GA - Suspicion over heat death of Cooper, 22 mo., Cobb County, June 2014, #5

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
ScarlettScarpetta said:
That is you. I know people who have left their children at home, in a car, At school..
We are parents we are not perfect.

I have put water on the stove to boil and forgotten in seconds because I am distracted by something.
I have been mothering for 24 years, I have forgotten my child was in the back of my car. I did not leave her in there because she then called my name but I forgot all about her being there.

IT is possible. I think people who think it is not possible, Are just kidding themselves. Anything is possible.

I just need to see something that proves intention.
Click to expand...

My hinky meter is going crazy on this case but I wanted to corroborate your claim that it is possible to forget your child. I've worked with children most of my career. I've been at school meetings when parents have left and forgot they brought their child with them- at their SCHOOL, I've been at ymca's when parents have left their child, and I can't count the number of times both parents go home to find out one of them forgot to pick their child up from after school programs. It happens all the time. Almost all were busy, harried parents, (that is not an excuse) but one I remember vividly. She was a friendly, nice person, but she could not grasp how things like letting a two year old play outside by himself (100 feet from a 55mph rd) was not safe. They were just cute little accessories to her life. She forgot them all the time. I could go on and on. Jmo
 
According to CNN headline, the mom has also admitted to searching for hot car deaths... I was wondering when the other shoe would drop.:banghead:
 
Re: the photo of Cooper in his carseat at the top of this thread:

Is this the one he was in when he died? I vaguely recall someone saying he was in a much larger one that day, but I'm not sure.

TIA.
 
Linda7NJ said:
Then you, I would hope, asked to be excused as a juror. If you can't do the job, you shouldn't be there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

We will see what the final charges wind up being.
 
I found this MSM quote from about a year ago. Found it interesting:

"Since 1998, a total of 582 children have fallen victim to heat stroke after being left inside cars. Just over half of those fatalities were caused by caregivers forgetting the kids in the car.
In 18 per cent of the instances, the children were deliberately locked inside cars."

Wow. Not an insignificant minority. That number surprised me. Guess this crime isn't as uncommon as we thought. And that's naturally just the ones in which that cause/manner of death was proven!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...E-HOURS-just-days-birthday.html#ixzz2ZVJiAWg1
 
jmcgladr said:
I found this MSM quote from about a year ago. Found it interesting:

"Since 1998, a total of 582 children have fallen victim to heat stroke after being left inside cars. Just over half of those fatalities were caused by caregivers forgetting the kids in the car.
In 18 per cent of the instances, the children were deliberately locked inside cars."

Wow. Not an insignificant minority. That number surprised me. Guess this crime isn't as uncommon as we thought. And that's naturally just the ones in which that cause/manner of death was proven!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...E-HOURS-just-days-birthday.html#ixzz2ZVJiAWg1
Click to expand...

My guess is deliberately locked in, not to kill them but to keep them safe from strangers.
 
JeannaT said:
In my opinion, it's not sheep who do this. It's people who think rationally and refuse - when they've HEARD evidence that is somehow not going to be allowed although witnesses are instructed to "tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth". Sometimes a piece of the truth they tell isn't allowed to be considered by a juror. Although it's relevant.

I can't be the only person who knows that jurors hold things inside their heads that they don't discuss - but that influence their internal deliberations and verdict. OTHERWISE, honestly, this case would be over and done with. He's admitted to the minimum qualifications for the charges they've charged him with. Done and done. But no. There are jurors to come.
Click to expand...

No, it would still go to trial, because HE pled not guilty. is has nothing to do with thought processes. If he says "not guilty" there is a trial. It won't be over until he decides he will take responsibility and plead guilty, or a jury decides his fate.
 
JeannaT said:
In my opinion, it's not sheep who do this. It's people who think rationally and refuse - when they've HEARD evidence that is somehow not going to be allowed although witnesses are instructed to "tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth". Sometimes a piece of the truth they tell isn't allowed to be considered by a juror. Although it's relevant.

I can't be the only person who knows that jurors hold things inside their heads that they don't discuss - but that influence their internal deliberations and verdict. OTHERWISE, honestly, this case would be over and done with. He's admitted to the minimum qualifications for the charges they've charged him with. Done and done. But no. There are jurors to come.
Click to expand...


I speaking specifically about those jurors. we have all seen, were indeed convinced, beyond a reasonable doubt, based on evidence...and let go of that opinion to follow the majority. Being a sheep. Not having the fortitude to see it through. If a juror is convinced, one way or the other, beyond a reasonable doubt, based on facts and evidence they haven't done their job.
I don't want to hear from them later this bull that they believed he/she was guilty or innocent.

Let the jury hang. Let another jury try.

IMO that's how wrongful convictions and murders go free happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
JudyBolton said:
What do you think of the Sargent Pierce with 34 years of LE experience (if that is all in Atlanta then believe me - he's seen a LOT of yucky stuff) saying what he said - "What I know about this case shocks my conscience as a police officer, a father, and a grandfather."

I realize you don't believe the dad did anything intentionally wrong but why do you think a 34 year veteran of the police force would make such a statement? - on the record btw - with his name!

I do not believe we have all of the facts - I do not believe LE has all of the facts, yet - but I'm 100% certain they have more facts than we do.
Click to expand...

One fact sticks out to me that a parent who accidentally left their child in a vehicle wouldn't do...claim like the father did that his child (in a state of rigor mortis) was choking moments earlier. I can't fathom a parent who was accidentally forgotten their child in a hot vehicle making such a statement to cover up the facts.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-animal-die-hot-car-toddler-son-died-way.html

"When he pulled in and people started asking him what had happened, he said that the baby had just started choking.

'But the baby didn't look like it had been choking, it looked like it had been sweating, like it had been in a swimming pool, his hair was all wet."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1406/25/ijvm.01.html (apologies, couldn't find a better MSM link but I know it's been discussed here)

"In a few -- in a matter of a few minutes of arriving at work, you`re telling me that this man completely forgot this child was in the backseat?

And witness testimony stating upon arrival and finding that child, he was saying it was choking. Well, guess what? Somebody also said rigor mortis

had set in. The child would not have been choking if it had been deceased for a matter of hours."
 
blue22 said:
No, it would still go to trial, because HE pled not guilty. is has nothing to do with thought processes. If he says "not guilty" there is a trial. It won't be over until he decides he will take responsibility and plead guilty, or a jury decides his fate.
Click to expand...

Pleading not guilty is not not taking responsibility it is exercising your rights to a trial.

Everyone deserves a defense.
 
ScarlettScarpetta said:
We will see what the final charges wind up being.
Click to expand...


If they remain the same, and you were chosen to be a juror, I'd hope you would do the right thing.

Edited because auto correct is insane.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
blue22 said:
No, it would still go to trial, because HE pled not guilty. is has nothing to do with thought processes. If he says "not guilty" there is a trial. It won't be over until he decides he will take responsibility and plead guilty, or a jury decides his fate.
Click to expand...

That's not true. If he pleas "not guilty" then the whole process starts.

Offering him a plea deal, for this or that sentence. Offering him a judge trial.

The LAST thing that might happen in this long process is a jury trial. A plea of not guilty doesn't automatically make that happen. That's the very last step.
 
Hamsterdance said:
One fact sticks out to me that a parent who accidentally left their child in a vehicle wouldn't do...claim like the father did that his child (in a state of rigor mortis) was choking moments earlier. I can't fathom a parent who was accidentally forgotten their child in a hot vehicle making such a statement to cover up the facts.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-animal-die-hot-car-toddler-son-died-way.html

"When he pulled in and people started asking him what had happened, he said that the baby had just started choking.

'But the baby didn't look like it had been choking, it looked like it had been sweating, like it had been in a swimming pool, his hair was all wet."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1406/25/ijvm.01.html (apologies, couldn't find a better MSM link but I know it's been discussed here)

"In a few -- in a matter of a few minutes of arriving at work, you`re telling me that this man completely forgot this child was in the backseat?

And witness testimony stating upon arrival and finding that child, he was saying it was choking. Well, guess what? Somebody also said rigor mortis

had set in. The child would not have been choking if it had been deceased for a matter of hours."
Click to expand...

This is not a hard one for me. If he saw his child was not breathing, To assume he was choking is not far from what a parent might think.

Children choke silently. It was not like he was claiming the child was screaming, He saw the child was blue and thought he is choking.

This makes sense to me.
 
ScarlettScarpetta said:
My guess is deliberately locked in, not to kill them but to keep them safe from strangers.
Click to expand...

Could be for any reason, really - the article did not specify. However, the parent in those cases DID make a conscious choice to leave their child in a car on a hot day (which every sensible person knows is extremely dangerous), lock the doors, walk away and stay away for long enough for their child to perish from the heat. Seems irresponsible at best, intentionally harmful at worst.
 
Linda7NJ said:
If they remain the same, and you were charm to be a juror, I'd hope you would do the right thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I think it has way more leeway here. If he goes to trial, Then they have to present something as a defense. That means as Jurors we would get to choose if we believe the defense or not. At this point for me, It would be not guilty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 69 more.
Total: 3,504 (members: 70, guests: 3,434)

Online statistics

Members online
70
Guests online
3,434
Total visitors
3,504
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,115
Messages
17,963,464
Members
228,687
Latest member
Pabo1998
Back
Top