I saw the light bulb video on Youtube. Search for "Ross Harris light bulb video."
There is no evidence or testimony that we're not privy to. The public heard/saw everything the jury heard/saw.
Here's the video and it shows that he didn't bend down to look in to the car, however another article claims that it wasn't this part of the video that was incriminating. Apparently when he walked away, someone was walking toward the direction of his car and Ross stopped and watched them. Then once they passed his car, he continued on. I guess the jury believed he wouldn't have done that for any other reason than that he waited to see if that person noticed Cooper in the car. I'm on my phone and can't post two things at once so I'll find the article and add it in. I can't find a full video that shows what happened after he left the car.
Article explaining what happened after he left the car:
http://www.11alive.com/mb/news/local...rial/351042630
This and -
That was my sticking point, even without the video. Like I said ages ago, if I buy something while I'm work, it sits with me or near my desk - and the fact he did take it to the car, i find it odd the car didn't smell at the very least sweaty from the young fellow + what Boston said.
I'm glad i'm not the only one!
Yeah me sixth or tenth or whatever we are up to. The main things that did it for me were the 30 second gap, the light bulbs, and the smell. They are all iffy enough on their own, but put them together and it definitely looks intentional to me.
I also believe she was innocent, and yet she was treated like an effing criminal the entire time and put under media and public scrutiny the likes of which none of us hopefully will ever have to endure. All while she was suffering through the loss of her child in such a horrible way, and her husband being locked up (like it or not, at that time she didn't know he was such a man-whore and she loved the sorry SOB). The cops and District Attorney's Office treated her brutally and even after they admitted that she had no part in her son's death they still continued to put her under the "umbrella of suspicion." Even during the trial. Boring was an absolute bastard to her the first day on the stand and apparently someone got a hold of him that night and told him to lighten up on the grieving mother FFS because his behavior toward her the following day was considerably more appropriate. That shady-ass detective was reluctant to admit under oath that she was cleared. They all can go to right to hell for the way they have been treating her.
I think the thing that bugs me most about it is that the ONLY reason this thing went viral is because that moron investigator told everyone he researched animals dying in hot cars and visited childfree forums or whatever. That is the ONLY reason. And it wasn't even true.
Otherwise it would have just gone to trial, they wouldn't have had to change locations, and I seriously doubt this would have been the verdict.
I'm wondering if any of the jurors were upset when they learned that the investigator had lied.
I agree. I was suspicious of Leanna after the probable cause hearing until I realized I was only suspicious of her because the police wanted me to be ... not because there was any evidence she did something wrong.
I feel really bad for her, too, and you're right that she's been treated terribly.
Yeah it's crazy, because people around here were INCENSED when Ross was charged with murder for what most people thought was a terrible accident. They were enraged.
Then came the probable cause hearing, and public sentiment took a drastic swing in the other direction. Suddenly everyone wanted to see this guy hanged in the Marietta Square. But, like you said, so much of the damning "evidence" that came out at the pc hearing turned out to be inaccurate, exaggerated or downright false ... everything except the sexting. Personally, I think all the public outrage at Cobb County Police is what drove investigators to to do what they did at that hearing. They wanted the public behind them. Dirty stuff.
The defense will appeal, of course, and has a good chance of getting their wish granted for a number of reasons, including that the underage sexting charges were allowed to be included in this trial. Whether his sexting buddies were adults or minors had absolutely no bearing on the charges and should have been a separate matter, imo. It was only included to make him look like more of a scumball, seems to me. Isn't that what they call "prejudicial"?
Yes there's so much evidence that the police and prosecutors embellished or flat-out lied about Ross Harris and coerced other people to lie as well. From the completely false testimony that he'd been "researching how long it took an animal to die in a car" (I mean, just look at the title of this thread!) to the completely false testimony about him "researching a childfree forum on Reddit" to multiple people testifying about a "smell of death" that they never noted in their initial reports. And yet the judge would not allow the defense to introduce a police report as evidence so that they could challenge the cop who made statements under oath that contradicted what he wrote in his initial report. She wouldn't allow a police report to be introduced as evidence? It's all just so wrong.
One of the witnesses at the scene testified that he was acting suspicious but three weeks after the incident, when she was first interviewed by police she told them that Ross was acting distraught at the scene and that nothing seemed out of the ordinary to her. At one point Boring asked one of the witnesses, "is it possible that there was a smell at the time, but you just didn't take note of it?" And the judge freaking allowed it! She was so biased toward the prosecutors that it was almost comical, unless you consider that a man's life is at stake.
Now look, I'm not convinced that this guy is guilty or innocent, I kinda hate defending him because he was/is such a prick, but I don't think he got a fair trial.
AJC's verdict wrap-up: http://www.ajc.com/news/local/why-di...ewQXASTym8F3J/
Regarding the lightbulb video? From the article: "Jurors told prosecutor Chuck Boring on Monday that they noticed something that even the state hadn?t seen: Harris opened the car door with his left hand and then threw the light bulbs in with the same hand."
Interesting. I wonder why that was a smoking gun.
He definitely did that, last I looked his posts were still up on there.
EDIT:
A post of his: https://www.reddit.com/r/Atlanta/com...philips_arena/
Thread on his profile: https://www.reddit.com/r/toosoon/com...eet_uroscoeua/
Overview of his posts: https://www.reddit.com/user/RoscoeUA/
Images before Childfree locked down (talking about it) - http://imgur.com/a/Q5w4B
The testimony was that he was sent a link to a "childfree" forum on Reddit by a friend, and his response was "Grossness."
What forums are you talking about? He used to post on Reddit, but if he'd ever posted on the childfree Reddit forum that would absolutely have come up in court.
LOL I change my definitely to 'in my head, he had posted there' - I swear early on I saw something, before it was locked down, but maybe it was just about him lurking.
My bad! (I can't see anyone talking about his posting on there, but I'm also sus they may have removed it to protect themselves sussing the chatlog)
The smell bothers a lot of people, but I just don't know what to believe about it.
Not everyone at the scene smelled it. There was no note of it in the initial reports. It wasn't until a year later that anyone mentioned anything about a smell.
Honestly from the way they've run the investigation, it wouldn't surprised me one bit if they were told to play up the "smell of death" thing on the stand to distract from their ultra crap police work.
The day the light bulb video was shown in court (I still don't get why the jury thinks Ross opening the door with his left hand then throwing the bulbs in with his left hand is a big thing):
http://www.ajc.com/news/breaking-new...ZkzQo6CS0MBgM/
2:52 p.m.
Harris doesn't turn around to look when there's someone walking close to his car. It appears that he's staring at his phone.
2:47 p.m.
There is more video footage of someone walking by Harris' car without hesitating.
There are a number of people who walk by Harris' car or get into their own vehicles, the attorney pointed out.
None of them hesitate, look into Harris' car or otherwise act like something is off.
2:36 p.m.
Next there is video of Harris throwing the light bulbs he bought at Home Depot into his SUV at lunchtime. Harris' head always remains above the roofline of the car. He never actually looks into the car.
Defense cross examination of lead detective, including light bulb video and the Reddit lie:
http://www.ajc.com/news/breaking-new...DAgfBiBSbsmiP/
4:21 p.m.
Now Kilgore is discussing a subreddit thread about living a childfree lifestyle.
At a previous hearing, the prosecution asked Stoddard did he go to any topics that goes toward motive?
The childfree movement advocates for not having more children and not adding to the biomass, Stoddard said.
"That testimony caused quite a scare in the public and the media," Kilgore said. The prosecution objected and the judge sustained. [<-- of course she did!]
In previous testimony in recent weeks, though, another detective testified that Harris never did a Google search about living a childfree lifestyle. He ended up on the subreddit thread because a friend of him sent him a link as a joke. Harris almost immediately responded with "grossness."
4:15 p.m.
Kilgore is now showing another parking lot video.
This is the zoomed in footage that the prosecution showed the jury yesterday. It's enhanced to try to making clear what's happening.
In the video, Harris walks away from his car and pauses, looking at something in his hand, presumably his cell.
Meanwhile, someone is walking by him. To see that person, Harris would have to rotate his head or shoulders and torso, Kilgore said.
"He could use his peripheral vision ... just to get a glimpse of him," Stoddard said.
But that wouldn't work if the person is behind Harris, Kilgore said.
It's hard to tell if Harris turns at all, Stoddard admits.
"The video is inconclusive. It is what you see and I leave it at that," Stoddard said.
Light bulb surveillance vid ... they're all shitty because A) surveillance footage tends to suck, and B) they're videos of videos shown in the courtroom:
The same surveillance vid bout 58 minutes in on this one:
Why would someone send a link to a CF forum as a joke? (unless that other person had hinted at wanting to be without kids) And the "grossness" reply doesn't jive with me either. For the most part, most CF forums function very similarly to the jibber jabber part of this forum, where people just talk in a friendly manner about nothing. Other than that they talk about why they don't have kids or how they get fucked over by people with kids. It's not like THEY are talking about killing babies. What would be gross about it? (not really looking for an answer, just kind of rhetorically playing this out in my head). If you've participated in a CF forum, you would know what I mean.
I haven't followed this as closely as some, but just reading about the whole "light bulbs" thing would make me lean more toward an accident, not that he intentionally left him in the car. If he knew his son was in there the whole time, why would he even return to the car, even for a brief moment? I mean, that was the parking lot at his work so he knew about the cameras, correct?
And I really don't want to re-read back through all the pages so if someone could answer this for me that would be super: did he (possible quotation marks) discover (possible quotation marks) his son in the back and get help when he returned to his car after work, in the same parking lot? A video of his reaction would have been good to see...
The issue about the child-free forum is that at the probable cause hearing, the lead investigator presented it as if Ross visited/participated in it as proof he wanted to murder his baby, when in fact he only looked at it once because someone sent it to him. I'm not sure why his response was "grossness," because I don't what was being said when he looked at it. There's certainly nothing wrong with people not wanting kids and talking about not wanting kids. It was just the way the police presented it ... which was not how it really happened.
He drove away from work and toward a movie theater when, according to him, he caught a glimpse of Cooper's head over his shoulder. He pulled into a shopping center parking lot, jumped out, etc. There's surveillance video of all that, too.
I think if it was planned, he wouldn't have done it on a day where he'd have to "forget" Cooper was in the car 30 seconds after leaving Chick-fil-A. If he had taken Cooper to daycare straight from home, he'd have a much longer period of time to "forget."
And I'm sure he was aware of the parking lot cams at his job.
Thanks, I just found a video on youtube of parts of the trail, but it's over 3 hours long and no way do I have time for that lol (I am at work). I have skipped around a bit, so I saw the dash cam video of the officer arriving on the scene, but wish there was just a video of only highlights of important stuff...lot of it is just him sitting in the back of the cop car.
Yeah there's only dashcam video, not actual surveillance of him pulling into the parking lot ... unless I missed that somewhere.
Here are the first two days of testimony, which includes the witnesses who saw him pull in (and one who saw him try CPR, even though police said at the probable cause hearing that Ross didn't try CPR):
http://www.ajc.com/news/state--regio...om8LQNVQr49DM/
http://www.ajc.com/news/local/minute...uD1mTPvOWVNuL/
Here's the dashcam video stuff ... it's only 50 minutes (dashcam starts about 10 minutes in), and, yes, most of it is Ross sitting in the car. It is what it is. Then he goes to the police station, and there's video available of that ... then Leanna and Ross together. There might be a "highlights" video out there somewhere, but I'm tired of digging through this stuff:
The Youtube channel where I found that^^^ has the whole trial.
My thought with the whole not hesitating when people were by his car while he was standing next to it thing, vs stopping and watching later while he is walking away, is that people don't tend to think much of children in cars with parents right there, but would be way more concerned to see a child in a car with no parent around.
Also, while I am not 100% convinced of his guilt, I feel like someone might reasonably think that no one who knows his dead son is in a car would toss light bulbs into it. Which means to me, that someone might try to be tricky and do exactly what "no one" would do under those circumstances.
I would be really interested in knowing how he was acting during the time before and after the light bulb toss.
If he was acting 100% normal, I think that would say a lot, because I feel like even the most hardened killer would have a hard time pulling off complete sanity upon seeing that you killed your kid.. intentional or not.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)