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

[HarmonyE.]

I don't think he was overcharged.

I'm not sure how anyone can conclude he wasn't overcharged.

The prosecution does not think they have enough to charge him again. Malice murder is essentially murder one and requires the prosecution to prove intent.

They're admitting now they cannot prove he intentionally murdered Cooper, so they clearly over-charged him.

So now, aside from the years he's spent in prison already, he's not guilty of anything at all regarding Cooper's death. Had they simply gone with felony murder, not malice murder, they wouldn't have needed to prove criminal intent. But now he gets off altogether. He's only staying in prison because of his sex crimes and he'll be out in a few years.

This is the prosecution's fault, not the appeals court's.

 

[cocomod]

I believe he will be punished for this crime, just not in this lifetime in our courts. I believe a higher power will punish him at some point because the most innocent among us was taken because of his selfish acts.

 

[LinasK]

I'm not sure how anyone can conclude he wasn't overcharged.

The prosecution does not think they have enough to charge him again. Malice murder is essentially murder one and requires the prosecution to prove intent.

They're admitting now they cannot prove he intentionally murdered Cooper, so they clearly over-charged him.

So now, aside from the years he's spent in prison already, he's not guilty of anything at all regarding Cooper's death. Had they simply gone with felony murder, not malice murder, they wouldn't have needed to prove criminal intent. But now he gets off altogether. He's only staying in prison because of his sex crimes and he'll be out in a few years.

This is the prosecution's fault, not the appeals court's.

Because sexting/pursuing other women was exactly why Scott Peterson killed his wife. I do NOT believe that Ross was overcharged. It was completely relevant to his not wanting to be a father and intentionally killing his son and staging it as an accident.

 

[TxLady2]

I did not follow this case. So it was his intension to kill this baby?!! Wow!! There is no shortage of devils and monsters now, Satan must be proud. I think he needs to be locked inside a car with no way to get out and deprived of bread and water. Handcuffed. And blindfolded.

 

[HarmonyE.]

Because sexting/pursuing other women was exactly why Scott Peterson killed his wife. I do NOT believe that Ross was overcharged. It was completely relevant to his not wanting to be a father and intentionally killing his son and staging it as an accident.

I personally don't find it helpful to compare very different cases in different jurisdictions. Cooper wasn't Harris's wife and this happened in a different state with different charging schemes.

The prosecution overcharged and they're basically admitting this by opting not to try him again, now that the prejudicial information cannot be included. As I said above, felony murder would have made much more sense from a charging perspective.

Did you watch the entire trial? I did, and it was clear to me the prosecution never actually proved what was going on in Harris's head. The message to the jury was - This is a really bad man, and you should therefore assume this was a premediated murder. But they never came up with anyone that proved (and they had the burden of proof) that Harris arrived at work that day fully intending to leave Cooper in hot car until he was dead.

I'm no Harris supporter. His selfish actions lead directly to the horrible death of a baby. But the obsessive sexting is the very thing that may have lead to Harris's distraction that morning. And distraction isn't pre-meditated murder.

 

[LinasK]

I personally don't find it helpful to compare very different cases in different jurisdictions. Cooper wasn't Harris's wife and this happened in a different state with different charging schemes.

The prosecution overcharged and they're basically admitting this by opting not to try him again, now that the prejudicial information cannot be included. As I said above, felony murder would have made much more sense from a charging perspective.

Did you watch the entire trial? I did, and it was clear to me the prosecution never actually proved what was going on in Harris's head. The message to the jury was - This is a really bad man, and you should therefore assume this was a premediated murder. But they never came up with anyone that proved (and they had the burden of proof) that Harris arrived at work that day fully intending to leave Cooper in hot car until he was dead.

I'm no Harris supporter. His selfish actions lead directly to the horrible death of a baby. But the obsessive sexting is the very thing that may have lead to Harris's distraction that morning. And distraction isn't pre-meditated murder.

The motive is the same in both cases- not wanting to be a father because they'd both rather be free to have affairs. No I didn't watch the trial, I followed it at the time. It was clear to me that he researched hot car deaths and staged finding Cooper. That's premeditation. You don't "forget" about your child in 30 seconds, especially when they are inches away from your face.

 

[HarmonyE.]

The motive is the same in both cases- not wanting to be a father because they'd both rather be free to have affairs. No I didn't watch the trial, I followed it at the time. It was clear to me that he researched hot car deaths and staged finding Cooper. That's premeditation. You don't "forget" about your child in 30 seconds, especially when they are inches away from your face.

I'd suggest a review of similar cases. Sadly, distracted parents do indeed forget about their kids when they are sitting a few inches behind him. It happens so frequently that car makers are adding safety features to new cars to remind drivers if something or someone is in the back seat.

He never researched children and hot car deaths. The media was wrong about this, and the angle was dropped when a deeper drive was done into his hard drive.

There's no actual evidence that he staged finding Cooper. That may be your personal interpretation, but clearly the prosecution doesn't agree with you. They could certainly re-introduce the film they have of him at the scene in a new trial, but they must not think it's strong enough to meet their burden of proof.

His motive was that he wanted to have affairs so he killed his kid (and not his wife)? So is every sex addicted, cheating husband a probable future child killer? I don't think so. It's an extremely weak motive. And he was having plenty of affairs while Cooper was alive.

I'm not interested in bantering with you about this further has you haven't watched the trial. It's on YouTube, pretty much in its entirety.

 

[LinasK]

I'd suggest a review of similar cases. Sadly, distracted parents do indeed forget about their kids when they are sitting a few inches behind him. It happens so frequently that car makers are adding safety features to new cars to remind drivers if something or someone is in the back seat.

He never researched children and hot car deaths. The media was wrong about this, and the angle was dropped when a deeper drive was done into his hard drive.

There's no actual evidence that he staged finding Cooper. That may be your personal interpretation, but clearly the prosecution doesn't agree with you. They could certainly re-introduce the film they have of him at the scene in a new trial, but they must not think it's strong enough to meet their burden of proof.

His motive was that he wanted to have affairs so he killed his kid (and not his wife)? So is every sex addicted, cheating husband a probable future child killer? I don't think so. It's an extremely weak motive. And he was having plenty of affairs while Cooper was alive.

I'm not interested in bantering with you about this further has you haven't watched the trial. It's on YouTube, pretty much in its entirety.

I never said that hot car accidental deaths don't happen. I just don't believe that's what happened in this case. I think he staged it to look like one to have a child-free life.

 

[TxLady2]

Ok, who put the baby in the car seat that morning when he was leaving to go to work? And didn't I read somewhere in this thread that he stopped at the chicken place and enjoyed breakfast with the child? So then he forgot the child by the time he got to work?? Can anyone explain that to me, because I don't believe this was an accident. You don't forget the baby in just a few minutes.
I am just disgusted by the way our legal system works sometimes. To watch these lawyers play such games and ignore common sense... it's baffling.

 

[Weki]

I think that the state, by declining to retry him, has conceded defeat. There isn’t enough evidence to prove intent. If it’s a genuine case of forgetfulness, I’m not sure felony murder would’ve worked either. I’m assuming if they were to charge felony murder, the underlying felony would be child endangerment or something like that. If he didn’t intend to murder his son, he didn’t intend to endanger him either. In this case the only outcome was death. So he either murdered him maliciously or he forgot. He was distracted sexting etc but I’m not sure that is enough to prove the underlying felony needed for felony murder. JMO

It makes me angry too!

 

[neesaki]

I think that the state, by declining to retry him, has conceded defeat. There isn’t enough evidence to prove intent. If it’s a genuine case of forgetfulness, I’m not sure felony murder would’ve worked either. I’m assuming if they were to charge felony murder, the underlying felony would be child endangerment or something like that. If he didn’t intend to murder his son, he didn’t intend to endanger him either. In this case the only outcome was death. So he either murdered him maliciously or he forgot. He was distracted sexting etc but I’m not sure that is enough to prove the underlying felony needed for felony murder. JMO

It makes me angry too!

Idk…. Put a few of us together, and I have no doubt we could have come up with evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. It’s already been discussed for several threads.
Face it, it seems to me that there are three types of prosecutors….

1.There’s the overly zealous ones who are out to win a conviction, and could care less about justice. they only want to “win”. It’s a competition to them. They will do anything to win, including concealing evidence from the defense, persuading the judge to exclude witnesses that could help in the defense, etc…. In other words, cheating.

2. Then there’s the other type…. the lazy ones, who sit at there desk and play video games on their cell phones. (Yes, I have heard that first hand from a lawyer who knows). They don’t give a crap about the case and are too lazy to deal with it. That pay check, ya know…

3. Then the truly dedicated, conscientious prosecutor who actually cares about the victims , and will fight tooth and nail to get them justice. But they will do so fairly, without violating the constitutional rights of the alleged offender.

So… which type of prosecutor handled this case. Wanna take a vote?

 

[neesaki]

You can see in the video played at trial that he never glanced below the roofline of the car, and clearly never looked in the back seat. So if he was checking to see if Cooper had died, he wouldn't have been able to know for sure. Harris was well aware of the cameras in the lots, they can be seen on screen at the Security desk. If he intentionally left Cooper in the car, going to the car mid-day seems an unnecessarily risky move.

Not only will he not fry, once he does his time for his unrelated crimes, he'll not do another day in prison and be considered "not guilty" in Cooper's death forever. The prosecution screwed up badly here by over-charging Harris. IMO

He purposely didn’t lean inside or look inside the car, because he knew of the video cameras. Then he would have had to have seen Cooper, and he sure couldn’t be videoed doing that! All he could do was keep his head above roofline…… so he could continue his charade of not knowing he left Cooper in the car….. and listen for any sounds, and smell the air inside the car , to tell him he had achieved his goal. JMO