Cooper Harris - Sidebar Thread

Discussion in 'Cooper Harris' started by tlcya, Apr 20, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. simba16

    simba16 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,733
    Likes Received:
    1,171
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Again, the way the state is charging this case premeditation DOES NOT have to be proved, only that the child neglect or accident occurred during the felony of sexting with a minor, which of course Ross was doing. This case is different because of the sexting with a minor, a felony under Georgia law.
    Please correct me if I have this wrong. I'm going back to review...
     


  2. GA_Peach

    GA_Peach Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I think that LE has thought from the beginning that the Harris case was different. If you listen to their early statements, they repeatedly stated that they did not believe that this was a case of a father who simply forgot his child in a hot car. Based purely on speculation, here are a few potential reasons. LE has stated that JRH's initial behavior was not consistent with a grieving father. LE stated that JRH was swearing at them on the scene, and JRH refused to get off his cell phone. They also stated that JRH told them at the scene that he had "no malicious intent." On top of that, you have LH's curious question to JRH, "Did you say too much?" Those actions got the attention of LE.

    Upon digging further, LE discovered that JRH researched/clicked on "hot car deaths," visited child-free forums, and was sexting with women whom were not his wife. As the prosecution intends to argue at trial, JRH desired a child-free life. On top of that, Cooper was in a car seat that was far too small him (and on the tightest setting at that) despite the fact that a new car seat had been purchased for him.

    The totality of these circumstances warrant a closer look IMO.

    I think that it is a possible for a parent to forget a child, and in those cases, the parent has been dealt the most painful sentence possible. The parent has to live for the rest of his life knowing that he killed his child. I cannot imagine what it's like living with that knowledge. Having said that, most of those cases arise from a change in routine that causes a parent to believe that the child has been safely dropped off. It doesn't appear that JRH had an entirely different routine on the day that Cooper died.

    As a parent and caregiver, JRH's number one priority was to keep Cooper safe while Cooper was in his care. However, JRH made a conscious decision to not make Cooper his top priority. At breakfast, JRH was texting/chatting with women, and as a result, his attention was not fully on Cooper. I am not sure what JRH's thoughts were as he strapped Cooper into his car seat, but he failed to keep Cooper safe when he did not drop him off at daycare. Given that JRH made a conscious decision to put another activity above caring for Cooper, it is hard for me to accept that he forgot Cooper. I am not prepared to say that he intended to kill Cooper, but he did not forget him (in the normal sense of the word). Consequently, I am hard-pressed to believe that he is not guilty of felony murder.

    On a purely personal note, I used to work at the location of Cooper's daycare. I have eaten at that Chick-Fil-A (CFA) on multiple occasions, and I have driven through the intersection between CFA and the Treehouse literally thousands of times. Because of the topography and how the The Home Depot SSC (location of Cooper's daycare) is situated, it is incomprehensible to me that JRH drove through that intersection without being reminded that he needed to drop off Cooper at daycare. The prosecution has requested a field trip for the jurors to see the various locations, and if that is done, JRH will be found guilty IMO. It's impossible to put into words how the SSC towers over that entire area.


    You are correct that the state does not have to prove premeditation. However, sexting with a minor is not the reason. The sexting of the minor charges are admissible to show motive. This was discussed during defense team's motion to sever the charges.

    Even if JRH was not sexting with a minor, the state would still not be required to prove premeditation. This is because the state is also charging JRH with second-degree child cruelty, a felony. Since Cooper's death allegedly occurred during the commission of second-degree child cruelty, a felony itself, Cooper's death is classified as felony murder. Since second-degree child cruelty simply requires criminal negligence, that is the standard that the state must meet to convict JRH of felony murder.
     
  3. Jinkasaurus

    Jinkasaurus Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Trophy Points:
    93
    I'm trying to isolate what factors make RH different than the case this week with the firefighter.

    With the firefighter, he thought he dropped his 23-month son off at daycare in the morning. Then around 3:30pm, he went out, took the dog for a walk, then got in his car and went to buy groceries. Only when he got home from the grocery store, around 4:30pm, did he realize that his son was strapped in the car seat right behind the driver's seat.

    So he didn't notice the car seat when he left to get groceries, when he got out of his car at the grocery store, or when he got into his car to go home. Three entirely separate times of getting in/out of the car and sitting inside it - all while his dead child was in the backseat.

    The details seem quite similar overall - but the firefighter had many more opportunities to notice the child in the back seat.

    It seems that the sexting and other internet activity by RH is what is being used by the police as the basis for saying RH killed Cooper intentionally.

    The firefighter is being charged with aggravated manslaughter, but it seems that very early on, the cops are already going on the record saying that it was "not an intentional act." http://wfla.com/2016/09/09/investigation-underway-into-childs-death-in-pinellas/ - I wonder how they can conclude that so quickly.

    I don't remember how quickly the police came to the conclusion that RH did this on purpose.
     
  4. krkrjx

    krkrjx The answer is blowin' in the wind.

    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    12,742
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I know that some parents really do get distracted and that distraction can lead to another distraction and then they think to themselves that oh so familiar, Now, where was I? and on some sort of automatic pilot switch to their normal routine having forgotten that at the time of initial distraction they were on their way to get a child out of a car seat...or whatever in their case.

    The problem I have is that there are some parents who did not forget and if parents are not held accountable for the death of a child while in their custody based on the "anyone can make that mistake" theory, children could conceivable be murdered under the guise of "I forgot."

    People will do this, don't kid yourself otherwise. If there is any indication at all of anything fishy in any child hot car death case it should be prosecuted as intentional and let the courts sort it out. IMO. If that does nothing else, it might prevent those who hope to get away with murder either to get rid of a kid they do not want or to collect on life insurance on a young life they deem expendable.

    I do not know for sure yet where Harris falls in the "intent" category but it sure looks to me like he had reckless disregard for Cooper. That, to me, should not go unpunished and to go further, there may be ways to prove past disregard shows intent to harm. If the state can prove that, Harris should reap what he has sown.

    I am not sure that in many of the cases we hear of there is evidence of reckless disregard and thus no intent to harm can be proven. I have insufficient details to call this as the case with the firefighter but evidently LE sees the facts as not similar to those in the Harris case.

    IMO.
     
  5. just the facts pls

    just the facts pls New Member

    Messages:
    533
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bold/underline is mine.

    When the prosecution requested a change of venue, I immediately suspected it was to take JH as far away as possible from the route he drove the last day of Cooper's life. Now he's all the way in Brunswick and hopefully the judge will still allow a field trip.
     
  6. PaperDoll

    PaperDoll When I'm Silent, I make the most sense

    Messages:
    25,800
    Likes Received:
    146
    Trophy Points:
    63
    From the get go, I think he's guilty. How can he forget he had his child in the car especially since he just strapped him in his car seat, then within a couple minutes he decides to NOT take him to day care.. Really? sorry I'm not buying his story about how he forgot. Then he gets out of the car to head into work not even realizing Cooper was still in his car seat? Then goes to the car at lunch and still didn't see him? The smell alone would have made him take note wouldn't it?
     
  7. Nore

    Nore New Member

    Messages:
    6,586
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ------Hi Simba 16, I agree. I am just starting to follow, (computer problems )
    He started sexting right away from what I remember. That sends up a flag
    right away. with a minor yet! I read everything at first, had no doubt. I do
    think it will be manslaughter tho' I wish for more. :seeya:
     
  8. Laughing

    Laughing Rarely Speechless

    Messages:
    8,036
    Likes Received:
    17,940
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Apparently the prosecution has permission to show a car the make & model used by Ross to the jury.

    If an identical car seat with right-sized baby doll is buckled into that car & each juror is required to back that car into a parking space...they will vote Guilty as soon as their elbows bump that doll's head.

    JMHO YMMV
     
  9. GA_Peach

    GA_Peach Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I actually just watched the ruling on this motion last night (link is included at the bottom). The judge ruled that Ross's actual vehicle with Cooper's car seat can be brought to Brunswick. However, there will be guidelines (TBD at a later date) about how the jurors are to view the vehicle. The defense raised a series of objections all based on the assumption that viewing the car would prejudice the jurors. Kilgore made the point that the jurors would view the car the way that each of them viewed the car on that day versus how Ross saw the car. In light of that, I would be surprised if the jurors are actually allowed to drive the car.

    The video below is an interesting watch, but it is nearly 4 hours long. On a side note, I think that the defense team has the better and stronger attorneys. JMO


    http://www.wildabouttrial.com/trial_videos/justin-ross-harris-trial-motions-for-81916/
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice