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

[katydid23]

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.

Right, your daughter called out to you so you took her out of the car. But if you had walked away, how long before you would have noticed she was missing?

 

[Linda7NJ]

At 9 am? A 2 yr old is going to instantly fall asleep, within minutes, at 9 am? I wish my toddlers had done that. They would never fall asleep at 9 am.

Well, playing devils advocate and seeing the defense already being laid out at the funeral service....I'll say... He did sleep in his parents bed the two nights prior. Everyone was sleep deprived....he was cutting teeth..sick...something.
He didn't hear his son, because he's deaf in his right ear. ) bottle rocket mishap)

You'll be hearing that at trial.. Bank on it. IMO

How he's going to get around that foreshadowing float to his father about seeing Cooper on Jesus's lap.... Well, I hope ALL the jurors are smart enough to know psychics don't exist.

all IMO

All IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JeannaT]

He admitted he left the child there, but obviously believes that he did not do so negligently. HE questions the facts. HE does not agree with the charges. There is a trial if he doesn't agree with the charges. It's simple, why is that even a question.

We know why there is a trial, he plead not guilty. The same exact reason there is always a trial. Why is that fact even a debate?

The jury will NOT be considering intent to look at these charges. Intent is NOT part of these charges. If they go in there and debate about intent, they are not correctly looking at the charges. The judge will carefully give them instructions on what factors to debate here.

To me, he clearly believes he did that "negligently". He was screaming "what have I done, what have I done" in the parking lot.

Juries are made up of humans. They'll look at intent. If it goes to jury trial. Although they may not admit it, that will be on their minds as it is on all human minds looking at this horrible case. I guess there are some jurors who are robots, but I think most do consider things that they haven't been instructed to consider. Not out loud, of course.

 

[Linda7NJ]

He admitted he left the child there, but obviously believes that he did not do so negligently. HE questions the facts. HE does not agree with the charges. There is a trial if he doesn't agree with the charges. It's simple, why is that even a question.

We know why there is a trial, he plead not guilty. The same exact reason there is always a trial. Why is that fact even a debate?

The jury will NOT be considering intent to look at these charges. Intent is NOT part of these charges. If they go in there and debate about intent, they are not correctly looking at the charges. The judge will carefully give them instructions on what factors to debate here.

ETA: I feel like you are really going in circles with this. There is a trail, because he did not plead guilty. PERIOD. There is not a trial, because the prosecution doesn't believe the facts. Come one now.

Agree 100%

Only thing he can hope for, IMO, is a plea bargain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[popsicle]

11-YEAR-OLD INVENTS LIFESAVING DEVICE FOR BABIES

An 11-year-old boy has invented a device that could help prevent parents from accidentally leaving babies inside hot cars.
Andrew Pelham calls his device the E-Z Baby Saver.

http://abc7news.com/archive/9169951/

All you need is a bungee cord type thing from the store. Smart kid!

 

[Linda7NJ]

To me, he clearly believes he did that "negligently". He was screaming "what have I done, what have I done" in the parking lot.



Juries are made up of humans. They'll look at intent. If it goes to jury trial. Although they may not admit it, that will be on their minds as it is on all human minds looking at this horrible case. I guess there are some jurors who are robots, but I think most do consider things that they haven't been instructed to consider. Not out loud, of course.

If I was a juror, I wouldn't allow it.

Either you defend your position with facts and evidence following the jury instructions, or you are failing to take part in deliberations. You'd get the boot...

All IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gngr~snap]

“I want to tell everybody that I wish I was in that car seat, not her,” the weeping 31-year-old mother tells AL.com/The Birmingham News. “If I had to die for her to live, I would have done that.”

This is a very different response we got from Cooper's ...family. (I want to attribute, but am following tos)

A baby they tried for years to conceive and the parent responsible at the time had a "feeling" something bad was going to happen.

too weird!
Her case was dropped 3 weeks before Cooper died.
It happened in Tuscaloosa, maybe this is what they looked up?
moo

 

[JeannaT]

Well, playing devils advocate and seeing the defense already being laid out at the funeral service....I'll say... He did sleep in his parents bed the two nights prior. Everyone was sleep deprived....he was cutting teeth..sick...something.
He didn't hear his son, because he's deaf in his right ear. ) bottle rocket mishap)

You'll be hearing that at trial.. Bank on it. IMO

How he's going to get around that foreshadowing float to his father about seeing Cooper on Jesus's lap.... Well, I hope ALL the jurors are smart enough to know psychics don't exist.

all IMO

All IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In your experience, did your children talk continuously? I did have one who talked too much, but the others - if I was alone in the car with them running errands at that age (ESPECIALLY if they were backward facing) would kind of lapse into silence.

As cute as Cooper's little "bye red car" habit was, it's highly unlikely he was vocal 100% of his waking time.

 

[blue22]

To me, he clearly believes he did that "negligently". He was screaming "what have I done, what have I done" in the parking lot.

Juries are made up of humans. They'll look at intent. If it goes to jury trial. Although they may not admit it, that will be on their minds as it is on all human minds looking at this horrible case. I guess there are some jurors who are robots, but I think most do consider things that they haven't been instructed to consider. Not out loud, of course.

If he clearly believed he negligently left his son in there, WTH did he plead not guilty?

If the jury found him not guilty, because they consider intent...there can be a mistrial. They can't find him innocent if they believe he did not premeditate, because the charges do not include that. I don't care what they do in their heads, but if that plays a factor in the verdict, that is BIG problem.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Right, your daughter called out to you so you took her out of the car. But if you had walked away, how long before you would have noticed she was missing?

She was not supposed to be with me that day at all. I forgot to drop her off and she had off from school. I have no way of answering that.

 

[jmcgladr]

A baby they tried for years to convince and the parent responsible at the time had a "feeling" something bad was going to happen.

too weird!
Her case was dropped 3 weeks before Cooper died.
It happened in Tuscaloosa, maybe this is what they looked up?
moo

Seriously? In Tuscaloosa, where they came from? They may even know the other family. Copycat crime?

Even the "premonition" ahead of time being the same? That's way too coincidental IMO.

 

[JeannaT]

If he clearly believed he negligently left his son in there, WTH did he plead not guilty?

If the jury found him not guilty, because they consider intent...there can be a mistrial. They can't find him innocent if they believe he did not premeditate, because the charges do not include that. I don't care what they do in their heads, but if that plays a factor in the verdict, that is BIG problem.

Because, Blue, he's not guilty of murder in his mind (and frankly, not in my mind either).

Or because his lawyer told him to plead not guilty.

Or because he wants to get out and make something of this life that he believes God has given him.

He's admitted he was horribly negligent and that's pretty obvious to me. Murder - no.

 

[nightwatch]

[quote name="ScarlettScarpetta" post=10677025]Yes. And he forgot. He just pulled into a space and forgot. I still see that possibility.[/quote]

In two minutes. After putting him in his car seat. After eating with him. Not only did he forget his son, but he forgot to take him to daycare...which is what he does everyday?

Also if true he goes back to car and still does not see baby. Hopefully prosecutors will bring a mock-up of the inside of the car to show the jury.

Jmo



In 2/10 of a mile, he forget the thing that starts his workday? He forgot his ROUTINE?

ciao
Eta this post came out strange it
was a response to blue's post

 

[blue22]

Because, Blue, he's not guilty of murder in his mind (and frankly, not in my mind either).

Or because his lawyer told him to plead not guilty.

Or because he wants to get out and make something of this life that he believes God has given him.

He's admitted he was horribly negligent and that's pretty obvious to me. Murder - no.

If he agrees that he was horribly negligent, then he should be able to clearly see that his horrible negligence is why his son was dead in that car. His negligence didn't keep him alive.

To reiterate, it's going to trial because of HIS plea.

 

[Linda7NJ]

In your experience, did your children talk continuously? I did have one who talked too much, but the others - if I was alone in the car with them running errands at that age (ESPECIALLY if they were backward facing) would kind of lapse into silence.

As cute as Cooper's little "bye red car" habit was, it's highly unlikely he was vocal 100% of his waking time.

Mine would have made your ears bleed. The kid started speaking understandable words at 8 months...HE NEVER SHUT UP!!!

Of course he didn't walk till he was like 16 months. Never crawled. Was getting worried.

Kids are weird. They come with their own internal clocks.

All IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JeannaT]

If he clearly believed he negligently left his son in there, WTH did he plead not guilty?

If the jury found him not guilty, because they consider intent...there can be a mistrial. They can't find him innocent if they believe he did not premeditate, because the charges do not include that. I don't care what they do in their heads, but if that plays a factor in the verdict, that is BIG problem.

Nobody would admit they considered something they were told not to consider. So I don't see where a mistrial would occur. BTW - CAN you have a mistrial after a verdict has been rendered and the verdict is "not guilty"? I don't think so. That's double jeopardy. If the judge got wind that people were considering things NOT admissable at trial - that might cause a mistrial. Not after a not guilty verdict has been rendered.

Sometimes I sit here and think . . .I really like most of the other posters here, including you - but do we live in such different worlds that we see things SO differently as in - jurors DO deliberate all though the trial although they're told not to until the end, they DO consider evidence presented even if the judge says please strike that and don't consider it, etc.

Do you not agree? Jurors, for the most part, use their BEST reasoning skills and don't become robots in the jury box. They try their very hardest to come to the truth and do that fairly, even if it means considering things they've see and heard but have been told to strike those things from their memories.

 

[Flutterby80]

I am forgetful by nature. It's irritating as all get out, but driving away after paying for food at McDonald's? Did it. Drive right past my exit that I was JUST heading for? Yep. Did I get all the way to the babysitter's one morning before realizing I was barefoot? Embarrassingly, yes. Do I make a grocery list only to leave it on the kitchen table? Only about 70% of the time.

So it's not the fact that dad left breakfast and immediately drove to the wrong exit that I can't believe. Or the fact that he pulled up and parked at his job instead of going to daycare.

It's that he didn't notice Cooper. Not at 9:30 am. Not at lunch time. Not at quitting time. Apparently, he didn't give Cooper a thought all day. I do not believe this even a little bit. Forget the smell. Just the fact that he didn't notice a human being, a person, his CHILD, was in his car on 3 separate occasions screams bull$%@# to me. He's a liar, IMO. Well, that's the least of what he is.

 

[Roxye]

A baby they tried for years to conceive and the parent responsible at the time had a "feeling" something bad was going to happen.

too weird!
Her case was dropped 3 weeks before Cooper died.
It happened in Tuscaloosa, maybe this is what they looked up?
moo

I want to respond directly, but I can't.

What I will say, if my child died, I would DO and bargain with ANYONE to bring him back. I would give my own life so my son could live. No matter of the selfish world we live in, or the horrible stages he will have to go through.

My Niklet deserves a life above and beyond my own. Even knowing he has hardships coming.

(still following tos?)

 

[Linda7NJ]

If he clearly believed he negligently left his son in there, WTH did he plead not guilty?

If the jury found him not guilty, because they consider intent...there can be a mistrial. They can't find him innocent if they believe he did not premeditate, because the charges do not include that. I don't care what they do in their heads, but if that plays a factor in the verdict, that is BIG problem.

Jury nullification is a possibility... But I sincerely doubt it in this case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[blue22]

Nobody would admit they considered something they were told not to consider.

Sometimes I sit here and think . . .I really like most of the other posters here, including you - but do we live in such different worlds that we see things SO differently as in - jurors DO deliberate all though the trial although they're told not to until the end, they DO consider evidence presented even if the judge says please strike that and don't consider it, etc.

Do you not agree? Jurors, for the most part, use their BEST reasoning skills and don't become robots in the jury box. They try their very hardest to come to the truth and do that fairly, even if it means considering things they've see and heard but have been told to strike those things from their memories.

If there is an innocent verdict, and that verdict is found because they feel he didn't "intend" to do it...that is a mistrial. The can't deliberate intent. PERIOD. End of story. Intent has nothing to do with the charges before them and cannot be factored into their verdict. They can have their own opinion about intent, that is a natural thought process. What they can NOT do, is introduce that thought process into a verdict.