though, to redact the minor's name in them?).

#3 of the DT's motion to sever states "different victim, different dates," all inclusive, though what's on the BOI does seem to differ.

Dunno, then, if Harris was sexting that minor or any minor on that day, but again, IMO the age of who he was sexting with is entirely irrelevant. In fact, if I were on the DT and was forced to deal with those sexting charges, I'd use them to refute any argument by the State that Harris's sexting proved a motive of wanting to live a "childfree life."

After all, who could possibly believe Harris was prepared to leave his wife and kill his baby to run off with a 16 year old?

That he was sexting with an adolescent probably speaks more to his gross emotional immaturity than anything else, IMO.

 

[GA_Peach]

Thanks--I appreciate the links you've posted to docs (any way, though, to redact the minor's name in them?).

#3 of the DT's motion to sever states "different victim, different dates," all inclusive, though what's on the BOI does seem to differ.

Dunno, then, if Harris was sexting that minor or any minor on that day, but again, IMO the age of who he was sexting with is entirely irrelevant. In fact, if I were on the DT and was forced to deal with those sexting charges, I'd use them to refute any argument by the State that Harris's sexting proved a motive of wanting to live a "childfree life."

After all, who could possibly believe Harris was prepared to leave his wife and kill his baby to run off with a 16 year old?

That he was sexting with an adolescent probably speaks more to his gross emotional immaturity than anything else, IMO.

I have no idea how to redact the name as the files are not mine.

I am intrigued to see how it all unfolds during the trial. I have said it before, but I think that the prosecution has two abrasive personalities. I have watched several hours of archived motions over the past week, and those parties do not wear well IMO. It will be interesting because a large part of the case rests on one witness (Detective Stoddard), and his credibility will be crucial to the state's case. On the other hand, JRH is unlikable for too many reasons to count. Kilgore has an uphill battle representing JRH.

 

[Hope4More]

We agree about the prosecutor's abrasiveness. I found him very off-putting within 10 minutes of listening to him argue against change of venue. IMO he sounded snide, arrogant, condescending, and had a strong tendency to make his replies to the DT personal, rather than about facts and the law.

Agreeing with you on yet one more thing -- yes, I think Stoddard is key to both sides. The State is fortunate to have what will be a fairly conservative jury, no matter what. Jurors where I live would likely be more receptive to what I think will be one of the DT's narratives-- that Stoddard misrepresented facts during the probable cause hearing and his testimony can't be trusted.

 

[JerseyGirl]

From yesterday:

Six of the 12 jurors questioned individually Tuesday were moved ahead to the final pool.

Two of the prospective jurors interviewed individually Tuesday were excused due to their age. If you’re 70 years or older, jury duty is an option, not a mandate.

Four others potential jurors were sent home, struck for cause because they held strong beliefs Harris is guilty.

“A little boy is dead,” said one of the jurors dismissed. The CPA said his mind was made up. “In this case, there is one person responsible.”

Group questioning of the fifth panel of 12 jurors is likely to conclude by day’s end. Cobb County Superior Court Administrator said he is confident a jury will be in place by Oct. 3, when opening statements are scheduled. The trial will be in recess the week of Sept. 26th.

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/breaking-news/six-more-jurors-added-to-pool-in-ross-harris-murde/nsbxZ/

___

Twenty nine prospective jurors are now eligible for the final pool. It’s assumed that at least 42 potential jurors — and as many as 50 — must be qualified, from which the main jury of 12, plus up to four alternates, will be selected.

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/two-find-the-magic-words-to-get-out-of-harris-jury/nsb3J/

 

[MzOpinion8d]

Info only: JRH didn't search child free living online, but had visited a Reddit forum on that topic. In a hearing at some point, Kilgore expanded on this and apparently JRH hadn't actively participated in the forum but had just responded to a couple of questions people had posted.

I think the mention of it will potentially convince jurors, though, especially those who don't use computers much and don't realize what kind of rabbit holes you can get sucked into while reading articles and forums online.

 

[jamiect]

Justin Ross Harris trial: A full pool of jurors, at last!

A total of 45 jurors have been qualified for the jury pool after extensive questioning by the judge and the attorneys for the defense and prosecution. It is from this pool that the lawyers will make their peremptory strikes — in which they can dismiss any juror for any reason, save for race — and whittle the pool down to the final 12 jurors and up to four alternates

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/...mt/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

[Hope4More]

Info only: JRH didn't search child free living online, but had visited a Reddit forum on that topic. In a hearing at some point, Kilgore expanded on this and apparently JRH hadn't actively participated in the forum but had just responded to a couple of questions people had posted.

I think the mention of it will potentially convince jurors, though, especially those who don't use computers much and don't realize what kind of rabbit holes you can get sucked into while reading articles and forums online.

Harris apparently was an active Reddit member for 3 years. It'll be interesting to see how many of his posts, not just what he read, are considered relevant and admissable.

For example, he apparently posted anti-abortion comments at least several times, voicing his opinion that abortion is murder, and that "killing a baby" that way was a "selfish" act.

Also, a year or so before Cooper's death, Harris posted that he had his "dream job, a beautiful 6 month old son," that he loved his job, and that he "couldn't be any happier."

On the other hand (maybe, could be used to make opposing arguments), Harris seemed to have a thing about advising fellow Reddit members on how to deal with police, once telling a member that if pulled over for a DUI, best not to say too much to LE, because LE from the traffic stop on would be building a case.

One read on that is that Harris might have been a wannabe cop, which the DT could use to explain his "strange" response while initially in custody that he hadn't acted with malicious intent.

Who knows what else is there that could be used, one way or another.

 

[GA_Peach]

Is the court in recess until October 3?

 

[Hope4More]

Link to the general bill of indictment:

http://ftpcontent3.worldnow.com/waga/documents/Harris.pdf

If you look at count 6, which is one of the sexual exploitation of a minor charges, June 18, 2014 is end date for this crime. Based on that, I am assuming that JRH on the day of Cooper's death requested naked pictures of the (alleged) victim. Additionally, the DT motion to sever the charges states (in section 1) that these crimes occur between March 1, 2014 and June 18, 2014.

With respect to the "child free" living, the evidence presented during the trial will allow the jurors to determine whether JRH actually wanted a child free life. Much of the reporting and the statements surrounding what JRH searched, clicked on, and/or texted is nebulous at best. However, the prosecution's attempt to make JRH's desire for a child-free life part of the motive is not simply plucked from thin air.

For the record, it is not that I disagree with you about severing the charges. I think that a compelling case can be made on both sides with respect to severing the charges.

ETA - If JRH was not sexting or engaging in any way with this particular minor on the day of Cooper's death, I agree that the charges should have been severed. The specifics surrounding the timing will emerge during the trial. IMO the time frame of the sexting is key to whether these events are part of a "single scheme."

I read more and understand what you're saying about the legal context of "single scheme." It's the only (theoretical) nexus between the sets of charges, and IMO a really big reach by the State and Staley, but perhaps not so big a reach that an appeals court would consider Staley's refusal to sever an abuse of her judicial discretion.

That Harris broke the law in sexting with a minor is indisputable, and after rereading his probable cause hearing, it would seem that he did sext with the minor on the day Cooper died.

Harris also sexted with 5 of age women that day, though, which means the State could just as easily run with their "child free" argument without asking that the minor-related charges be introduced.

Given that thinking about or even wanting to be "child free" isn't a crime, and that the State is IMO going to have a difficult time proving that was Harris's state of mind, the "single scheme" argument is tenuous at best. IMO it's pretty clear the State sought to bring the charges in for precisely the reason the DT alleged-- as bad character evidence, which otherwise would be inadmissable.

 

[jamiect]

Is the court in recess until October 3?

No court is live today..motions and a juror problem. Court is expected to resume @11 am.

Link
http://www.wildabouttrial.com/trial_videos/justin-ross-harris-live-stream/

Tweets from this morning:

Duffie Dixon 11AliveVerified account ‏@DuffieDixon 5m5 minutes ago
Potential Juror to be re-questioned about her truthfulness will be here in the courthouse at 11.

11Alive NewsVerified account ‏@11AliveNews 10m10 minutes ago
RT @DuffieDixon Judge in #RossHarris murder trial WILL allow 3D animated reinactment of little Cooper's death in… http://on.11alive.com/2dccS1G

Veronica Waters ‏@MissVWaters 16m16 minutes ago
Re: that prostitute's ID of #RossHarris: defense says she couldn't really ID him, just described the man as "fat and dumpy.

 

[JerseyGirl]

WATCH LIVE: Justin Ross Harris Pre-Trial Hearing

http://lawnewz.com/video/watch-live-justin-ross-harris-pre-trial-hearing/

A jury panel has been selected and attorneys are now arguing motions at a pre-trial hearing, and conducting additional questioning of a juror who had previously been selected.

A panel of 45 jurors was chosen for the case. The court will be taking next week off, and then jurors will return on October 3 for the final selection of a 12-person jury plus four alternates. Opening statements in the trial are scheduled to begin once the jury is in place.