12
   

The case of the man who cooked his son in his car

 
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jul, 2014 11:32 am
@Romeo Fabulini,
Quote:
As far as I know, the guy has never said anything like-
"I did NOT check out hot car deaths on the net, the police and Feds planted it on my computer to frame me".
So why hasn't he said that?


First because both him and his wife had already admitted to the police that they had done such searches.

Then I do not think that anyone would give any credit to a claim that evidence on the hard drive had been tamper with given the processes that are in place dealing with the handling of such materials from the first moments it come into law enforcement hands and the skill level needed to be able to plant evidence beyond the abilities of being detected by other experts.
izzythepush
 
  0  
Reply Wed 16 Jul, 2014 12:59 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:
Now no human being should need to proved that he feel bad for the death of a young child and the death of a child or even a pet in a hot car is one hell of a way to die.


That was like pulling teeth.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jul, 2014 01:02 pm
@engineer,
engineer wrote:
I'm sure Bill was horrified as we all are when we hear of things like this. I took his post to be about whether it was a planned killing as opposed to a terrible accident.


He's got a track record. When BillRM posted about someone caught watching graphic child pornography on a plane, all his compassion was for the man caught. He showed none for the child victims, or other passengers on the plane who needed counselling after having caught a glimpse of such material.

I just tell it how I see it.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jul, 2014 02:21 pm
Izzy who talked of history, himself have a long history of turning all threads no matter what the subjects happen to be into personal attacks on myself.

It is a damn shame as he had ruin or at least derail any number of threads by doing so,

The best way to try to stop this silliness is for me to just placed him on ignore and to ask others to please not response to his attacking posts concerning myself even when you are supporting me from his silliness.

By the way thanks for the support given on this thread by some of the posters but once more I do not desire this thread turn into another attacks/responses between Izzy and myself.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jul, 2014 02:50 pm
Now trying to placed myself in this man shoes and assuming I was cold blooded enough to killed my own son, his actions does not make sense to me given the computer skill levels assume of an IT employee of a large company.

Both he and his wife doing internet searches on the subject of children and animals dying in cars in a manner that he should had known could be found and would be found by law enforcement after the fact.

His others actions on the internet up his last work day showing him in a very bad light and not even attempting to removed the records of such surfing.

Hell as his son is dying on his work parking lot he was trading naked pictures with a sixteen years old girl that is legally consider child porn!!!!

So assuming he is guilt of killing his son can anyone be so stupid to leave all this very bad and very incrimating evidences laying around?

Is being so mental sick as to killed you own son interfere with your abilities to think rationally?



0 Replies
 
Linkat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jul, 2014 03:32 pm
This is a very interesting article about how/why this occurs from a neuroscientist viewpoint.

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2014/06/30/cooper-harris-child-dies-hot-car-why-parents-forget

When my kids were very young, I was terrified this could happen to me. Not that by any means I would want to or thought I was capable of it. But after hearing so many accounts of it happening I thought === what makes me special that I am so superior that it couldn't happen to me. Fortunately it never did, but the thought still sends chills down my spine.

And my husband (who so often trashes people about this) did this to our dog. He had the dog in the car with him for some reason and upon coming home forget he was in the car. Fortunately the car was in the garage with the windows open somewhat and it was not a very hot day. He did remember when he said where is doggie and then a panic look and he ran out to get him.
Linkat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jul, 2014 03:34 pm
@Linkat,
Oh and the head of the IT department where I used to work --- dummy he sent an email to woman within the company he was having an affair with (both married of course) -- detailing what he wanted to do with her.

Instead of sending to her --- he sent it to a group email.

Ya think being the head of IT would make you always double check before hitting send -- especially on such a personal type email.

I could never look at the guy the same way after that.

Oh and not long after that -- a general email went out about being careful on your distributions lists prior to sending.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jul, 2014 10:36 pm
@izzythepush,
Quote:
My opinion is, that poor boy, what a horrible way to die.

And the thought that any parent would intentionally kill their own child in that particular way, is absolutely horrifying.

And, in all of these cases, they have to do a complete investigation to determine whether the death was a tragic accident or a crime. And the outcomes and decisions about that aren't always consistent
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/fatal-distraction-forgetting-a-child-in-thebackseat-of-a-car-is-a-horrifying-mistake-is-it-a-crime/2014/06/16/8ae0fe3a-f580-11e3-a3a5-42be35962a52_story.html

I find BillRM's reaction, of wondering why the man in Georgia didn't remove or better conceal searches and other materials found on his work computer, or his own phone, very curious, given all the things one could consider about this case, including the totality of the initial evidence that leads prosecutors to believe this was an intentional act of murder. But it doesn't surprise me that he focused on that.

Personally, I have no interest in why Justin Ross Harris left potentially incriminating computer/phone evidence for the police to find--I don't see that as particularly relevant to an issue of guilt, and that's not the only evidence that aroused suspicions--in fact, suspicions were increasing before the police ever looked at his computer and phone, based on the way he was acting, including the fact that he drove a car reeking of the odor of death for some time before he pulled over and "discovered" his dead child in the back--the pungent sickening smell of body decomposition in the car was described as overwhelming.

I watched the initial hearing in this case, which was like a mini-trial, and the state presented enough evidence to justify the charges and to deny bail. And now, in addition to continuing to gather more evidence, they are also investigating whether his wife was also involved in planning this death. This is what's currently going on with the case:
Quote:
What's next in case of Georgia father whose child died in hot car?
By Ashley Fantz, CNN
July 10, 2014
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/10/justice/hot-car-death-whats-next/index.html

But I see little point in having a public opinion or media trial in this case right now--let the investigations continue, and wait for more hearings, more evidence release, and the trial. This is a very serious matter and a potential death penalty case. It is expected to go to a Grand Jury in late July.

I think the most meaningful discussion about these hot car deaths, including this one, should focus on how to prevent them. . Despite all the publicity to this case, 26 children have been left in cars in the past month.
Quote:
17 children this year have died in hot cars
by Heather Hourigan, Reporter,
Jul 16, 2014

COLUMBIA, Mo. -
"I think it's more common than people want to admit, or want to believe," said Dr. Zerrer with Providence Urgent Care

Twenty-six children have been left in cars around the country since June 18.

Monday in Houston bystanders broke into a car to get children out from the backseat.

The most recent death was in El Paso, Texas where a two-year-old was found dead in a car after being left in her driveway overnight.

"Seventy five plus percent of fatalities from hot cars are two-year-old and under because little kiddos cant not regulate their temperatures like adults can, that system is not as developed. And for their size they increase their heat up to five times faster than an adults because of metabolism rates," said Dr. Zerrer.

A 22-month-old in Georgia died in the car after being left for seven hours while his father was at work.

He is now facing felony murder charges.

In response to that high profile death, parents around the country have taken to youtube.

It is called the hot car challenge.

ABC 17's Heather Hourigan took the challenge Wednesday for thirty minutes.

Within that half hour while it was in the mid 70's outside, the car heated up to 116 degrees.

"It can take as little as 20 to 30 minutes for a child to die in a hot car," said Zerrer.

According to Gene Weingarten a Washington Post write who won a Pulitzer Prize for his story on hot car deaths, he learned it can happen to any parent.

He wrote in the last ten year it has happened to a dentist, police officer, and even pediatrician.

Those are just a few.

"It's a preventable thing and that's what makes it a giant deal because it can be zero," said Dr. Zerrer.
http://www.wusa9.com/story/news/nation/2014/07/16/hot-car-death-petition/12721431/


Should the government step in? There is mixed opinion on that.
Quote:
Should the government step in to prevent hot car deaths?
By Kelly Wallace, CNN
July 15, 2014

(CNN) -- While the case of the Georgia father accused of intentionally leaving his toddler son to die in a hot car continues to grip the nation, it has also sparked a debate about whether more could be done to prevent the accidental deaths of children from heatstroke inside a car.

Is it an issue for the automakers to tackle voluntarily? Should the federal government mandate a driver-reminder alert? Is it solely a matter of parental responsibility? Those are just some of the questions parents across the country, experts and public officials are asking.

Today, in most new cars, you hear an alert if a driver or passenger is not wearing a seat belt or if you leave the key in the ignition when you get out of the vehicle.

Beginning in 2018, another major safety feature will become a requirement. Under a final rule issued earlier this year by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, all new cars will be required to have rear-visibility technology. More than 200 people -- 31% of them children under 5 -- are killed annually in "unintentional backing" incidents, according to the government agency.

The national nonprofit KidsAndCars.org is one of the organizations that helped get the rear visibility standard passed by Congress and signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2008.

Change has come slowly, said Janette Fennell, the group's founder, noting that it has taken six years since the president's signature for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to issue the final rule, and it will take four more years for the standard to be fully in effect.

"We won't have 100% of our vehicles meeting the rear visibility standard until 2018, and ... you know the numbers of how many people are going to be killed and injured," said Fennell, who created her organization after she and her husband were kidnapped and locked in their trunk while their 10-month-old child was taken somewhere else.

They managed to escape and find their baby, who was also unharmed, but the experience led to the creation of KidsAndCars.org. The group's first victory was a regulation that all new cars beginning in 2002 include a trunk release that glows visibly in the dark interior of a car trunk.

"We do not know of one fatality in the trunk of a car that has that little release," she said in an interview.

Fennell and her organization have have been following the issue of children dying from heatstroke in cars for more than a decade. At least 44 children died from child vehicular heatstroke in 2013, according to her agency. She believes the technology exists today that could dramatically save lives.

"You can't buy a car (today) that doesn't turn your headlights off for you or remind you to turn off your headlights," said Fennell, who argues these changes in cars show that the auto industry knows people are human and will forget to do things like turn off the car's lights.

"And the question just begging to be answered is, who has decided it's more important not to have a dead car battery than a dead baby? And I don't say that to be harsh or sensational. It's just a fact."

The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration did a study, as CNN reported back in 2012, and concluded that the devices that existed at that time to try to reduce infant heatstroke deaths were not reliable enough.

"In fact, we recommend against people relying on the products ... to protect their most precious cargo," said David Friedman, the agency's acting administrator, in an interview.

Friedman said while the agency was able to conclude that rear visibility technology can protect children and adults from back-over incidents, the technology to protect children and adults from heatstroke "just doesn't seem to be there yet."

" 'Yet' is an important word there," said Friedman, who says his agency continues to evaluate new technologies.

The focus now, says Friedman, is on making sure people follow some simple safety tips that, if followed, can reduce infant car heatstroke by 100%: tips such as "look before you lock," or put a reminder in the back of your car such as your cell phone, pocketbook or briefcase -- something you just wouldn't leave your car without -- to remind you that you have a child in the back seat.

Another tip is to always lock your car and keep the keys out of reach, since about 30% of fatalities from vehicular heatstroke come from children who decided to play in the car, said Friedman. He said another 20% of the deaths come from people who knowingly left their kids in the car, thinking they would be gone only a short time.

"The sad reality is ... all it takes is a few minutes for the temperature inside a vehicle to turn deadly," said Friedman.

States across the country aren't waiting for the federal government or the auto industry to step in, and are calling for new laws on the books. Nineteen states currently make it illegal to leave a child unattended in a vehicle, according to KidsAndCars.org. Two of those states are doing more: A new law in Tennessee now protects bystanders who break into a hot car to rescue a child from being held liable for damages, and in Connecticut, there is a push to stiffen penalties for leaving a child unattended in a car.

Has awareness of the problem and a desire to do more to prevent these deaths risen to a level where there is a demand for a government mandate?

In conversations with parents across the country, there's a real difference of opinion.

Janis Brett Elspas, a mom of four in Los Angeles, thinks we need a government-required alert signal to prevent people from forgetting children in cars.

"The problem is, like wearing a seat belt itself, people still ignore the warning light (and) sound that appears on their dashboard," added Elspas, founder of the blog Mommy Blog Expert. Government-mandated education of parents is also needed, she said.

Julie DeNeen, a mom of three in Clinton, Connecticut, thinks the government should require that car seats come outfitted with a technology to alert the driver that a child is still there when the car stops, just as the government already sets guidelines on height and weight restrictions for a car seat and use of a 5-point harness.

"No one argues about the government setting the specifications for a car seat," said DeNeen. "It would be a small effort on the part of the company and make a big impact on children's lives."

Cynthia Lieberman, co-founder of CyberWise.org, a site focused on helping parents, educators and children use digital media safely, thinks the government could put guidelines in place for in-car child safety monitoring tools, guidelines the auto industry would be required to follow.

"Adults should have the option to use the car manufacturer's device or select their own monitoring system," she said, pointing to one device, a Cars-N-Kids car seat monitor that sends an alert to your smart phone if the car seat is too hot or cold, or the child gets out of the seat.

But on the other side are many voices that say this is not an issue for the government.

"Honestly, people need to slow down and focus," said Rhonda Woods, a mom of three in New Milford, Connecticut, who says the topic has sparked a big discussion in her house for the past week.

"There is no need to be so engrossed in our phones or our own minds that we lose touch with those around us, very specifically, our kids."

Laura Beyer, a mom of two grown children in West Allis, Wisconsin, and blogger for the local newspaper's website, agrees. "I would hate to have the government intervene on such basic parenting skills," she said. "I can bet $1 million that parents remember to grab their cell phones, purses and such, but how the heck can they forget a human being they claim to love?"

Other parents think voluntary technology that parents can choose is a better solution.

"It should be an add-on option that when purchasing a car, a buyer can choose," said David LeRoy, a father of two boys in Chicago, who created a Facebook group for African-American fathers last year.

To others, the larger issue, which government regulation and technology can't really impact, is parents who knowingly leave their children in cars and don't realize the dangers of such an act.

Elizabeth Flora Ross, a mom of a 5-year-old in Jacksonville, Florida, and a former marketing executive turned freelance writer, recently witnessed and wrote about a case of a baby left in a hot car in her community. Thankfully, the baby was OK.

When she asked her Facebook followers how many people have left their kids in cars, she was surprised by not just the number of parents who admitted they had, but how they didn't feel there is anything wrong with it.

"Perhaps regulation would make parents think twice. ... But I believe the key lies in building awareness of the dangers and working to change attitudes and behaviors."

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/10/living/hot-car-death-prevention-technology-parents/


It is a horrible, horrible, way for a child to die. Cooper Harris had scratched at his face and caused abrasions to the back of his head as he struggled to survive the damage being done to every cell in his body by the excessive heat in the car.

We should be talking about preventing those deaths which truly are accidents and which can be prevented. Questions regarding the guilt or innocence of Cooper Harris' father can, and should, wait at least until the investigation is complete.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jul, 2014 03:38 am
@firefly,
Preventing those deaths might not be all that hard as I remember having an after market solar power fan that fit in a window of my van that did a fair job of keeping the temp somewhat down.

A build in system where any time a car is park in the sun some tiny solar power fans should keep the temperate from going into the red zone of death might save lives.

Quote:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61%2BcIPNU41L._SY355_.jpg

Solar powered - needs no batteries!
Blows hot air out of the parked car and draws the cool fresh air in.
Provides a cooler environment for your kids or pets in parked cars.
Protects dash, interior, and valuable items in your car from high temperatures.
Fits any vehicle window.



You would desire the build in systems to be far better with safety redundancy but this is the idea.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jul, 2014 03:51 am
@BillRM,
Another idea that come to my mind is a system in children car seats that when a child is in the seat and the temperate go up beyond a set temperate it would set off a very loud alarm to draw people to that car.

A fast google search found that such car seats are already being sold but instead of an alarm it call your cell phone. I would myself would wish a system that did both call your cell phone and set off a loud alarm.

Quote:


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-technology-could-help-prevent-kids-deaths-in-hot-cars/

Smart car seats

A company called TOMY International developed one possible solution.

In 2013, it began selling a "smart car seat" with iAlert technology that communicates between one of TOMY's First Years Brand car seats and your smartphone. The car seat, available through Amazon for $284, has temperature, angle, and motion sensors. If the seat gets too hot, the company says it will send an alarm to your phone. The system also alerts you if the seat is installed improperly or if the child has unbuckled themselves while the car is in motion.

Amazon customers gave it mixed reviews. Though the seat's comforts and non-electronic features seemed fine, a few reviewers found that the alert system was unreliable. For example, customer "Jackie D" said on July 24, 2013: "When the unit was connected, the alerts would come through 9 out of 10 times but the problem is that they should come through 10 out of 10 times. When setting up secondary contacts to receive text alerts, the alert failure rate was even higher, maybe 2 out of 10 went through and when these did go through they still took at least 10 minutes to receive."

Customer "CRP Ag" commented on October 17, 2013: "Despite my reservations, if you view the alerts as another tool in your toolkit as a parent trying to keep your child safe, this is a nice innovation. Once the kinks are worked out, this will be a great device."

TOMY responded on the Amazon customer review site to Jackie D's comment, promising to work with her to address the issues she raised. CBS News contacted the company's public relations firm but was unable to get a statement at press time.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jul, 2014 04:12 am
@firefly,
Quote:
I find BillRM's reaction, of wondering why the man in Georgia didn't remove or better conceal searches and other materials found on his work computer, or his own phone, very curious, given all the things one could consider about this case, including the totality of the initial evidence that leads prosecutors to believe this was an intentional act of murder. But it doesn't surprise me that he focused on that.

Personally, I have no interest in why Justin Ross Harris left potentially incriminating computer/phone evidence for the police to find--I don't see that as particularly relevant to an issue of guilt, and that's not the only evidence that aroused suspicions--in fact, suspicions were increasing before the police ever looked at his computer and phone, based on the way he was acting, including the fact that he drove a car reeking of the odor of death for some time before he pulled over and "discovered" his dead child in the back--the pungent sickening smell of body decomposition in the car was described as overwhelming.


Now returning to the subject of this thread it still seems odds to me that a man of even average intelligent that was planning on killing his child in such a manner and knowing or should know that a full investigation would be done not only leave all manner of evidence on his computers that paint him in a bad light but was even trading pictures with some 16 years old girl that very day that by it self is enough to get him a possible prison sentence.

Plus the fact that you know your son is dying in your car and you are at the same time sexing with women?

How the hell can anyone that abnormal function as well as he did in society to the point that the people who knew him the best at once rush to his defense?

All the above questions go away if it was indeed an accident.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jul, 2014 04:16 am
Off hand I can't think of a case over here where a child has died in a car. I can't think of a good reason to leave a small child alone in a car unless you're just popping in the corner shop to get a pint of milk, or paying for petrol.

Lots of tourist attractions, like theme parks, historical attractions etc have signs in the car park saying that dogs die in hot cars, but nothing about children.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jul, 2014 04:18 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:
First because both him and his wife had already admitted to the police that they had done such searches.


If they had done such searches they can't claim to be ignorant of the dangers. At the very least they're guilty of neglect in an extremely cavalier fashion.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jul, 2014 04:03 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
Now returning to the subject of this thread it still seems odds to me that a man of even average intelligent that was planning on killing his child in such a manner and knowing or should know that a full investigation would be done not only leave all manner of evidence on his computers that paint him in a bad light but was even trading pictures with some 16 years old girl that very day that by it self is enough to get him a possible prison sentence.

Plus the fact that you know your son is dying in your car and you are at the same time sexing with women?

How the hell can anyone that abnormal function as well as he did in society to the point that the people who knew him the best at once rush to his defense?

All the above questions go away if it was indeed an accident.

How to prevent even accidental deaths of this type is part of the topic of this thread. And both Harris and his wife claim they were so afraid this might happen with their son, they both researched this issue--meaning they would know of simple ways of reminding the driver there is a child in the back, like leaving one of your shoes or your cell phone in the back when you put your child in the car seat, and they also knew of the dangers of leaving a child in a hot car.

More significantly, If they were so worried about an accidental hot car death for their child, why was he still in a rear-facing car seat, where it's more difficult to see a child in the car, both for the driver of the car, and for others passing the car?

This was a child already old enough to have been in a front-facing car seat, and, in fact they had been using a front facing car seat for him, but a few weeks before his death they had gone back to the old rear-facing seat that had used since he was born. If one is so worried about an accidental death, why do they go back to using a type of car seat that's more likely to result in an accidental death because the child is less visible when you look in the rear view mirror while driving, or when you get out of the car, and passersby would have a more difficult time seeing a child accidently left in the car? Does that make sense for parents concerned about accidental deaths because children are mistakenly left in hot cars?

They would also know that these deaths are often ruled to be accidents, and it is a type of murder they could get away with, because the cause of death is hyperthermia and not by the active actions of the parent to bring about death, like smothering, so intent is crucial to proving a crime. A rear-facing car seat makes it harder to see, and remember, your child is in the car, so using one might be an effort to have this death seen as accidental because it's even more plausible that you could forget your child in the car if he was in a rear-facing car seat.

Your complaint seems to be the man did a lousy job of planning a crime because he left too much potentially incriminating digital evidence behind.
That he's inept at planning doesn't mean he's not guilty.

And maybe part of his alibi, to prove he didn't have intent, was to go about a normal work day in his usual manner, which for him included texting/sexting with 6 women, none of whom was his wife, and sending a picture of his erect penis to a 16 or 17 year old.

He also went out to lunch with some co-workers, bought some light bulbs, and made sure they saw him putting the bulbs in the car, perhaps to try to prove he didn't know the child was in the car--an evidence issue is likely to be the child's time of death, and whether a distinct odor would have already been present in the car when he put those bulbs in it.

He had also received an e-mail from his son's daycare telling him his child had not arrived for the day. Did he call his wife about that? No. Was that also so he could claim he didn't know the child was in his car?

And his driving his car, reeking with the overwhelmingly sickening stench of death, some time before pulling the car over, and allegedly suddenly "discovering" his son's body, may have been part of a plan to not have the body found in the parking lot at work, but elsewhere, but a normal person could not have failed to recognize the stench, as soon as the car door was opened, nor would they have driven in it.

You have to be willing to accept the unfortunate reality that there are people who can, and do, intentionally kill their child, just as there are those who abuse their child, both physically or sexually. It's that horrible thought, particularly when done in this manner, that has people interested in this case--what sort of monster would do that? Is Harris that sort of monster? Or was he just so anxious to get into his office and sent pictures of his erect penis to an underage girl, and texts to 6 women, that he really never even thought about his son in the back of the car?

Either way, as some information emerged about him, those who initially supported him, even started an online petition for him, began dropping that public/internet support fast, and those who knew him as a "wonderful father and husband" realized they might not have really known him very well at all, or what his family life was like in private.

The digital footprint he left on computers or his phone doesn't point to this being an accident, as you are trying to assert, it merely means he might not have planned carefully enough, or that he thought those things would help him to be seen as innocent of any malicious intention, because he had seemingly behaved normally that day.

You're also omitting all of the other information the state presented at that first hearing. I watched the hearing, and the computer/phone info, by itself, is insubstantial to justify any of the current charges against him regarding an intentional act, that info simply hints at the motive that the state believes accounted for an intentional act of child cruelty, which is why they presented other evidence, particularly regarding motive. And it was his behavior at the crime scene, and what he said to the police, that made them suspicious before they ever looked at the electronic devices.

The state is clearly building a case based on a lot more than what he searched on his computer, and they are concentrating on motive to explain his actions--and even at the initial hearing I watched, it's likely to be much a much stronger case than Florida eventually brought against Casey Anthony. The defense's main thrust is obviously going to be to fight to keep this evidence out of a trial, because, otherwise this man is going to be hard to defend.

And spousal privilege does not apply in this case, his wife can be compelled to testify.

But, as I said in my last post, it is way too premature to raise issues that point to innocence, as you are trying to do with the digital data. And you are overlooking all of the other evidence the state presented, even at a first hearing. It's just way too soon to take sides, it's enough that the state justified the charges at that hearing, and next it goes to a Grand Jury, and then more evidence will be released. But, right now, there is no reason to feel the state is charging a possibly innocent grieving parent without very having good reason to suspect this was not an accident.

Until then, try to reserve making judgments because you don't think intelligent people, who can function normally at work, or superficially in public, can do such heinous things. As I recall, you thought Casey Anthony was guilty, even though she was acquitted, and her outward behavior toward her child was seemingly normal too. Just because people seem to functional normally doesn't mean they are not capable of killing their children, and it doesn't mean they haven't actually killed them. Stick to the evidence--and we haven't seen most of it yet--before jumping to conclusions one way or the other. So far, the state has only justified the charges, proving guilt hasn't yet happened.

I hope this isn't going to be another thread where you give helpful tips to other criminals, or potential criminals, on how to better conceal illegal acts.









izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jul, 2014 04:33 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:
I hope this isn't going to be another thread where you give helpful tips to other criminals, or potential criminals, on how to better conceal illegal acts.


This is the criminal watching child pornography on a passenger jet all over again.
FOUND SOUL
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jul, 2014 05:08 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Delve deeper,

He was also sexting the whole day at work. He knew the child was in the car.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jul, 2014 05:13 pm
@FOUND SOUL,
Quote:
He was also sexting the whole day at work. He knew the child was in the car


So his sexting all day at work somehow proved that he knew his poor child was in his car?

Seems the very last thing he would do is to generated such material if he knew that he would come under investigation within hours due to the death of his child that would surely uncover his online actions.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jul, 2014 05:15 pm
@BillRM,
DEPRAVED INDIFFERENCE MURDER in the US is Murder 2. Have they filed charges yet? If all this information is correct, this guy needs to be pokied and his wife looked into as accomplice.

MAnn, how sad . Imagine the kid just trying to breathe
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jul, 2014 06:30 pm
@izzythepush,
Quote:
This is the criminal watching child pornography on a passenger jet all over again.

I recognized that too.

And it was also his response to every news story about someone arrested or convicted for possession of child pornography--why didn't they better protect or encrypt their computer? And this was followed by discussions of how he does that, and tips on how they could do it too. With him, it's all about how not to get caught doing an illegal act--how to wipe away or hide such actions your computer might reveal--how to cover your tracks better.

At least he's consistent.

These hot car deaths may not be a problem where you are, but that are a tragic reality here, either because infants and very young children (the most frequent age groups in these fatalities) are either accidently forgotten in their car-seats and left behind, or they were intentionally left there by negligent people who don't see the harm in doing that. But children that age should never be left in a car alone, for more than a very few minutes, regardless of whether the outside temperature is very warm or not--you just shouldn't leave infants and young children unattended in a car--which is why that's already a crime in 19 states here.

That BillRM posts an ad for a dashboard fan, which no one in their right mind should rely on to protect their child (or even their dog) from a heat-related death, or even a device to send messages or alarms to a smart phone that the car seat is heating up, shows that he just doesn't get it--those infants and young children should not be left unattended in cars, and parents shouldn't be doing that. And they shouldn't rely on devices like the unreliable ones he mentioned because they carry unacceptable risks, and they can justify, and can encourage leaving the child alone in a hot car.

Of course people can accidently leave their child in a car, including a hot car, simply because their mind is elsewhere and, on the moment, they just forget the child is there when they exit the car--even an otherwise conscientious good parent might do that, with tragic results, and many others soon remember the child is there, and they swiftly return to the car, remove the child, and avert those tragic results.

I've never accidently left a very young child or a pet in a car, and I definitely would never do so intentionally, but I once locked my car keys in the car while they were still in the ignition, and I once accidently locked my handbag, car keys inside of it, on the front seat of my car. So that sort of absentmindedness and memory lapse can happen. But, when I left my handbag, I became aware of it almost immediately, even though I had to wait for a locksmith before I could retrieve it.

What's needed is a device that will remind someone, both before they exit the car, and/or immediately afterward, that there is still a weight present in the car seat, which will make it almost impossible to "just forget" the child is there. That's the sort of thing that I think auto manufacturers and car seat makers are already working on. And passersby in my area have already become more active when they spot unattended young children in cars--there were 2 very recent instances near me where they immediately called the police to report it when they noticed it, and, in Texas, the passersby actually broke into the car to remove children.

Trying to better protect children, and better prevent these hot car deaths, is definitely a part of this topic, particularly if one feels that Cooper Harris might have been left in that car by accident. BillRM apparently just can't see or understand that.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jul, 2014 06:32 pm
@farmerman,
Farmerman I have a hard time justifying charging most parents for losing a child due to a momentary mind slip, no problem charging a parent for knowingly leaving a child in the car with the idea that the child would be ok for the time involved with manslaughter and of course first degree murder for using a hot car to murder a child.

An yes it is an awful way to have a child die and I would be in very bad shape if by way of either bad judgment or a mind slip I even would have cause the lose of a family pet less alone a child.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/19/2019 at 09:20:01