Is there anyone that believes Ross is innocent?

[Evie Ivy Over]

Sex addiction. Is it the same or different from other addictions?

Addiction is when it interferes with work or relationships.

I would say his issues do. I doubt if HD would say sexting at work is OK.

So, if his addiction was drugs or alcohol, would that make him more or less accountable for leaving his child?

The only thing is, he didn't sext the entire day--he did many other things. So, I'm not sure anyone could say RH's sexual addiction (if he has one) was the cause of his child's death. What if work was his preoccupation? Would he be less guilty if his distraction was not sex, drugs or alcohol? I don't really think an addiction is the reason for RH leaving his child in the car--I do believe he was distracted in the moments between the time he put Cooper in the car at CFA and when he came to the traffic light where he turned the wrong way, but his activities after that sound to be pretty varied and not just sex oriented.

 

[human]

The only thing is, he didn't sext the entire day--he did many other things. So, I'm not sure anyone could say RH's sexual addiction (if he has one) was the cause of his child's death. What if work was his preoccupation? Would he be less guilty if his distraction was not sex, drugs or alcohol? I don't really think an addiction is the reason for RH leaving his child in the car--I do believe he was distracted in the moments between the time he put Cooper in the car at CFA and when he came to the traffic light where he turned the wrong way, but his activities after that sound to be pretty varied and not just sex oriented.

Doesn't his sexting cause problems at home and at work?

He is willing to risk his marriage and his job for sexting,

Is that not addictive behavior?

Substitute gambling or shopping.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

what you say is absolutely reasonable. yet a previous argument supporting guilt had about 28 "thanks", meaning the great majority on here are on board with guilt. I'm not that familiar with the supposed facts in this case, just picking it up here, reading the threads. All I know is: dad took son to chick filet, then to work, left him in hot car, in car seat that was turned correctly facing backwards, stayed at work for 7 hours while his son died in the hot car, was supposed to take the son to day care b4 going to work, sex texted a lot of women at work, once saw a video about animals dying from heat, his wife asked him if he "said too much " to LE, and has been charged with "murder". I am not sure from what I have read if "murder" in this case includes "intention" or not. But, imo, it certainly should. If state cant prove "intent to murder" they have overcharged, imo. Just because he sexted all day proves NOTHING imo, doesn't even SUGGEST anything, imo. Has it been proved that Sexually obsessed people do not love their children? This seems to me to be imaginative over reach by the state. Unless that one poster was correct, and intent doesn't matter. In that case, guilty. Dead kid in car = guilty. OTOH, sexting all day is exculpatory evidence just as much as accusatory evidence, as this post points out...imo.

Dad left him in a car seat that was too small for the child and the straps were set much too low for him also, yet Dad made a point to tell police how he knew all about how to use the car seat.

He stayed at work for 3 hours and then went to lunch with friends and bought light bulbs which he placed inside the car upon his return. He did not tell police he had gone to home depot, and also did not tell police he had returned to the car at lunchtime despite their detailed questioning of his day. He then stayed at work for about 3.5 more hours.

He was sexting up to 6 different women, one of whom was underage, and he exchanged nude photos with her.

He watched a video on animals being left in hot cars AND searched to find out how long it takes a CHILD to die in a hot car. As did his wife, because supposedly they were very afraid it would happen.

Sexting isn't the issue for me - it's the lying. He did not volunteer the info to police that he had been sexting throughout the day. He was lying to his employer by doing that on work time, he was lying to his friends who admitted they knew nothing of that activity. Same for his brother. He also told one of the women he sexted with that he did not have a conscience - it didn't bother him to cheat even though he was presenting himself everywhere as a devoted husband and father.

This post was meant to help fill in your knowledge gap since you are new to the case. All of the info comes from sworn testimony at the probable cause hearing.

 

[rob]

He isn't innocent because his child died on his watch. But now that it was the detectives testimony that swayed me and it has been called into question and backed up with video, I don't know if I believe it was truly a deliberate act. I think that JRH has issues and he is most likely a crappy husband, but I don't see any evidence of him being a crappy father at this point and will now be waiting for trial.

I just don't know what I think any more. But without the detectives embellishing and trying to sway people? I don't know what I think.

Just because one reporter saw the video and thought differently, I'm not ready to change my mind. When I see the video, I might change my mind, but no reporter will change it. But I also tend to take LE's word over any media,
all jmo

 

[costalpilot]

In the short time i've been here, I think I can see which way the wind is blowing here: guilty, for some, due to sexting. he went to work. there he sexted. was it work, then, that caused him to forget his kid, if he did, or sexting? Your argument is that the sexting made him forget the child? LOL proving that.

Snipped....



Regarding the "thanks," I wouldn't necessarily jump to conclusions what they mean. I sometimes "thank" a post just because I liked the writing, or logic, or humor. If a post interests me I might "thank" it, even if I don't agree with the opinion.

Regarding the sexting, of course a sexting parent can still be a loving parent. But in this case, I think the sexting placed his child in danger. Having a beer after work while watching the kids is fine, drinking a case of beer and passing out while children are in your care is not okay. You wouldn't say a beer-drinking father is automatically a bad father, but you could use excessive drinking as evidence of neglect.

JMO

 

[Lovejac]

In fact, if we read above the names of the people who thanked a post, we see:

"The following [#] User Say Thank You to [Author of Post] For This Useful Post:"

Some are more useful than others

 

[SnoopyDawgDawg]

Some are more useful than others

lol!!

 

[rob]

In the short time i've been here, I think I can see which way the wind is blowing here: guilty, for some, due to sexting. he went to work. there he sexted. was it work, then, that caused him to forget his kid, if he did, or sexting? Your argument is that the sexting made him forget the child? LOL proving that.

I dont' think he is guilty because of the sexting, but it just shows in one more way that he is not who he protrays himself to be.

 

[human]

In the short time i've been here, I think I can see which way the wind is blowing here: guilty, for some, due to sexting. he went to work. there he sexted. was it work, then, that caused him to forget his kid, if he did, or sexting? Your argument is that the sexting made him forget the child? LOL proving that.

I don't think he forgot his kid because he was sexting.

I think he planned on the whole "forgetting" because he had tried marriage and fatherhood and it was not that amusing. He wanted to have more fun with all of these new people he was meeting.

 

[Lovejac]

Just because one reporter saw the video and thought differently, I'm not ready to change my mind. When I see the video, I might change my mind, but no reporter will change it. But I also tend to take LE's word over any media,
all jmo

One reporter AND the brother of the accused vs. An under oath detective with pictures and video to back up their testimony.

That's an easy choice for me. I've seen way more inaccuracies and lies in the media than I ever have with LE. Not to say it doesn't happen, just not as often as with media in my experience.

 

[Evie Ivy Over]

I dont' think he is guilty because of the sexting, but it just shows in one more way that he is not who he protrays himself to be.

You mean because he went to church?

 

[Datchery]

I'm unimpressed by a lot of the little pieces of evidence against RH, and was even before the AJC article came out. Looking up child-free websites? That could just mean following a link off of another article he had been reading. The insurance policies? Lots of people have those. "There was no malicious intent?" As anyone on this site can say, plenty of non-LE people who have grown up on cop shows and crime stories could use that language. Not crying? Everyone processes grief differently.

Still, I think RH is guilty for for one major reason: he is asking us to claim he forgot, not a sleeping infant, but an alert TODDLER in a car within a two minute drive.

We've been hearing about a lot of cases of kids left in cars this summer, but the fact remains that the number of kids who die each year after getting locked in hot cars is very, very small - an average of 38 per year, according to the post over in the science & statistics thread. Only a little over 50 % of those involved kids FORGOTTEN in a car - about 30 % involved older kids who locked themselves into cars, and 20 % occurred when parents intentionally left their kids in cars while they ran an errand not realizing how quickly heat can kill young children. So this doesn't actually happen all that often.

Now, of the ~ 20 kids forgotten in cars per year, I'm going to guess a good number are infants who are much more likely to fall asleep and not make a peep than a verbal 22 month old who had just been active. I'm also going to guess that most of them were forgotten after far longer trips - and remembered in a lot less than 7 hours.

My point is, when you hear that there are 38 hot car deaths a year, and hear some of the stories of heartbroken parents who have made the worst mistake imaginable and suffer with that knowledge every day, you might be tempted to say "well, it is horrible, but it does happen." But when you put all the circumstances together, how often does it happen after a very short trip with a non-infant whose parent then doesn't remember him for a full 7 hours? I mean, seriously, has there EVER been a case with circumstances comparable to this one? If so, how many?

Combine that with the hot car video, and you're no longer talking about reasonable doubt. You're talking about fantasy.

 

[EvilSoup]

Doesn't his sexting cause problems at home and at work?

He is willing to risk his marriage and his job for sexting,

Is that not addictive behavior?

Substitute gambling or shopping.

My dad is a "functional" alcoholic.

He never drinks during work hours. But as soon as he gets home, he has his Glenfiddich. I suspect it is what gets him through his day.

Anyhoo, once he is home with scotch in hand, he has checked out. Nothing else enters his realm.

Addiction is addiction. If your obsession pulls you away from real-life relationships and responsibilities, you gots a problem.

 

[EvilSoup]

I don't think he forgot his kid because he was sexting.

I think he planned on the whole "forgetting" because he had tried marriage and fatherhood and it was not that amusing. He wanted to have more fun with all of these new people he was meeting.

The "Ferris Bueller of Tuscaloosa". At age 28. :sick:

 

[EvilSoup]

What does any of this have to do with believing that RH might be innocent?

Salem

Just to say that confusion over looking left or right is not that uncommon. At least in lefties. The whole "changing lanes" "looking right" thing could be a bit muddy.

But sorry.

 

[EvilSoup]

Snipped....



Regarding the "thanks," I wouldn't necessarily jump to conclusions what they mean. I sometimes "thank" a post just because I liked the writing, or logic, or humor. If a post interests me I might "thank" it, even if I don't agree with the opinion.

Regarding the sexting, of course a sexting parent can still be a loving parent. But in this case, I think the sexting placed his child in danger. Having a beer after work while watching the kids is fine, drinking a case of beer and passing out while children are in your care is not okay. You wouldn't say a beer-drinking father is automatically a bad father, but you could use excessive drinking as evidence of neglect.

JMO

I "thank" posts I don't necessarily agree with if they are thought-provoking, funny, or well-argued. I don't have to agree with someone in order to respect them.

 

[EvilSoup]

He isn't innocent because his child died on his watch. But now that it was the detectives testimony that swayed me and it has been called into question and backed up with video, I don't know if I believe it was truly a deliberate act. I think that JRH has issues and he is most likely a crappy husband, but I don't see any evidence of him being a crappy father at this point and will now be waiting for trial.

I just don't know what I think any more. But without the detectives embellishing and trying to sway people? I don't know what I think.

I think the fact that Cooper died a horrific death in a hot car while Ross texted pics of his (or someone else's) peen makes him a really crappy father. JMO.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

I think the fact that Cooper died a horrific death in a hot car while Ross texted pics of his (or someone else's) peen makes him a really crappy father. JMO.

And to minors no less!

 

[EvilSoup]

And to minors no less!

Thank you. So is that a felony or a misdemeanor? I hope he is charged with that disgusting piggishness as well.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Thank you. So is that a felony or a misdemeanor? I hope he is charged with that disgusting piggishness as well.

Yes, a felony (piggish ness in the 1st degree)!