CONVICTION OVERTURNED GA - Ross Harris Trial Appeal, hot car death of son, Cooper

Laughing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2010
Messages
12,627
Reaction score
42,330
Does everyone put their right hand on the passenger seat and turn their head to look out the rear of a vehicle when backing up? I usually just use my mirror's. JMO.


Wow I hope no one is ever in any of your blind spots! (Especially anyone or anything I care about!)

In this state you won't pass your driver's license exam unless you do.

Recommended wherever I look:


  • Do not depend only on your mirrors or only looking out a side window.
  • Turn and look over your right and left shoulders before you begin backing. As a safety measure, look over your right and left shoulders again while backing.

Turn and look over your right shoulder when backing out the vehicle. Do not depend only using your mirrors.



What should you do before backing out of a diagonal parking space?
be sure that the way is clear, look over your shoulder while backing, and yield to approaching traffic


Per usual, your mileage may vary....
 

ScotAng

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2012
Messages
457
Reaction score
595
RH goal was to sext and have sex with as many woman as possible and the evidence presented by the State shows that being married didn't slow him down.

The GSC didn't overturn the murder conviction because they felt the State didn't have enough evidence to convict. They overturned the conviction because the trial court allowed the State to present cumulative and prejudicial evidence to the jury. JMO.
It's clear he cheated before and throughout the marriage and never in doubt marriage didn't slow him down.
Am I missing something here?
 

HarmonyE.

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2016
Messages
750
Reaction score
1,016
Wow I hope no one is ever in any of your blind spots! (Especially anyone or anything I care about!)

In this state you won't pass your driver's license exam unless you do.

Recommended wherever I look:


  • Do not depend only on your mirrors or only looking out a side window.
  • Turn and look over your right and left shoulders before you begin backing. As a safety measure, look over your right and left shoulders again while backing.

Turn and look over your right shoulder when backing out the vehicle. Do not depend only using your mirrors.



What should you do before backing out of a diagonal parking space?
be sure that the way is clear, look over your shoulder while backing, and yield to approaching traffic


Per usual, your mileage may vary....

All true, but let's face it, Ross definitely seems like the lazy type.

I can't remember if the SUV had a back up camera. My 2014 vehicle does, but I'm guessing Harris's did not?
 

mom2chloe

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2008
Messages
1,917
Reaction score
17,001
So Ross spared his wife because she wasn't pregnant? Having a little trouble with that logic.
Ross spared his wife because he was able to manipulate her and could have easily continued on with his sexual addiction via prostitution, CSAM and whatever else was his thing. Likely his relationship with his wife changed after Cooper’s birth to his dismay. This is neither rare nor unusual. The child becomes the major focus of the parents who love them. Who knows whether he would have let his wife live had he gotten away with his crime? We don’t know. He is an addict who found his sexual gratification more important than anything else we presume he cared about and protected. IMO
 

RANCH

United we stand, divided we fall.
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
15,850
Reaction score
27,487
Wow I hope no one is ever in any of your blind spots! (Especially anyone or anything I care about!)

In this state you won't pass your driver's license exam unless you do.

Recommended wherever I look:


  • Do not depend only on your mirrors or only looking out a side window.
  • Turn and look over your right and left shoulders before you begin backing. As a safety measure, look over your right and left shoulders again while backing.

Turn and look over your right shoulder when backing out the vehicle. Do not depend only using your mirrors.



What should you do before backing out of a diagonal parking space?
be sure that the way is clear, look over your shoulder while backing, and yield to approaching traffic


Per usual, your mileage may vary....
There's no reason to make things personal. I should have added that I do look over my left and right shoulders when backing up. I don't take my hands off of the steering wheel.
 

katydid23

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
62,318
Reaction score
182,276
Why? Because that's how the US judicial system is set up. And trials aren't about fairness to the victim; it's the defendant who is entitled to a fair trial.

I'll let the court explain further:

The trial court also clearly abused its discretion in admitting the sexual-activities evidence to show Appellant’s intent, absence of mistake or accident, and knowledge, as indicated by the State’s failure to defend these purposes on appeal. The evidence was not relevant to show intent, because the intent required for the alleged crimes against Cooper was different than Appellant’s intent when he sent sexual messages and engaged in sexual conduct.

And again, malice murder requires intent. Not intent to sext. Intent to murder Cooper.
Right, I get that. But the majority opinion ands I disagree about the 'intent' behind RH's actions.

They assume his intent when he was sending those texts was just about his sexual conduct.

I believe that he CHOSE to make a right turn towards his office as opposed to a left turn towards the daycare. His intent was to allow Cooper to stay buckled into the car that morning, while RH continued his obsessive sexting, with no annoying need to stop to cater to his son's needs anymore.

The court assumes there was no intent behind the decision to skip daycare drop off that morning. I don't make that assumption.

I see this as a malice murder. When I saw what RH did that tragic day, in each momentum, decision by decision----I saw intent to end his child's life. JMO
 

HarmonyE.

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2016
Messages
750
Reaction score
1,016
The court assumes there was no intent behind the decision to skip daycare drop off that morning. I don't make that assumption.

I don't see the court making any assumptions about this. Harris was granted a new trial because it concluded there was extensive amount of improperly admitted evidence.

For instance, how did the nine blown up color photos of his erect penis help any juror with the question of Ross's intent to murder Cooper that day? They didn't; they were included to show what a gross person Harris is - and that's the very definition of prejudicial.
 

RANCH

United we stand, divided we fall.
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
15,850
Reaction score
27,487
I don't see the court making any assumptions about this. Harris was granted a new trial because it concluded there was extensive amount of improperly admitted evidence.

For instance, how did the nine blown up color photos of his erect penis help any juror with the question of Ross's intent to murder Cooper that day? They didn't; they were included to show what a gross person Harris is - and that's the very definition of prejudicial.
I agree. The GSC opinion is clear that some of the sexual evidence helped the State's motive theroy. The idea that the court overturned the murder conviction because they didn't see any intent by RH is not correct.
As explained below, although the evidence presented at
Appellant’s trial was legally sufficient to support his convictions for
the crimes against Cooper, and some of the evidence regarding
Appellant’s sexual activities was properly admissible as intrinsic
evidence of those crimes or to establish the State’s motive theory,
the trial court should have excluded much of this evidence under
OCGA § 24-4-403 because it was needlessly cumulative and prejudicial,
See page 3 of link.

 

neesaki

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
13,511
Reaction score
30,510
IIRC Leanna Taylor testified that they had a happy marriage until Cooper came along. So I would ask Ross Harris how he could still be happy with his son if his son was the reason he was unhappy with his marriage. Would he have been happier with Cooper as a single dad?
RH was so self serving he couldn’t stand sharing his world with a baby. He wanted his own needs met, that was all important. I know someone else like that but thankfully they didn’t resort to such extreme measures, although they were abusive.
 

neesaki

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
13,511
Reaction score
30,510
I would find it bizarre too, but that is not what I said.

I believe Ross wanted to be free from the burden of a child full stop. He didn't appear to have much interest in Leanna, I doubt he planned on staying married to her.

I'm finding it difficult to comprehend the logic behind the court's mention of Leanna on the point in your post. Are we to believe a Georgia court has never encountered a case where a (cheating) parent killed a child, but not their partner?

Shanann was pregnant, all burdens eliminated. Leanna wasn't, no burden for Ross going forward.
Plus it would have been much more complicated to make the murder of his wife look like an accident. He certainly couldn’t have “accidentally “ left her to die in a hot car. He’d have to tied her up and put her in the trunk.
 

RANCH

United we stand, divided we fall.
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
15,850
Reaction score
27,487
Plus it would have been much more complicated to make the murder of his wife look like an accident. He certainly couldn’t have “accidentally “ left her to die in a hot car. He’d have to tied her up and put her in the trunk.
He could have made her "disappear." That's been done before. JMO.
 

HarmonyE.

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2016
Messages
750
Reaction score
1,016
This thread seems to be drifting towards bad fan fiction at this point, what with speculation that Harris contemplated tying up Leanna and leaving her in the trunk.

I suggest anyone seriously interested why the court overturned his conviction read the actual decision. It's long, but very clear.
 

neesaki

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
13,511
Reaction score
30,510
This thread seems to be drifting towards bad fan fiction at this point, what with speculation that Harris contemplated tying up Leanna and leaving her in the trunk.

I suggest anyone seriously interested why the court overturned his conviction read the actual decision. It's long, but very clear.
I was just saying that’s what it would have taken to do the same to her as he did to Cooper. My apologies if I seemed to imply he contemplated doing that.
 

DaisyKenny

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2019
Messages
193
Reaction score
2,124
...

Are we to believe a Georgia court has never encountered a case where a (cheating) parent killed a child, but not their partner?

Shanann was pregnant, all burdens eliminated. Leanna wasn't, no burden for Ross going forward.
RH was telling the women he was cheating with that the only reason he had not divorced his wife was because of his kid, so I still don't understand why the court wouldn't treat the killing one's child the same way they would if the spouse had been murdered.

The defense also complained about allowing the message someone else wrote about 'hating being married with kids', which RH replied to the morning he left Cooper to die.

So RH tells his sexting partners that he hates being married and wishes he was single again and that the only reason he hasn't divorced his wife is because of his son and he ends up killing his son in a hot car, which for some reason was his wife's greatest fear. What are the odds?
 

katydid23

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
62,318
Reaction score
182,276
I don't see the court making any assumptions about this. Harris was granted a new trial because it concluded there was extensive amount of improperly admitted evidence.

For instance, how did the nine blown up color photos of his erect penis help any juror with the question of Ross's intent to murder Cooper that day? They didn't; they were included to show what a gross person Harris is - and that's the very definition of prejudicial.
Here is where I see the court making assumptions about RH's intent:

The evidence was not relevant to show intent, because the intent required for the alleged crimes against Cooper was different than Appellant’s intent when he sent sexual messages and engaged in sexual conduct.


To me, that ^^^^ seems to say that the RH's intent behind his incessant sexting was purely for sexual gratification that day.

And I am not making that assumption because I think he was purposely trying to distract himself because he was fully aware that his son was strapped in his car seat, out in the parking lot. He was just waiting for it to be over. There were several things during the trial which seem to support that conclusion.
 
Last edited:

katydid23

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
62,318
Reaction score
182,276
I don't see the court making any assumptions about this. Harris was granted a new trial because it concluded there was extensive amount of improperly admitted evidence.

For instance, how did the nine blown up color photos of his erect penis help any juror with the question of Ross's intent to murder Cooper that day? They didn't; they were included to show what a gross person Harris is - and that's the very definition of prejudicial.
As for the D-pix, I agree that was probably unnecessary. But I don't think it rises to the level of overturning the conviction.

JMO IMO
 
Top