The Grand Jury & Trial

[ILikeToBendPages]

Agree. It could be a slip on his part or he could say he was separated....many women have no probs dating a separated person if they aren't living together or paperwork is in the system starting the process.

Except there is a text? IM when he tells the women/teenager that his wife and child are in the same room and she asks if he has a conscious and he says nope.

 

[tlcya]

yes, the use of next winter makes things confusing. Were it now winter, using next winter would mean the winter of 2015/16

But since this year's winter has not begun that term is causing confusion.

Confusiing wording aside. This thing won't go to trial sounds like til at least 2015/2016 winter and that is without other delaying factors from attorney's on either side. MOO

 

[eileenhawkeye]

It wouldn't surprise me if takes 3 years or so to get to trial. It took 90 days to get from the bond hearing to the indictment, and the prosecutor said if it took longer than 90 days, so be it. So it doesn't seem like that side is in any rush. I can't imagine the defense is either. There is not much they can really do to help their client's case IMO, except delay the trial in the hopes that the emotional impact is lessened. I am not saying it would work, after all this is a case of a child murdered in a horrible way, but they seem to try that tactic in every case.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

I know that the pros didn't show their entire case at the GJ hearing, but I am assuming they showed some evidence for all the charges in about 1.5 hours. Is that any indication that this will be a short trial (~2 weeks)? Is it possible to predict what trials will be months long in advance? Are some trials longer simply because there are more witnesses and evidence to go over?

 

[sonjay]

It wouldn't surprise me if takes 3 years or so to get to trial.

For perspective, it was a just a tad over 4 1/2 months from the date Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were killed until the OJ Simpson trial started -- They were killed on June 13, 1994, and the trial started on Nov. 2, 1994.

I tend to think that "next winter" means "the very next winter coming up," i.e., the winter of 2014/2015. It would greatly surprise me if the trial doesn't start until the winter of 2015/2016. Especially if JRH continues sitting in jail while awaiting trial. The defendant has a right to a "speedy trial," and I believe that usually the defense's approval or consent is required if the trial is to be delayed beyond a certain time. IMO, JRH wouldn't consent to that, especially if he's kept in jail during that time.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

I did not realize that the Simpson trial started so soon. Did OJ request a speedy trial? I believe that trial went for about 11 months, so it doesn't seem to be the norm in any aspect. Every trial I've seen on WS took at least a year after the defendant was arrested. If it was sooner, the defendant likely requested a speedy trial (David Westerfield).

 

[sonjay]

I did not realize that the Simpson trial started so soon. Did OJ request a speedy trial? I believe that trial went for about 11 months, so it doesn't seem to be the norm in any aspect. Every trial I've seen on WS took at least a year after the defendant was arrested. If it was sooner, the defendant likely requested a speedy trial (David Westerfield).

I just did a little research, and apparently in Georgia, the "speedy trial" rules don't formally need the defendant's approval. Rather, it's the other way around: the defendant has to assert his right to a speedy trial. If he does, then the trial must be held during the current court term or the following term. If that doesn't happen, then the defendant goes free.

Source: O.C.G.A. § 17-7-171 (2014)
http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/gacode/Default.asp

There are exceptions, of course. There are always exceptions. One common-sense exception is, if the defense causes delays, then it's on them and they can't get set free just because they delayed their own trial. But again, IMO, JRH will not be willing to sit in court for a year and a half, or two and a half years, awaiting trial. If he can't get released while awaiting trial, IMO, he will assert his speedy trial claim. And frankly, I wouldn't blame him, nor any other defendant who asserts a speedy trial claim. Who wants to sit in jail for 2 or 3 years awaiting trial? Even out of jail, who wants to have their entire life put on hold for that long while awaiting trial? It would be one thing for a minor charge that didn't carry the possibility of extended prison time, but it's something else altogether for charges such as what JRH is facing.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

The Trials forum: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?8-Trials

I only see two US trials on the first page that were held less than a year after the arrest. One was held almost exactly a year later. For whatever reason, it does not seem like defendants in many high-profile murder cases are requesting a speedy trial. They seem content with sitting in jail. If their lawyer tells them they need more time or a delay will help their case, it looks like they are listening.

IMO...In this particular case, the farther the trial is held from June/July 2014, the better for JRH, even if just slightly. If he was to request a speedy trial, the pre-trial hearings would all happen pretty close to each other, so the public would hear about the case more often, than if the trial is 2+ years away, and they are more spread out.

 

[noZme]

If one had a cellphone, sitting in jail, awaiting trial, could be a lot like working at Home Depot Corporate offices.

 

[Z&BsMommy]

If one had a cellphone, sitting in jail, awaiting trial, could be a lot like working at Home Depot Corporate offices.

[IMG[/IMG]
Haha, thanks I needed that [emoji5]

 

[sonjay]

If one had a cellphone, sitting in jail, awaiting trial, could be a lot like working at Home Depot Corporate offices.

LOL! Please don't tell me that he's allowed a cell phone in his jail cell!

 

[sonjay]

The Trials forum: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?8-Trials

I only see two US trials on the first page that were held less than a year after the arrest. One was held almost exactly a year later. For whatever reason, it does not seem like defendants in many high-profile murder cases are requesting a speedy trial.

Do you have any feel for how soon trials are held for defendants being held in jail vs. defendants who are out on bond? Not arguing with you about the speediness of the trials, but I'm surprised that so many trials start so long after the arrest. If I were a defendant sitting in jail until my trial, I'd certainly assert my right to a speedy trial.

 

[Yoda]

"Charges are strong"

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/08/opinion/cevallos-hot-car-death-prosecution/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

 

[eileenhawkeye]

I wonder if we will see more people defending JRH as time goes by. People who will say that there is not enough evidence, and that it was the media circus that convicted him, they are ~above it. Obviously I hope the trial will quiet them, but what about, before it starts but a year or two from now? There was something about JRH that made many run to his defense in the beginning, despite being charged with murder.

I also think that if he is acquitted, there will be many saying that the prosecution's case wasn't strong enough and they overcharged. I see it with the Anthony case, but I feel like it took a while before those comments started rolling in. In this case, I bet we will see those comments almost immediately. Hopefully, I never find out if my prediction comes true.

 

[Baznme]

Do you have any feel for how soon trials are held for defendants being held in jail vs. defendants who are out on bond? Not arguing with you about the speediness of the trials, but I'm surprised that so many trials start so long after the arrest. If I were a defendant sitting in jail until my trial, I'd certainly assert my right to a speedy trial.

I heard a snippet on HLN the other night that if there is no death penalty on the table, 6 months to trial. If death penalty is on the table, count on it being a year before trial. My guess is to give the attorneys plenty of time to present their case.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

I heard a snippet on HLN the other night that if there is no death penalty on the table, 6 months to trial. If death penalty is on the table, count on it being a year before trial. My guess is to give the attorneys plenty of time to present their case.

IDK how HLN would know this, especially since there hasn't even been any pretrial hearings yet. How do they know the defense won't keep asking for delays? I think 6 months is only a possibility if he requests a speedy trial. It took three months to go from the bond hearing to indictment. I think they making stuff up to sound more informed lol

 

[Ruby]

All opinions (guilty, innocent, intended to kill, accidental) are welcomed and should be respected.
I understand that opinions may be this person is guilty, and in most cases they are.
I am not defending JRH himself, and I do not think he is all that innocent.
But I see nothing wrong discussing evidence as if I was going to give him the benefit of the doubt.

If the state presents strong evidence, they'll have a strong voice for the victim, and justice will be served.
The defense will (and should) question everything the state puts forth, it is their job, it's our system.

It's nice and it's easy for me to make up my mind and have an opinion.
It's different in court and my opinion may not count the way I think it should.
So it's intriguing to me, to try and see it from the defense angle, question and explain everything away.
When it can no longer be in favor of the defendant, I know the state is stronger, and justice will be served.

I'll be waiting for the trial to see the states full presentation, pretending I'm on the jury,
seeing if and how the defense can explain anything, everything, or nothing at all.

It's just too sad that the victim in most cases can not speak for themselves, and it's worse that in this case it's a small child.
Rest in peace Cooper.

 

[Baznme]

IDK how HLN would know this, especially since there hasn't even been any pretrial hearings yet. How do they know the defense won't keep asking for delays? I think 6 months is only a possibility if he requests a speedy trial. It took three months to go from the bond hearing to indictment. I think they making stuff up to sound more informed lol

I don't know that they stated it as a matter of fact, more closely "speculation" and by a panel of attorneys at that. Since I'm sure they know more than I do, it stuck in my head, so just passing on what was said.

 

[JerseyGirl]

Maddox Kilgore, Harris’ lawyer, tried to poke holes in the theories the prosecution might bring against Harris in the trial when he spoke about the indictment Thursday.

Kilgore said the charges of malice and felony murder contradict each other.

“The first count charges Ross with malice murder — that is that he intended to kill his son,” Kilgore said.

Philip Holloway, a Marietta criminal defense lawyer, said the definition of malice in Georgia law implies the person thought out the act.

“Under Georgia law, if a person is acting with malice it means they have acted with premeditation, deliberation and with an abandoned and malignant heart,” Holloway said.

Kilgore contrasted that charge with two counts of felony murder, one he said meant Ross Harris “intended — not to kill his son — but to maliciously cause him pain” and another he said meant Ross Harris “left Cooper there with full knowledge.”

Kilgore said he only has one defense.

“Ross doesn’t have any theories. He has the truth,” Kilgore said.

Holloway said Kilgore revealed the angle of defense he might use at trial during his statements about the indictment.

“What he was showing was part of his defense strategy. In other words, he’s showing that the DA is inconsistent in their allegations,” Holloway said.

Holloway said the eight charges against Harris ranging in severity could make it easier for a jury to convict Harris because there are many charges to choose from. Holloway said the jury might reason that if the jury didn’t want to convict Harris of malice murder, he should be convicted of felony murder.

“It makes it harder for him, because it gives the jury several things to hang their hat on if they decide not to go with malice murder,” Holloway said.

http://neighbornewspapers.com/view/...Harris-not--cold-blooded-killer-?instance=all

another new article:

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20140913/NEWS/140919780/1291/living02?p=1&tc=pg

 

[blue22]

Maddox Kilgore, Harris’ lawyer, tried to poke holes in the theories the prosecution might bring against Harris in the trial when he spoke about the indictment Thursday.

Kilgore said the charges of malice and felony murder contradict each other.

“The first count charges Ross with malice murder — that is that he intended to kill his son,” Kilgore said.

Philip Holloway, a Marietta criminal defense lawyer, said the definition of malice in Georgia law implies the person thought out the act.

“Under Georgia law, if a person is acting with malice it means they have acted with premeditation, deliberation and with an abandoned and malignant heart,” Holloway said.

Kilgore contrasted that charge with two counts of felony murder, one he said meant Ross Harris “intended — not to kill his son — but to maliciously cause him pain” and another he said meant Ross Harris “left Cooper there with full knowledge.”

Kilgore said he only has one defense.

“Ross doesn’t have any theories. He has the truth,” Kilgore said.

Holloway said Kilgore revealed the angle of defense he might use at trial during his statements about the indictment.

“What he was showing was part of his defense strategy. In other words, he’s showing that the DA is inconsistent in their allegations,” Holloway said.

Holloway said the eight charges against Harris ranging in severity could make it easier for a jury to convict Harris because there are many charges to choose from. Holloway said the jury might reason that if the jury didn’t want to convict Harris of malice murder, he should be convicted of felony murder.

“It makes it harder for him, because it gives the jury several things to hang their hat on if they decide not to go with malice murder,” Holloway said.

http://neighbornewspapers.com/view/...Harris-not--cold-blooded-killer-?instance=all

another new article:

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20140913/NEWS/140919780/1291/living02?p=1&tc=pg

Maybe it's just me...but I really think it sounds like the lawyer will have Ross on the stand. Oh man, I hope so! That will just make it harder for the defense.