Cooper Harris - Sidebar Thread

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Juror 86 is a pastor. His questioning begins now. He has no opinions, bias, or prejudice. @cbs46

http://www.cbs46.com/story/31848598/day-15-justin-ross-harris-courtroom-tweets#ixzz47F7RTYYm

Friday began with some jurors being excused for various causes. The prosecuting attorney Chuck Boring asked for one juror to be excused because of her comments.

"She said she would need to be able to sleep at night and in her instructions she said she trusts her opinions of the law more than she would the judges instructions," Boring said.

The defense argued she should be qualified as a potential juror.

"I understand what she wrote out there that she trusted herself more than the judge's instructions but even if that were completely absolutely true that would not disqualify her."

Judge Mary Staley agreed with the defense.

"I would be instructing her on the law and she said she could follow it so I am not going to strike her for cause based on that."
 
"I forgot!"

Yeah, no doubt that's going to be the defense of many going forward from here. It's kind of like the "I killed him because he was abusive" defense that some years ago would not have been allowed without proof but is disturbing in how effective it can be in getting a woman acquitted of murder and mayhem or a lenient sentence when they are convicted. Even if a claim of abuse is an absolute lie, totally unproven, no witnesses to corroborate it, there will be people willing to support that as an excuse.

Forgotten Baby Syndrome? ... that's no more than a trendy defense and it's just sickening, imo.
 
kimi_SFC said:
Thank you for posting this JerseyGirl. :tyou:

Does is make anyone else here the least bit uncomfortable that Juror #78 has so much in common with jrh? Just because J#78 says she can remain impartial doesn't mean it will happen. Call me jaded, but this isn't sitting right with me. After enduring past trials where we've been left astounded with the end result, I've learned that trials are won and lost in jury selection. :cow:

That said, my HinkyMeter is acting up. :(

I wasn't able to access the linked article (encountered a paywall).

If someone could chime in, I have a question:

At this juncture, do we know if she (J#78) has been selected to sit on the jury, or may be an alternate?

A big :gthanks: to everyone who has helped to keep this thread updated, as I haven't been able to follow jury selection as closely as I'd like. You are all amazing!

:yourock:


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

I feel like I have a lot in common with JRH, and I can assure you that does not work in his favor.... for me. For years, I worked at Home Depot's SSC, the location of Cooper's daycare, frequently ate at the CFA across the street, shopped in the Aker Mills Square shopping center, and drove the same route as JRH. Knowing these locations so intimately makes it practically impossible for me to believe he forgot Cooper. There is a reason that the prosecution has entered a motion to allow the jurors to go on a field trip to visit these locations.

A parent forgetting a child in a car is an unfathomable tragedy, but I feel as if this situation is different.

ETA - The "Roll Tide" exchange is in such poor taste by both parties. There is a dead child, and this seems like appropriate banter? I say this as a person who lives and breathes college athletics!
 
MsMarple said:
Anyway, I guess what I'm saying is there's a fine line between experiencing some sort of brain dysfunction and letting distactions take priority over your responsibilities to your child and each case needs to be carefully examined before condemning or exonerating the parent.
Click to expand...

Respectfully snipped by me.

I 100% agree with this. I don't know how we as a society criminalize the act of forgetting. However, letting distractions overtake your thoughts is completely different. In any event, the situation is completely tragic.
 
MsMarple said:
Yeah, if there really is such a thing as "forgotten baby syndrome" then I guess no penalty will act as a deterrent. OTOH, I'm curious to see if new laws will deter parents from purposely leaving their kids locked in a car. Tennessee passed a law in July of 2014 that gives people permission to smash a car window in order to rescue a child inside without being liable for the damage. In July of 2015 they extended it to cover pets too.

As for the "I forgot about my kid" cases, I'm getting a little sick of the "parent has been punished enough" sentiment by prosecutors. Once the investigation is complete then fine - if the evidence shows the parent genuinely forgot then act according to local law, be it no charge, suspended sentence, jail term, whatever. But please, the dead child deserves a thorough investigation, so don't just hand the parent a pass simply because they're the parent.

One case from 2007 really bothers me. In 2007, Brenda Nesselroad-Slaby, the assistant principal whose daughter died wasn't prosecuted because she had suffered enough. What's shocking to me is that a week earlier she had purposely left her in the car briefly. In fact she had a habit of leaving Cecilia in the car - a school official even warned her to stop it. Plus, CCTV showed that she returned to the SUV five times during the day Cecilia died and once moved the SUV to another location in the parking lot. Yet prosecutors called Cecilia's death a "tragic mistake." Case closed.

The mother wasn't prosecuted but I think she should have at the least been charged with negligence. And in the extreme, her actions could be seen as suspicious. I wonder if the investigation would have gone differently if it happened today...

Anyway, I guess what I'm saying is there's a fine line between experiencing some sort of brain dysfunction and letting distactions take priority over your responsibilities to your child and each case needs to be carefully examined before condemning or exonerating the parent.
Click to expand...

BBM. :clap::clap::clap:Thank-you!! I'm getting a little sick of it, myself. It keeps happening, and I think that's exactly why Ross/Justin Harris thought he could get away with it. Where is the justice for the children who died??? How about we start putting victims first?
 
Uh oh, here it comes...

WSB-TVVerified account ‏@wsbtv 8m8 minutes ago
Ross Harris' lawyers ask for change of venue 3 weeks into jury questioning | @RossCavittWSB is LIVE in Cobb Co. at 5
https://twitter.com/wsbtv
 
raig Lucie ‏@CraigLucie now32 seconds ago
Breaking: Attorney's for #rossharris are asking that the case be moved out of cobb county. Happening now. Coverage on #wsbtv

I can't get the WSB livestream to work properly. :mad:
 
Defense attorneys argue that too many of the jurors have already made up their mind on the case. They came to the decision after the long, 3-week process of qualifying 42 potential jurors.

All the potential jurors have been sent home for the day because of the request and court stands in recess.

http://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/134644811-story
 
http://www.wsbtv.com/live-stream

Story's on now...

ETA: Not much to report - defense not happy with so many potential jurors saying Ross is guilty, wants change of venue. One juror even said Leanna should be named too. IMO it's the right move, though defense should have filed the motion last week. What a waste of court time.
 
Seriously, now? With nearly the number of jurors needed for the pool? *facepalm*


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
I doubt the judge will allow it, but I don't want it to be an issue later on. I read the appeal for Alejandro Avilia's DP sentence, he murdered Samantha Runnion, and the jury selection/change of venue denial was a huge part of his lawyer's arguments. Thankfully, it was denied.
 
BTW, his lawyers requested a change of venue before jury selection began and it was denied. Their arguments were pretty lame though. I sort of wonder if that was on purpose, like purposely get it denied so you can request a change of venue after jury selection is almost complete?
 
eileenhawkeye said:
BTW, his lawyers requested a change of venue before jury selection began and it was denied. Their arguments were pretty lame though. I sort of wonder if that was on purpose, like purposely get it denied so you can request a change of venue after jury selection is almost complete?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think defense was sitting on this motion until they felt that they had a strong enough argument. IMO I think they have a good chance of having it granted. It's hard to argue that the jurors are impartial, based on what we've seen so far.

The motion said, in part, "In defendant counsel's judgment, an impartial jury cannot be obtained in the county where the crime is alleged to have been committed. From the questioning of potential jurors and answers provided by them, it is apparent that due to pretrial publicity in this matter, an impartial jury cannot be obtained in this county as there is a pervasive and persistent opinion that defendant is guilty of the crimes alleged against him in this indictment."

(Return for updates; we are seeking a copy of the motion now).

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/four-more-qualified-to-serve-on-jury-in-hot-car-mu/nrDsp/
 
MsMarple said:
Yeah, I think defense was sitting on this motion until they felt that they had a strong enough argument. IMO I think they have a good chance of having it granted. It's hard to argue that the jurors are impartial, based on what we've seen so far.

The motion said, in part, "In defendant counsel's judgment, an impartial jury cannot be obtained in the county where the crime is alleged to have been committed. From the questioning of potential jurors and answers provided by them, it is apparent that due to pretrial publicity in this matter, an impartial jury cannot be obtained in this county as there is a pervasive and persistent opinion that defendant is guilty of the crimes alleged against him in this indictment."

(Return for updates; we are seeking a copy of the motion now).

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/four-more-qualified-to-serve-on-jury-in-hot-car-mu/nrDsp/
Click to expand...

Yeah, I completely understand them requesting one. I think it's pretty ridiculous that the trial wasn't moved in the first place.
 
eileenhawkeye said:
Yeah, I completely understand them requesting one. I think it's pretty ridiculous that the trial wasn't moved in the first place.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it seems like that would be a no-brainer but IIRC, defense had filed a motion to seal the pretrial hearing (it was denied) but I don't think they previously filed for a change of venue. I may have missed it but if not then you have to wonder if not doing so was part of an overall strategy. IOW, they had nothing to lose by sitting in on jury selection, which would allow them to take the public's temperature, so to speak.

Remember early on when a gimmee money fund was created and someone started a petition asking that charges against Ross be dropped? Both went south right after the probable cause hearing. If I was on Ross' defense team I'd probably go ahead with jury selection just to see how the public felt two years later.

From september, 2015:

Harris attorney Maddox Kilgore filed a motion last week asking court officials to seal the courtroom during the coming hearings. In the 17-page motion, Maddox argues that his client has a right to a fair trial that could be compromised by additional publicity, and described media coverage of the case as "highly publicized by any standard."

During the hearing this morning, media attorneys argued that other options, such as a change of venue and sequestration should be considered before closing the court to the media. Harris' attorneys believe that extensive media coverage, both on the state and national level may harm their client's ability to receive a fair trial.

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2015/09/justin_ross_harris_in_court_to.html
http://media.wix.com/ugd/943520_42dbbc894f8348fd94943654952ba90b.pdf

Anyway, now I guess we'll have to wait and see how much delay this is going to cause. The judge is hearing the motion on Monday.

:waiting:
 
[video=twitter;726176890868912128]https://twitter.com/RossCavittWSB/status/726176890868912128[/video]
Ross Cavitt | WSB-TVVerified account
‏@RossCavittWSB
Experts: Fewer impartial jurors likely prompted motion to move Ross Harris #HotCarDeath trial out of Cobb. @wsbtv
 
I dont know if Judge Staley will grant the Motion for a change of venue...

I believe if they do they try and move to a county that both the prosecution and defense agree to and that is similar in population/demographics.

In 2004, Cobb County Superior Court Judge Bodiford ordered a change of venue in the trial of Lynn Turner and the case was moved to Houston County.
 
eileenhawkeye said:
Were you speeding or texting or intoxicated when you ran the spot sign? I am skeptical you would see that harsh of a punishment. People drive drunk, kill someone, and nothing happens to them. If you make a mistake while driving, and there is nothing nefarious behind your actions (and sometimes, even if there is), you can get off with a slap on the wrist. People will still drive recklessly even though they know if they kill someone, there will be consequences. So I don't agree that parents knowing that if their child is left in a hot car, they will see a jail time will work. And until we still start sending people to jail for things like drunk driving or even rape (the conviction rate is extremely low), I am not here for us filling up the jails with innocent, grieiving parents.
Click to expand...

I agree. Jail sentences might (probably would) keep lazy jerks from leaving their kids in the car intentionally to go to a bar or something equally intentional and frivolous, but it won't stop true forgetfulness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 71 more.
Total: 4,306 (members: 72, guests: 4,234)

Online statistics

Members online
72
Guests online
4,234
Total visitors
4,306
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,399
Messages
17,968,394
Members
228,767
Latest member
Mona Lisa
Back
Top