Trial - Ross Harris #3

Status
Not open for further replies.
But that is the problem for Ross. In other cases that Dr Diamond describes, the drivers have manufactured memories of dropping their child off that morning. So if they think of their child that day, they do not suddenly 'remember' they are still in the car. They have a 'false memory' of dropping the baby off already.

But Ross did not have that false memory. So when he had things through out the morning that should have triggered his memory, why didn't he remember his son was still in the car?

He cannot have it both ways.

There is evidence that Ross did create a "false memory" of dropping off Cooper.

At the scene, immediately after he discovers Cooper he said "I swear I dropped him off at day care. I thought I did."

So maybe it's not an actual "false memory" but it's a false, but firmly held, belief that he had dropped Cooper off. This is why any subsequent triggers that day wouldn't matter - he couldn't be triggered into realizing he forgot because he really thought he had taken Cooper to day care.

This is one of those things you either have to accept as possible based on expert explanations and the surrounding evidence. Or you don't accept it's possible no matter what anyone says.

If this exact thing had not happened so many times every single summer since kids started sitting in rear facing car seats in the back seat - I can see how it would be hard to accept or believe.
 
Does reddit have records of when reddit threads make the front page? Just wondering

Yes I believe so. They discussed the date that it was posted to Reddit and when Ross clicked on it. I think it was in May but I am not certain.
 
Cathy ‏@courtchatter 4m4 minutes ago

#RossHarris - Judge releases jury for the day. #Hotcardeath
 
The judge suggested the attorneys look up Harper vs State, 1981.

I think this is the case but wonder what she is trying to communicate to them:

http://law.justia.com/cases/georgia/supreme-court/1982/38123-1.html

Harper v. State

Annotate this Case
249 Ga. 46 (1982)

287 S.E.2d 211

HARPER v. THE STATE.

38123.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

At approximately 10:30 p. m. on the night of November 22, 1980, Eva Sue Dean, Fay Hall, Horace Hamilton and the defendant, Willie James Harper, left Dean's home in Rome. They drove to the defendant's house where he went in and got a gun, which he gave to Dean to carry in her purse. They then proceeded to the American Legion in Cartersville. There the two women sat at the bar while the two men went into a back room to shoot pool. With the defendant taking side bets, Hamilton played and won consistently. Because Hamilton's winning streak was causing some unpleasantness, after about 30 minutes the defendant came out and got his gun. Hamilton continued to win, causing the other players to get upset. In the last game played, Hamilton won. When Charles Garnigan said he wasn't going to pay, the defendant approached him and shoved him in the neck with the gun. The gun fired, fatally wounding the victim. The defendant and his companions then left; two days later the defendant turned himself in to the police. Subsequently he was convicted by a jury of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.

1. The defendant enumerates as error the admission of his statement to police. At a Jackson-Denno hearing the police officer who interrogated the defendant testified that he explained his rights to the defendant and that the defendant signed a waiver form and then made a statement, with the officer taking notes. When the officer then said he wanted to get the statement on tape, the defendant said he wanted an attorney. The officer stopped all interrogation and let the defendant call his attorney. The defendant testified that he asked for an attorney before he gave his statement.

*47 Having heard this conflicting testimony, the trial court ruled that the statement "was voluntarily given after he had his Constitutional Rights explained to him." We find no error. Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368 (84 SC 1774, 12 LE2d 908) (1964); Crawford v. State, 245 Ga. 89 (2) (263 SE2d 131) (1980).

2. In his statement, the defendant described his weapon as a.38 caliber gun and said that after he left the scene of the crime, he threw it out of the car window. On May 18, 1981, Horace Hamilton accompanied the district attorney and an investigator to a point on Highway 92, where they retrieved a .38 caliber automatic pistol from a ditch. Both Horace Hamilton and Eva Sue Dean testified that this gun looked like the defendant's gun. The defendant himself testified that it was not the same gun, but admitted that it was the same model, same color, and same size as his; that it had a clip, a hammer and a safety like his; and that he did not know anything about it that was different from his.

The defendant objected to its admission into evidence because there was no proof it was the same gun as that used in the crime. The trial court admitted it, finding it was shown to be the same gun by circumstantial evidence. We find no error. Moore v. Illinois, 408 U.S. 786, 798-800 (92 SC 2562, 33 LE2d 706) (1972); Herlong v. State, 236 Ga. 326 (2) (223 SE2d 672) (1976); Gunn v. State, 245 Ga. 359 (4) (264 SE2d 862) (1980).

3. Defendant also enumerates as error the trial court's failure to give two charges which he requested. Having examined the evidence and the requested charges, we find that the requested charges were not adjusted to the evidence in this case. Booker v. State, 156 Ga. App. 40 (4) (274 SE2d 84) (1980), revd. on other grounds, 247 Ga. 74 (274 SE2d 334) (1981); Stevens v. State, 247 Ga. 698 (9) (278 SE2d 398) (1981).

Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.
 
It was on reddit for a month before RH watched it and it made the front page a month later? hmmmmm

No. I could be off on the timing. Whenever it was posted to Reddit, that's when Ross clicked it from the front page. I thought it was a month before copper died but again I could be mistaken.
 
Stoddard is going down in flames.

:furious:

JMHO, Stoddard had only been there in that department since Dec 2013 coming from Crimes Against Children. He given the case and he was gonna make big on it. It will be his down fall.

So why did Murphy stop doing the SW and he take over? Stoddard has shown he is not above :underbus: JMHO
 
Possibly.

But I think it is more likely that he had considered doing it for awhile. He had contemplated it, and then for some reason, that morning he decided impulsively to go through with it.

I definitely agree this is a possibility. I have wondered if he decided to go through with it as he was messaging with the woman on Whisper about escaping his son at Chik-Fil-A.
 
This is what is most problematic for Ross about the hot car/dog video:



Stoddard: Harris commented on video about leaving animal in hot car. "That would be terrible if my son was in the car. I would hate that."
 
:furious:

JMHO, Stoddard had only been there in that department since Dec 2013 coming from Crimes Against Children. He given the case and he was gonna make big on it. It will be his down fall.

So why did Murphy stop doing the SW and he take over? Stoddard has shown he is not above :underbus: JMHO

I see if much differently. I think his background in 'crimes against children' means that he has seen a whole lot of evil ugliness and it may have affected him
 
Quote Originally Posted by Bc007 View Post
I agree it's hard to accept and I'm not 100% convinced he did forget. I'm waiting for all evidence to play out.

He didn't manufacture a memory of dropping him off. To my understanding that's not how it works. At any rate- with LH at the station he admits he can't recall dropping him off when he tried to remember. He couldn't see how this could have happened.

But that is the problem for Ross. In other cases that Dr Diamond describes, the drivers have manufactured memories of dropping their child off that morning. So if they think of their child that day, they do not suddenly 'remember' they are still in the car. They have a 'false memory' of dropping the baby off already.

But Ross did not have that false memory. So when he had things through out the morning that should have triggered his memory, why didn't he remember his son was still in the car?

He cannot have it both ways.
RH couldn't remember in the interview who had taken Cooper the Monday or even Tuesday the day prior. Honestly we don't know what the Def stand on why he didn't remember do we? (serious question)
 
No. I could be off on the timing. Whenever it was posted to Reddit, that's when Ross clicked it from the front page. I thought it was a month before copper died but again I could be mistaken.

It was posted on June 13th. Google "Reddit" and "Don't Leave Your Pets in the Car" and you should find it.
From my experience on Reddit, posts that hit the front page were posted that day or the day before.
 
There is evidence that Ross did create a "false memory" of dropping off Cooper.

At the scene, immediately after he discovers Cooper he said "I swear I dropped him off at day care. I thought I did."

So maybe it's not an actual "false memory" but it's a false, but firmly held, belief that he had dropped Cooper off. This is why any subsequent triggers that day wouldn't matter - he couldn't be triggered into realizing he forgot because he really thought he had taken Cooper to day care.

This is one of those things you either have to accept as possible based on expert explanations and the surrounding evidence. Or you don't accept it's possible no matter what anyone says.

If this exact thing had not happened so many times every single summer since kids started sitting in rear facing car seats in the back seat - I can see how it would be hard to accept or believe.

It is hard to accept in this specific case for a few reasons. In most cases that I have read about, the drive was longer and the car seat was further away from the driver. And there was no evidence to suggest the parent wanted to be free from their parental duties. And there was no evidence that the parents had an overriding fear of leaving their baby in a hot car. The fact that both RH and LH had this as their 'greatest fear' is very odd. The fact that he had recently watched a video of a hot car, and posted a comment about 'how terrible it would be if his son was in that car'....very weird.

It is very hard for me to believe that in that 3o second span of time, Ross totally forgot about Cooper and manufactured a memory of dropping him off. Especially given the very short distance to the baby seat. And with the fact that he was having a discussion at the very same time, about his urge to escape from his fatherly responsibilities, it is very hard to accept it was just a tragic accident. JMO
 
(Sorry). No, they didn't. The (...) about searches was reworded for the next batch of warrants obtained on June 24, after they had already seized the electronics. But, sad to say, the batch obtained on the 24th included the flat out lie about car seat straps being set on lowest, for infants. LE had already taken pics of that seat. They knew better. Fact.

Ahhh but thats for tomorrow possibly :) Definitely before the viewing of the car
 
RH couldn't remember in the interview who had taken Cooper the Monday or even Tuesday the day prior. Honestly we don't know what the Def stand on why he didn't remember do we? (serious question)

Do we even know if he legitimately remembered that info or not?
 
Katy what were they talking about when the judge told them to look up this case? I missed that.

I have to go look again too. The judge seems to be looking at Kilgore when she suggested the case be looked up--but I didn't catch what was being said.


eta---she also said pay attention to pages 61 and 62 but I don't know what that means exactly...lol
 
Did I miss the discussion about the HD parking lot videos Kilgore showed the jury?

The videos showed people walking very near or right by RH's car (times are my approximates, from memory): 9:35, 9:40, 10:00, and 11:21, may have missed one. The car still seems to be at least partially shaded at 11:21, though the video is pretty blurry.

Early walkby's suggest, imo, Cooper was likely asleep. The 11:21 video doesn't suggest anything good for the defense, imo, unless Cooper died between 11:21 and 12:45.
 
I think you are missing my point as it pertains to "forgetting" and what may have caused him to forget. All I am saying is if he truly went on auto pilot when leaving CF, for some reason that is still unknown, (if it's even the case at all) and went straight to work like he normally does when he doesn't have Cooper or had already dropped him off then it is an accident imo not negligence. I have poured through the Kidsandcar.org stories and they are gut wrenching. This happens to good people. I'm not suggesting in every case there is no negligence involved, but in some I don't think there was. Some of these parents truly believed the child was where they were supposed to be. Their actions through out the day wouldn't have mattered or triggered anything(short of a school calling asking where they are) because they truly think they dropped them off. Yes in the scenario as it relates to RH l, the reason he may have been distracted was awful, disgusting and makes him an absolute in the husband department but I don't know that it makes him a murder and rules out an accident. What if has been texting his boss or a co-worker obsessively instead of the sexts? The context of what he was texting is still irrelevant to the scenario assuming it was truly a break in his brain and auto pilot kicked in.

RH coworker Brandon, testified that RH did seem stressed that day. Also that there had been talk in the lunchroom/breakroom about RH being behind on a project and others having to double up and help on. He could have had that on his mind. Just throwing that out there since it was testified to.
 
It is really hard to articulate. I had to think and think about how to say it, and I'm still not totally satisfied that it conveys what I want to say.

I totally agree that forgetting happens in just a moment. It's not like a process of "Oh, I remember...now it's a bit foggy...I sort of remember....and nooooow, I forget." I get that it takes an instant.

But not correcting that forgetfulness WHEN reminded more than once during the day is harder to accept.

I do think he forgot Cooper....and then remembered at lunchtime.

jmo
 
There is evidence that Ross did create a "false memory" of dropping off Cooper.

At the scene, immediately after he discovers Cooper he said "I swear I dropped him off at day care. I thought I did."

So maybe it's not an actual "false memory" but it's a false, but firmly held, belief that he had dropped Cooper off. This is why any subsequent triggers that day wouldn't matter - he couldn't be triggered into realizing he forgot because he really thought he had taken Cooper to day care.

This is one of those things you either have to accept as possible based on expert explanations and the surrounding evidence. Or you don't accept it's possible no matter what anyone says.

If this exact thing had not happened so many times every single summer since kids started sitting in rear facing car seats in the back seat - I can see how it would be hard to accept or believe.

The whole thing hinges on whether or not a person accepts his THEORY as truth, or possible truth. I simply do not. There is nothing, I mean nothing scientifically reliable to back up his theory. His "research" is his own. Being a Dr. doesn't mean your theory is truth, or even close to it. Honestly, I think the guy thought up a possibility and is making money off it. He got $10,000 in his last case for testifying. I'm not suggesting it's hinky for expert witnesses to be paid. However, this guy has corned the market in car deaths and is really great at marketing himself.

I simply do not believe in or trust his theory. The defense had better hope people can be really convinced by their charismatic witness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
92
Guests online
1,417
Total visitors
1,509

Forum statistics

Threads
596,475
Messages
18,048,293
Members
230,011
Latest member
Ms.Priss74
Back
Top