Trial - Ross Harris #3

[TeaTime]

I don't think this was intentional , he was just way too into himself and his ladies and his obsession. He wasn't thinking about his son, even as they had breakfast, he was sexting with women. His brain was on his penis, Cooper was invisible. Selfish oaf? yes. Intentional murderer? no.

 

[arkansasmimi]

THIS is why those who think what they do/did from the beginning. Really puts things in context. Especially now after fixing to start last week of the States case in chief. And why some people just cant get past those sensationalized incorrect MSM reported "facts" vs actual trial testimony.

JMHO, Very interesting. Listen to this from 9/14/14 Motions by Kilgore. ESPECIALLY knowing testimony thus far at trial. The Motion #1 about inconsistent, nonfactual reporting
Knowing that Kilgore was correct and now they have had to have a change of venue...6/25/14 "sources from CCPD spokesperson personal opinion- that the death may not be accidental " AND 6/27/14 report in regards to AR.. *Kilgore added 11 exhibits to his Motion for Limited Closure of Courtroom during Pretrial Hearings. -- Kilgore adds the front page of the AR and Media Attny objects, lol Kilgore makes note that prior Def had objected to the AR being made public and the Media objected and wanted it made public. ..
6/27/14 from this Media report, "LEO Spokesman and Sources quote the CC ME as saying the Cause of Death is consistent with Hyperthermia, and that the Manner of Death is Homicide, added that " Homicide death by another person is known now" Kilgore states that this not true of legal determination. States that the AR says Manner of Death is UNDETERMINED.
**testimony if you will recall from Dr. Frist former CCME, on Cross with Ludwig, went over the AR Report and also Def entered into Evidence the Filed copy of Cooper Harris Death Cert, (not signed but FILED on 9/30/2014--- about 2 weeks AFTER this hearing of 9/14/14 & 9/15/14)

**State Evans, goes to the witness stand and shows Dr Frist an email , Def Objects the email was not entered into Evidence, State was allowed to ask (after ME saw copy of email ) who the individual named (the author of email) was, Dr Frist he was an employee at CCME and Frist testified yes he authorized that email to be sent to CCPD. *** Note this is 2 days prio iirc on date to the article Kilgore is referencing in his Exhibit #1. As of the time of Dr Frist testimony, as far as trial knows, no amended AR has been filed in this case. Over 2 years later.

Kilgore hit it on the head and is an exact prediction of what was and did happen in this case. So now the whole trial even more makes sense of the Def Cross exam. And I see now about the Judge rulings. And the State trying to get some sympathy because of scheduling? Is it a meeting with Lady Karma happening?

Kilgore also as one exhibit 7/4/14 "extremely sensational" headline day after the Probable Cause Hearing (7/3/14) that is "absolutely false" regarding Stoddard statement then at the PC/Bond Hearing vs now that Discovery has started.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpqWSpQmAyM&feature=youtu.be&list=PLoW1SIeAWaWbJFWVaOT7hUZkxX0v2uq6l

 

[arkansasmimi]

Originally Posted by Hope4More View Post
Stoddard tried to take something meaningless and make it sound sneaky and hinky. Seems to be his speciality.

RH's pockets had been emptied. There's no reason to think the Publix receipt was anything more significant than a piece of paper trash he'd left in his pocket, and seeing it on the table, instinctively reached for it to toss it.

He trashed it not only in front of Stoddard, but in front of a 2nd detective. There was nothing incriminating on the receipt. Stoddard implied that RH had thrown it away before having to account for what he had done at lunch in order to hide something, similar to Stoddard's certainty that RH forgetting to tell him about the lightbulbs was purposeful.

Smoke and mirrors, and revealing about Stoddard's mindset.

BBM

It doesn't make any difference what was on that piece of paper. He deliberately tried to hide it from the investigators. IMO that was tampering with evidence. A risky and stupid choice that an innocent person would NEVER make given the circumstances.
That moment totality changed my mind in this case.

RBBM, THIS. And before anyone gets too wound up on the thrown away Publix receipt, I would encourage one to think about it : JMHO

If you go back and watch that particular moment (I missed it orig) Stoddard searches, puts stuff on the table, then moves everything except that piece of paper to the side. RH reaches and thrown it in trash. **Now at the time it was very much something that did and SHOULD have made the Det hinkey meter go off. That is part of investigation. This was also prior to Miranda, that he threw away the receipt, and post Miranda that it was retrieved. They did not know what was on the paper at time, but afterward it was the Publix receipt and RH after he was read his Miranda and waived, gave timeline and some things he just could not remember. Like who took Cooper to daycare on Monday and "thinks" he took him on Tuesday - day prior. Recording of RH in that room started at 6 p.m. per testimony of Stoddard. But he DID tell them Publix so that receipt more than anything honestly, proves that RH told the truth about that. JMHO, after rewatching, I not sure if it wasn't just an unconscious gesture of throwing in trash. He fiddled with the card Stoddard gave him a few times. JMHO the State had to bring out the fact of RH throwing paper in trash and of Stoddard retrieving and what it was, because if not it would be scrutinized either way. Because of the simple fact anyone watching it see it. That jmho was what was suppose to happen (them retrieve and to identify what it was just as part of the investigation. It would evidence not looked at if they had not.). In this situation, it was a positive for the Def, as it proves that RH told the truth about Publix few seconds later, not lie. And the time and date would be on the receipt.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Quote Originally Posted by turaj View Post
I so wish the jury could do that trip themselves...to me it is a smoking gun. maybe they will do a video.
Quote Originally Posted by PaperDoll View Post

Along with sitting in Ross' SUV with the same car seat so they can view for themselves if Ross saw Cooper or not..
I thought that's what investigators are for. They investigate those things and testify before the jury. The defense then gets to cross examine the witness's.

Letting the jury do their own investigation doesn't allow for any cross examination. The accused couldn't face his accusers. Sounds like something that could lead to a reversal on any conviction at appeal. JMO

"The 6th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution sets out many rights for defendants during a criminal prosecution, including the right of the accused to confront their accusers. The relevant text of the Confrontation Clause of the 6th Amendment reads as follows: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to be confronted with the witnesses against him.

The confrontation clause guarantees criminal defendants the opportunity to face the prosecution's witnesses in the case against them and dispute the witnesses' testimony. This guarantee applies to both statements made in court and statements made outside of court that are offered as evidence during trial."

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/the-6th-amendment-s-confrontation-clause.html

Respectfully BBM.
There was a Pretrial Motions Hearing on Aug 19, 2016 prior to start of jury selection in which this very point was brought up. There was also a 3D animated video reconstruction done that we now know more about testimony and the fact that the car seat had been messed with and was not in it origional placement on 7/2/14/ We also know from testimony of CSI Grimstead that that car seat in that position was LEFT inside the car by him on 7/2/14. In a prior pre trial hearing, Stoddard is on record as saying that car seat was never left in vehicle. The 3D animated video presentation took scans of the veh on 7/2/14 and of the HD parking lot on 7/2/14 and 7/4/14 iirc the 2nd parking lot date. All info came from Stoddard and Stoddard in his testimony after Mr. Dustin, out right says that Mr. Dusting was not telling truthful testimony.

Anyway, the SUV and the video are in. Kigore brought same argument as you did. Also at beginning of Hearing they go over Dr. Diamond testimony. But here is where startes and shows what the 3D animated is going to be (actual video shown) ** lol but since then Kilgore brought out in Cross that the measurements and carseat that the State nor the Witness had realized. IF the State had realized prior they did not bring it out or even alert the Witness.

Start at 10:23 Making accommodations arguments from Boring for State, Evidentuary View at the car asking for...Kilgore cautions the Court not to go down this road then the 3D testimony.

Great point by Kilgore, start about: 14:00 will car seat be put back in? will juror be in back seat, invited lean in toss light bulbs? Creating evidence... put juror inside crime scene ..if your looking for something- your gonna see it. SUV State: murder weapon SUV Def: crime scene

[video=youtube;TAxRZETPDfk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAxRZETPDfk[/video]

 

[MzOpinion8d]

By divorcing RH prior to trial, LH will not be responsible for any fees, fines or restitution the court orders Ross to pay.

MOO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And I'm wondering if it made her eligible to collect Cooper's life insurance benefits.

 

[arkansasmimi]

THIS is why those who think what they do/did from the beginning. Really puts things in context. Especially now after fixing to start last week of the States case in chief. And why some people just cant get past those sensationalized incorrect MSM reported "facts" vs actual trial testimony.

JMHO, Very interesting. Listen to this from 9/14/14 Motions by Kilgore. ESPECIALLY knowing testimony thus far at trial. The Motion #1 about inconsistent, nonfactual reporting
Knowing that Kilgore was correct and now they have had to have a change of venue...6/25/14 "sources from CCPD spokesperson personal opinion- that the death may not be accidental " AND 6/27/14 report in regards to AR.. *Kilgore added 11 exhibits to his Motion for Limited Closure of Courtroom during Pretrial Hearings. -- Kilgore adds the front page of the AR and Media Attny objects, lol Kilgore makes note that prior Def had objected to the AR being made public and the Media objected and wanted it made public. ..
6/27/14 from this Media report, "LEO Spokesman and Sources quote the CC ME as saying the Cause of Death is consistent with Hyperthermia, and that the Manner of Death is Homicide, added that " Homicide death by another person is known now" Kilgore states that this not true of legal determination. States that the AR says Manner of Death is UNDETERMINED.
**testimony if you will recall from Dr. Frist former CCME, on Cross with Ludwig, went over the AR Report and also Def entered into Evidence the Filed copy of Cooper Harris Death Cert, (not signed but FILED on 9/30/2014--- about 2 weeks AFTER this hearing of 9/14/14 & 9/15/14)

**State Evans, goes to the witness stand and shows Dr Frist an email , Def Objects the email was not entered into Evidence, State was allowed to ask (after ME saw copy of email ) who the individual named (the author of email) was, Dr Frist he was an employee at CCME and Frist testified yes he authorized that email to be sent to CCPD. *** Note this is 2 days prio iirc on date to the article Kilgore is referencing in his Exhibit #1. As of the time of Dr Frist testimony, as far as trial knows, no amended AR has been filed in this case. Over 2 years later.

Kilgore hit it on the head and is an exact prediction of what was and did happen in this case. So now the whole trial even more makes sense of the Def Cross exam. And I see now about the Judge rulings. And the State trying to get some sympathy because of scheduling? Is it a meeting with Lady Karma happening?

Kilgore also as one exhibit 7/4/14 "extremely sensational" headline day after the Probable Cause Hearing (7/3/14) that is "absolutely false" regarding Stoddard statement then at the PC/Bond Hearing vs now that Discovery has started.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpqWSpQmAyM&feature=youtu.be&list=PLoW1SIeAWaWbJFWVaOT7hUZkxX0v2uq6l

CORRECTION: The Hearing was 9/14/2015 and 9/15/2015 I incorrectly typo 2014>>> So in the matter of the Death Certificate/Motions Hearing referenced, it was a 2 weeks shy of a year later after DC filed 9/30/2014

 

[MzOpinion8d]

I keep seeing it said that the car seat was moved and repositioned by LE. Where is this info coming from?

 

[arkansasmimi]

I keep seeing it said that the car seat was moved and repositioned by LE. Where is this info coming from?

Trial testimony Oct 12, 2016 Cross by Ludwig, of CSI Carey Grimstead of his putting the car seat back into the SUV to take photos of the doll in car seat 7/2/2014

ETA this is also where the testimony of the measurements from seat (where Cooper bottom/rump) would be to the top of the car seat 19 1/4 inches.
In the Cross of former Cobb County ME Dr Frist, Ludwig read into the record the measurements of Cooper Harris at autopsy via the report, and Dr. Frist affirmed.
Crown to rump of Cooper is 14 inches. Thus making Stoddard testimony at the PC hearing incorrect, that Cooper head was over the top of the car seat. Factually by official document and testimony of car seat measurements, Cooper top of head/crown to the top of the car seat is diff of 5 1/4 shorter... *weight 30# on car seat, Cooper weight was 21 # 5.4 oz. Thus he was within the guideline range to be in car seat. (30# 30 inches) Cooper was 33 inches from Crown to heel.

ETA #2 I would not be surprised that a car seat expert be called as a witness. JMHO

 

[arkansasmimi]

Motion to Quash #7, on Count 3 of charge

Prior to law going into effect 7/1/2014 this charge had a mandatory Life sentence
Prior 3/27/2014 Mandatory Life
3/27/14 GA Legislature Amended this charge 10-30 yrs
4/22/2014 Gov Deal signed the Amended Law
6/18/2014 Cooper Harris died - State going with Mandatory Life
7/1/2014 Amended Law goes into effect

Def this case is is rarest of cases

State contends that the Motion is not ripe, that shouldn't be heard until sentencing after a verdict

Def says the cases the State referencing because there is not a range of sentencing because there is a mandatory sentence (Def does not want to miss the opportunity to raise the issue.

Judge sides with State, wait and see what the Jury decides the revisit the Motion

Someone brought this up few posts back about the Law changing. Just happen to be on this same September 14, 2015 pretrial hearing
[video=youtube;uRG6yJMOARY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRG6yJMOARY&index=3&list=PLoW1SIeAWaWbJFWVaOT7hUZkxX0v2uq6l[/video]

 

[leelee114]

I don't think this was intentional , he was just way too into himself and his ladies and his obsession. He wasn't thinking about his son, even as they had breakfast, he was sexting with women. His brain was on his penis, Cooper was invisible. Selfish oaf? yes. Intentional murderer? no.

To me this sort of neglect is intentional. When you choose the things Ross did you are choosing actions which take away your ability to protect your child. Given his age Cooper was fully at the mercy of his father when in his care and instead of paying attention to his son and taking that responsibility seriously Ross chose another path and his son died a horrendous death. If Ross had chosen to exercise self control for just a few more minutes Cooper wouldn't be dead.

I can't help but wonder just how much people would wonder about intent if there had been a car crash because Ross was texting as he drove and Cooper died. Or if Ross hadn't properly fastened him in and he died in a crash? As far as I am concerned Ross's distraction weaponized his car as surely as it would have if he had killed Cooper while texting and driving.

Other scenarios come to mind like what if Ross got drunk or high while Cooper was with him and the baby fell down the stairs and died because his father was passed out on the couch? What if while in his care Cooper somehow gobbled up medicine left within reach that killed him?To me those hypothetical situations all have intent because a choice is being made and it is one that lowers the standard of care a child is recieving because on the most basic level the job of a parent is to keep their child alive. The ultimate consequence of a parent's failure to do so is in fact the death of their child.

I also sense Ross and LeAnn wouldn't give a damn about intent if a similar scenario played out except we replaced Ross with a babysitter. If a babysitter was hired to take Cooper somewhere and she got so distracted by flirting with men online that she let Cooper bake to death while at a mall I doubt there would be many voices calling it a terrible accident. She would probably lose what minimal support she had if we learned midway through her shopping and texting she took some of her purchases to the car and still didn't notice a now dead Cooper. No one would care how upset she may have looked when the police questioned her. The only reactions anyone would be thinking of would be Cooper's. Poor Cooper unaware that he is on a countdown to death when he realizes the car stopped. Poor Cooper in that moment where he thinks someone is going to get him out like always. Cooper wondering why he was left. Cooper starting to feel warm,then warmer, then so hot he is profusely sweating.Cooper starting to cry because in his world crying means mommy or daddy will come fix the problem. Cooper struggling in vain to free himself until the horrible inevitable conclusion of a fully avoidable situation.

No one would find anything remotely understanble about that situation at all because the babysitter shirked her duty to the child and that lead to fatal neglect.And in my world a parent has far more of a duty to protect their child than any other sort of hired caregiver hence I have no issue finding intent in this case nor do I question why the officers saw a crime not an accident. When a child dies like Cooper did it isn't a oopsie its a murder.

And on a final note I imagine myself as Ross and know that if I had to live with wondering about every horrible second my child spent in that car while I sexted I would never in a million years view my child's death as an accident. I would know I was murderer.

 

[Hope4More]

To me this sort of neglect is intentional. When you choose the things Ross did you are choosing actions which take away your ability to protect your child. Given his age Cooper was fully at the mercy of his father when in his care and instead of paying attention to his son and taking that responsibility seriously Ross chose another path and his son died a horrendous death. If Ross had chosen to exercise self control for just a few more minutes Cooper wouldn't be dead.

I can't help but wonder just how much people would wonder about intent if there had been a car crash because Ross was texting as he drove and Cooper died. Or if Ross hadn't properly fastened him in and he died in a crash? As far as I am concerned Ross's distraction weaponized his car as surely as it would have if he had killed Cooper while texting and driving.

Other scenarios come to mind like what if Ross got drunk or high while Cooper was with him and the baby fell down the stairs and died because his father was passed out on the couch? What if while in his care Cooper somehow gobbled up medicine left within reach that killed him?To me those hypothetical situations all have intent because a choice is being made and it is one that lowers the standard of care a child is recieving because on the most basic level the job of a parent is to keep their child alive. The ultimate consequence of a parent's failure to do so is in fact the death of their child.

I also sense Ross and LeAnn wouldn't give a damn about intent if a similar scenario played out except we replaced Ross with a babysitter. If a babysitter was hired to take Cooper somewhere and she got so distracted by flirting with men online that she let Cooper bake to death while at a mall I doubt there would be many voices calling it a terrible accident. She would probably lose what minimal support she had if we learned midway through her shopping and texting she took some of her purchases to the car and still didn't notice a now dead Cooper. No one would care how upset she may have looked when the police questioned her. The only reactions anyone would be thinking of would be Cooper's. Poor Cooper unaware that he is on a countdown to death when he realizes the car stopped. Poor Cooper in that moment where he thinks someone is going to get him out like always. Cooper wondering why he was left. Cooper starting to feel warm,then warmer, then so hot he is profusely sweating.Cooper starting to cry because in his world crying means mommy or daddy will come fix the problem. Cooper struggling in vain to free himself until the horrible inevitable conclusion of a fully avoidable situation.

No one would find anything remotely understanble about that situation at all because the babysitter shirked her duty to the child and that lead to fatal neglect.And in my world a parent has far more of a duty to protect their child than any other sort of hired caregiver hence I have no issue finding intent in this case nor do I question why the officers saw a crime not an accident. When a child dies like Cooper did it isn't a oopsie its a murder.

And on a final note I imagine myself as Ross and know that if I had to live with wondering about every horrible second my child spent in that car while I sexted I would never in a million years view my child's death as an accident. I would know I was murderer.

The fact of the matter is that RH wasn't texting or drinking or high or engaged in any activity whatsoever other than driving his car between the time he left CFA and reaching the intersection where he didn't turn left instead of going straight.

If he had been texting or drinking or high when he didn't turn left, he'd be guilty of criminal negligence, and even then would not be presumed to have had intent.

And, there is no way to know whether or not Cooper would be alive if RH had "exercised self control for a few more minutes." That's an opinion, not a statement of fact.

It's obvious RH spent a lot of time texting that morning, including while he was in CFA, but the fact of the matter is that he didn't text between the time he left CFA and the time he reached the intersection. By the time he reached the intersection, he was already not in the left turn lane he needed to be in to take Cooper to daycare.

No one on planet earth other than RH knows what RH was thinking about in that stretch. Maybe he wasn't thinking about Ms. X or Y or Z at all. Maybe he was thinking about what he had to do when he got to work, or what to say in his 10:30 AM project progress meeting, or about meeting up with friends at a movie that night. There isn't any way to know.

And, reality is, RH had only slept a few hours the night before. Maybe the few seconds of not focusing had as much to do with being tired as anything else. Yah, yah, he was up late doing what he wasn't supposed to be doing. So what. Countless other parents routinely stay up past their bedtimes, having friends over, going out, enjoying being married, reading a good book, watching a meteor shower, or getting lost in any other of a thousand different activities that make time go by too quickly.

Yes, maybe they are tired the next day, and no, their choices of the night before do not mean they wake up with the designation "bad parent," any more than RH's choice of activity made him a bad parent when he woke up, likely tired, on the 18th.

 

[turaj]

Interesting Ranch ... but don't juries often take "field trips" to the scene of the (possible) crime to better visualize the evidence? It seems since they moved the trial, these jurors have probably never been through this intersection. Were it held up here, (Cobb County)the majority would realize the significance of the distance.

I do agree about the car seat as they could potentially bring in a mock-up of the interior if they felt it was warranted.

yes they do "field trips" and I think the impact of just how close things are can be made by testimony but not as good as seeing this in person. I believe that they would have done this if trial stayed in Cobb county. They do plan on having a car with a 'doll" in there to get the impact of just how small it is.

 

[turaj]

Respectfully BBM.
There was a Pretrial Motions Hearing on Aug 19, 2016 prior to start of jury selection in which this very point was brought up. There was also a 3D animated video reconstruction done that we now know more about testimony and the fact that the car seat had been messed with and was not in it origional placement on 7/2/14/ We also know from testimony of CSI Grimstead that that car seat in that position was LEFT inside the car by him on 7/2/14. In a prior pre trial hearing, Stoddard is on record as saying that car seat was never left in vehicle. The 3D animated video presentation took scans of the veh on 7/2/14 and of the HD parking lot on 7/2/14 and 7/4/14 iirc the 2nd parking lot date. All info came from Stoddard and Stoddard in his testimony after Mr. Dustin, out right says that Mr. Dusting was not telling truthful testimony.

Anyway, the SUV and the video are in. Kigore brought same argument as you did. Also at beginning of Hearing they go over Dr. Diamond testimony. But here is where startes and shows what the 3D animated is going to be (actual video shown) ** lol but since then Kilgore brought out in Cross that the measurements and carseat that the State nor the Witness had realized. IF the State had realized prior they did not bring it out or even alert the Witness.

Start at 10:23 Making accommodations arguments from Boring for State, Evidentuary View at the car asking for...Kilgore cautions the Court not to go down this road then the 3D testimony.

Great point by Kilgore, start about: 14:00 will car seat be put back in? will juror be in back seat, invited lean in toss light bulbs? Creating evidence... put juror inside crime scene ..if your looking for something- your gonna see it. SUV State: murder weapon SUV Def: crime scene

[video=youtube;TAxRZETPDfk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAxRZETPDfk[/video]

as i understand it the car is in but jurors cannot get inside...only look...frankly that should be enough to get the picture.

 

[Hope4More]

as i understand it the car is in but jurors cannot get inside...only look...frankly that should be enough to get the picture.

Yes, a completely warped and prejudicial picture, imo, since they will be outside the car, looking in, aware that Cooper was in the car and had died, as opposed to being RH, inside the car, in the front seat, and imo, unaware that Cooper was in the car.

 

[Cardinal47]

No way did Ross Harris forget little Cooper was sitting in the car only inches from him! Children move and make noises. The ride was minutes.

 

[turaj]

Yes, a completely warped and prejudicial picture, imo, since they will be outside the car, looking in, aware that Cooper was in the car and had died, as opposed to being RH, inside the car, in the front seat, and imo, unaware that Cooper was in the car.

well obviously I would love for each of them to get in etc. but the only important thing is how RH( a pretty big guy in general ) sat in relationship to this car seat and Cooper. I think it will be impactful . It could also be used with someone of RH's stature standing at the door outside to see how much he could see glancing down when he "dropped" the lightbulbs off. I think he saw enough to know that Cooper was still alive and could not start screaming and do the whole routine. But no doubt Kilgore will do a good job of suggesting exactly what Hope says above.

 

[Cardinal47]

Ross may not have seen Cooper when he opened the door and put the lightbulbs in. But he surely saw and smelled when he got in the car after work.

 

[turaj]

RH is not a smart guy at all...his story might have hung together a bit better if he got in the car after work and then started the whole scene instead of driving for a while and saying he spotted him in the rear view mirror. To my lay person's view of this finding him immediately in the parking lot would have been slightly more believable. The proximity of the two in the car for me is critical evidence and I hope that state can illustrate that to maximum effect.

 

[blue22]

Yes, a completely warped and prejudicial picture, imo, since they will be outside the car, looking in, aware that Cooper was in the car and had died, as opposed to being RH, inside the car, in the front seat, and imo, unaware that Cooper was in the car.

But Ross was outside the car multiple times that day when Cooper was left, at lunch when he was either deceased or dying, and when he got in to leave work. Part of their job is to decide if they thought Ross was unaware. I think they should be able to see the car as Ross saw it several times that day, during the critical times of Cooper's last day.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Whenever you hear a guy complaining that he can't get laid, show him this case. There is a subgroup of men on the Internet who make that their identity. "Forever Alone" and "Incel" is what they call themselves. Goes to show that those guys are only interested in extremely attractive women.