This is a running account of testimony in the Justin Ross Harris hot car murder trial. Harris stands accused of intentionally leaving his 22-month-old son Cooper in a hot car to die on June 18, 2014. Court resumed today with the fourth day of testimony by the lead detective in the case, Phil Stoddard of the Cobb County Police Department.
Court has recessed for the day. The trial will resume tomorrow at 8:30 a.m.
Defense attorney Maddox Kilgore resumed his cross-examination of Stoddard after four hours of cross yesterday.
The prosecution is re-examining the detective. There were more photos used when Grimstead replaced the car seat, not just those shown in court.
Grimstead said he used the same process this morning to put the car seat back into the car. The measurements are lined up with the original measurements taken.
But there are no photos showing that, Lumpkin said. That is correct, Grimstead said.
When you processed the SUV in June 2014, was there a pair of sunglasses? Lumpkin asked. Grimstead said he doesn’t recall but they would be in one of the photos he took that day. Grimstead referred to his report and said there were no sunglasses.
He doesn’t remember if they were there on the days of the rescans conducted.
Are they in the vehicle today? I do not, Grimstead testified. He wasn’t looking for a car seat.
There were other items removed from the vehicle, Grimstead said.
The rescans don’t show items that had been removed, Lumpkin pointed out. Yes, Grimstead said.
Grimstead says he has put the car seat back in the SUV four times total, including putting it in in preparation for the jury viewing it.
There are connectors that help tighten the car seat up. Grimstead said he took photos of those too and used them to place the car seat back in.
He looked at the SUV’s backseat after removing the car seat after the scan. There were no indentations in the seat because it hadn’t been sitting there that long, Grimstead said. There were indentations the day Cooper died.
The photo does not depict the measuring tape on the floorboard – measuring from there to the top of the car seat, which is 2 feet and 6 ½ inches. There are no photos taken showing the measuring tape touching the floor. That’s correct, Grimstead said.
When Grimstead testified earlier, he had not seen the car seat again until court.
“You don’t know what happened to that car seat after you put it back in,” after initially examining it, Lumpkin said.
Also, he wasn’t asked to verify measurements in the initially scans of the car done in 2014.
When Grimstead took the car seat back on Oct. 15, there were some photos were taken.
One photo shows a measuring tape on the top of the car seat to show the gap between the driver’s seat and the car seat.
When Grimstead took the car seat back on Oct. 15, there were some photos were taken.
They measured from the front dash to the closest to the part of the car seat. The handle staid in the same position, it would be down in the front, Grimstead said. I have not moved the handle back and forth, he said.
Lumpkin, however, pointed out that he did indeed the move handle when putting the evidence tag put on there. Yes, Grimstead agreed.
When Grimstead originally processed the car seat, he measured from the floor to the top of the car seat. He didn’t use it when placing the car seat back in, Lumpkin pointed out. Grimstead was alone when processing the car so there are no photos of him taking the measurements.
Credit: WSB-TV
Credit: WSB-TV
Defense attorney Bryan Lumpkin is now cross examining Grimstead.
You weren’t aware of the extension of that seat before of it in court, the attorney said. Before that though, Grimstead testified that the car seat was in the same position as the day Cooper died, but on that day the extension was up, not down, Lumpkin pointed out.
“It turns out that testimony is just not true,” Lumpkin said.
Grimstead testified the 3-D scans will help the jury understand the position of the car seat inside the vehicle
Grimstead said he took the car seat this morning and placed it in Harris’ SUV at the request of assistant district attorney Jesse Evans, who is currently questioning the detective. Grimstead he used the original measurements and measuring tape that he did when first examining the SUV.
Grimstead testified the 3-D scans will help the jury understand the position of the car seat inside the vehicle.
The jury will actually view the SUV itself tomorrow so they can get a better look at the dimensions inside it.
Grimstead shows the jury a photo of the scanner sitting in the driver’s seat of the SUV.
The scanner took a panoramic view photo of the interior of the car.
In another photo taken from the driver side front door you can see the safety seat.
The prosecution is going through photos of the SUV with Grimstead in front of the jury.
One depicts the car seat sitting on the floor next to vehicle before it is placed in for the rescan. Another shows a side view of the car with both passenger side doors open.
A doll the size of Cooper was put in the car seat for the scan. The doll is visible through the passenger side rear window.
3:06 p.m.
They did the rescan in Glynn County because the vehicle had already been transported to Brunswick.
The prosecutor showed the jury two photos – one with the extension up and the other with it down. Grimstead said that when the vehicle was rescanned the extension was up as it had been the day Cooper died.
Grimstead is continuing to testify and the prosecution is questioning him.
He obtained the car seat originally but did not realize at the time that it had an extension. He only realized it, Grimstead said, during his trial testimony.
The jury is returning to the courtroom.
Demonstrative evidence, such as the scan, is only admissible as an aid for the jury, Rodriguez said. But the scan doesn’t accurately depict Harris stance outside the vehicle, he argued.
“It’s not fair. It’s not accurate. It’s not representative of any of the testimony we’ve heard,” Rodriguez said of the scans.
Superior Court Judge Mary Staley Clark said she will allow the new scans.
The defense continues to argue against allowing the scans.
The new scan took place on Oct. 15 and 16. Flyover videos used contain material differences than the original scans taking last March.
The scans allow the user of the software to manipulate different points and perspectives of Mr. Harris and the vehicle, Rodriguez said.
The new scan was based on completely new sources of information – two different detectives gave the information for the scans, Rodriguez said.
Grimstead said he was present when the scan was done. The car seat was not touched or moved in any way, he testified.
Credit: WSB-TV
Credit: WSB-TV
The defense is now cross examining the Cobb detective, Carey Grimstead. When you replaced the car seat the first time the seats extension was down. It was not down the day Cooper was strapped in and died.
Grimstead put the car seat in the backseat again with the extension up.
The measurements he used were the original ones included on the initial search warrant.
A detective who testified earlier in the trial has taken the stand again for a motions hearing. The jury is not in
He is discussing the placement of the car seat. The position of it was incorrect when the prosecution did a scan of the vehicle to create a 3-D video. They had to go back and rescan it with the right placement.
The defense is arguing the new scan shouldn’t be allowed because the rescan took place after the trial had started.
Court is back in session.
The court is in recess for a break.
Rodriguez is now showing photos of Harris throwing light bulbs into the car at lunchtime the day of Cooper’s death. It appears his head never enters the vehicle.
The prosecution, Rodriguez said, never asked Pineda to enhance any images of the people who walked by Harris’ SUV to identify them.
Videos tell their own story, sometimes they’re open to interpretation right? Rodriguez said. Right, Pineda responded. Sometimes they tell a full story, and sometimes it depends on the angle, the attorney said.
Was there anything you were able to see on the enhancements that you couldn’t see on the original video? Rodriguez said.
Yes, movement of the person in the video a little closer, Pineda responded.
Rodriguez points out that there is glare on the windshield. If there was a better angle, there might not have been glare, he said. That’s correct, Pineda said.
The images show Harris walking away from the vehicle.
Rodriguez with the defense is now cross examining Pineda. Boring actually reached out and initially contacted Pineda to request him to enhance the video.
What areas of the video did you feel you would be able to do enhancements? Rodriguez said. Where Harris was walking, Pineda said.
The images show Harris walking away from the vehicle.
Lead prosecutor Chuck Boring is the one questioning Pineda.
Boring is now showing the blown up images of the parking lot and Harris’ SUV to the jury.
Credit: WSB-TV
Credit: WSB-TV
He’s done this since 1989, including enhancing video footage. He’s testified as an expert in more than 50 cases.
Pineda was asked to look at two videos of the Home Depot parking lot where Harris’ car was parked with Cooper inside. He zoomed in to blow up images from the surveillance.
The state calls Walter Pineda to the witness stand.
Pineda does video analysis and photography.
Credit: WSB-TV
Credit: WSB-TV
Court is back in session.
The court is currently on a lunch break.
The six attorneys, three for each side, now stand in a tight circle and confer quietly.
Rodriguez says the prosecution asserted that the scans were 100 percent accurate as presented to the defense before the trial. He asks whether the animation is now more than 100 percent accurate.
"There hasn't been a single witness to testify to the recreation that you're going to see," he says.
Staley Clark says, "Trials are not static by nature. They're dynamic by nature." She rules that there was no discovery violation. "Defense motion 29 is denied in that regard," she says. But she relents on the defense suggestion that the prosecution must call a witness to explain the new animation scan, admonishing that she wants that testimony and the questions surrounding it to be very narrowly focused.
She then asks the parties about her "charge" regarding where Harris's SUV will be placed outside the courthouse and how the jury will be permitted to view it tomorrow morning. The prosecution says it's acceptable. The defense says it needs further refinement, specifically, regarding the distance from which the jury may view the vehicle and the length of time the display will take.
Staley Clark tells the parties to work out those issues among themselves and suggests that they get to it right away.
Rodriguez notes that the 3D animation in question was a second (or later) iteration that was made after the trial had begun.
Evan says the rescan was of the interior of the vehicle and the changes from the first iteration were "negligible." And he notes that Staley Clark has already signed off on use of the animation.
Staley Clark says additional testimony from the police about why the scan was redone is necessary. She then asks for argument on the question of when the new evidence was handed over.
Rodriguez: "This was based on how the trial ... it was apparently brought to the attention of the state through cross-examination of the state's witness that they had not accurately measured the distance between the car seat" and another point in the vehicle.
"They should be stuck with that," Rodriguez says, and not be permitted to make up for the mistake after the trial begins. He notes that the state was required to turn over evidence at least 10 days before trial, absent a specific exemption from the judge.
"This was not done," Rodriguez says.
Prosecutor Evans cites several examples of case law in which evidence was introduced after the start of a trial.
Staley Clark then says she'll hear a defense motion. Carlos Rodriguez speaks for the defense team. The motion concerns the prosecution's plan to use 3D computer animation of Harris's SUV. The prosecution's Jesse Evans argues that the judge has already ruled on most of the issues connected to the animation, but Rodriguez strongly disputes that.
Defense attorney Kilgore and prosecutor Boring confer briefly with the judge. Whereupon the judge dismisses the jury early and tells them they'll have some extra time before lunch is delivered at noon.
Credit: WSB-TV
Credit: WSB-TV
Kilgore asks Raissi whether he's familiar with "confirmation bias."
"We see what we're looking for often, don't we? So if we believe that somebody's up to something suspicious or something nefarious, we look for" things that will confirm that suspicion.
Raissi says that wasn't the case with him. "It did look strange to me. I recorded it. I'm just trying to document facts. I did not know the context of what was going on beforehand. I just found it odd that he said (malicious intent).
After a few more questions, Kilgore finishes and Raissi steps down.
Boring ends his direct examination of Raissi. Kilgore performs the cross-examination.
Kilgore: "You don't disagree that that is extraordinarily common that people say, 'Listen, I'm not guilty of this. I didn't mean to do this.'"
Raissi: "I believed the way he was doing this was not normal. ... The wording he was using, the vernacular, the language was not from a lay person. Certainly as a police officer or lawyer you understand what malice is. ... The wording he used caught my attention rather than him saying he (wasn't guilty). ... I thought it was strange that he was using that terminology."
Detective Raissi says he was working the night shift on the day Cooper died and was summoned to the scene at Akers Mill Square shopping center but was only there about 15 minutes.He says he then went with his partner to the Home Depot's Treehouse office building to meet with Leanna Harris. Raissi says he parked Leanna's car for her, then fetched her purse at her request. Raissi was then dropped off at the Harrises' apartment for a search of the premises, while Leanna was driven on to police headquarters.
He then returned to police HQ and photographed Harris in a police interrogation room to document his clothing and appearance. He said Stoddard walked in and told Harris about the charges that had been filed against him, including cruelty to children and murder.
Raissi: "He began questioning why he was being charged with (murder). He didn't understand. He said he had told us that it was nothing other than an accident. At that time he used the words 'malicious intent.' I was kind of surprised that he would know that language."
Raissi noticed that the interrogation room camera was turned off, so he started recording with his handheld camera.
The next witness is called. He is David Raissi, detective for Cobb County Police Department. With department for nine years. Now on the crimes against persons unit.
Boring rises for re-re-direct.
Boring: "You were asked about Jim Persinger. Now, do you know who the directy point of contact between Mr. Persinger ... was he employed by the DA's office?
Stoddard: "He was employed by the DA's office."
Boring: "So his point5 of contact would have been us, not you."
Stoddard: "That's correct."
The point of this exchange is Stoddard's admission on the stand that he did not read the consultant's full report.
Kilgore gets up on re-re-cross but the judge shuts him down after an objection from the prosecution.
Stoddard steps down from the stand.
Now they are talking about Stoddard's testimony regarding Harris's purported web searches for remote or secluded islands, including the Solomon chain in the Pacific.
Kilgore: "Did you do any other investigation as to the web history at that exact same time that Ross was there?"
Stoddard: "No, sir."
Kilgore hands over a defense exhibit of other web searches. The time is about a minute before Harris searched for remote islands.
Kilgore: Can you tell us the name of the article that Ross accessed on Reddit exactly one minute before he searched for remote islands?"
Stoddard says it's a story about a kid living in a rain forest.
Kilgore: "Story about a kid who lived in a rain forest? That's what he was looking at for one minute before searching for the Solomon Islands and remote islands, correct?"
Stoddard: "Yes, sir."
The island in question, Kilgore says, was in the Solomon islands.
Court is back in session. Kilgore resumes his re-cross-examination.
He and Stoddard spar over Stoddard's testimony regarding the surveillance video of Harris walking away from his SUV.
February 2015, he appeared to pull his phone out and use it.
But Stoddard is testifying today that he can't tell whether Harris was holding his phone.
Kilgore turns to the consultant the police hired to review Harris's web searches and Stoddard's admission that he didn't read the consultant's report.
Kilgore: "Something that important, the lead detective, you weren't clued in or told or given a copy of this report?"
Stoddard: "No. ... I don't even know if a report has been made."
An incredulous Kilgore asks, "Is it your position that you don't know if a report was made?"
Stoddard says he hasn't seen it, if it was, and admits that he never talked to the consultant about his findings, either.
The judge asks Kilgore how much longer he intends to re-cross Stoddard, and Kilgore says probably not more than 15 minutes. Staley Clark declares a recess.
Credit: WSB-TV
Credit: WSB-TV
Why wouldn't Harris have simply carried his light bulbs into the office with him, rather than pitch them into the car, Boring asks. Stoddard says he doesn't know and adds that he wouldn't throw light bulbs that he just bought.
Maddox Kilgore now begins re-cross. Both attorneys appear to be more animated than usual during this phase of re-direct and re-cross.
Kilgore: "I want to go back just real briefly ... look at page 61 (of the transcript of a hearing in July). ... Specifically you're begin asked about that public service announcement video. You were asked how many times did he view it?"
Stoddard replies that Harris viewed it two times.
Kilgore challenges Stoddard on that point, and Stoddard acknowledges that he doesn't know whether Harris actually watched the video twice. He says he knows for certain that Harris "accessed" the video twice.
They spend substantial time on the video Harris watched of a veterinarian talking about the dangers of locking pets inside hot cars. They reaffirm that Harris mentioned the video in the context of his son's death.
Then Boring turns to the video of Harris putting light bulbs in his car after lunch. Stoddard says he believes Harris had a clear view of Cooper in the car as Harris approached the vehicle but clarifies that Harris wouldn't have been able to see his son when he opened the door and tossed the light bulbs inside, because his head was above the frame of the car.
He leads Stoddard through a series of questions concerning issues raised by the defense during Stoddard's cross. Kilgore then objects, saying that Boring is doing the testifying and just asking Stoddard to confirm the information that Boring presents. The judge asks the prosecutor to avoid asking leading questions but says she did not find the question that raised Kilgore's objection to be leading.
Boring turns to the question of what investigators smelled at the scene. He lists several investigators and asks whether they "smelled something" -- the implication being that there was an odor at the scene, even if it was not the smell of death that Stoddard had earlier testified about. Stoddard says yes.
Kilgore finishes his cross-examination with a "thank you" to Stoddard, and lead prosecutor Chuck Boring rises for re-direct.
Kilgore notes that Leanna Harris's computer, seized by police, contained thousands of family pictures, including hundreds of Cooper. He asks Stoddard whether police returned the computer to Leanna in time for Cooper's funeral.
Stoddard then says, in response to a question, that on the day Cooper died, Leanna did not show any emotion and did not ask to see her son. He says she was detained at police headquarters and acknowledges that her belongings were searched.
Kilgore: "So after you went through her stuff, you the opportunity to observe her demeanor, and your report indicated that her demeanor was calm and collected. And there's no report that you made that she was crying or had tears."
Stoddard: "That's correct."
Kilgore: "Is that why she was suspect?"
Stoddard acknowledges that was the case.
Kilgore: "She wasn't reacting the way you thought she should be reacting?"
Stoddard: "That's a very small part of the whole picture. You have to have all the pieces to know why she was considered a suspect."
Credit: WSB-TV
Credit: WSB-TV
The judge orders the jury brought in. Ross Harris stands, wearing a dark jacket, white shirt and a blue tie.
Maddox Kilgore, lead defense attorney, resumes his cross-examination of Stoddard. He asks for a date or time when Leanna Harris was ruled out as a suspect in Cooper's death. Stoddard says she is still listed as a suspect on the police report but that she is not part of an active investigation and has been ruled out as a suspect.
"We did not find any evidence to rise to the level of probable cause" to accuse Leanna Harris.
Judge Mary Staley Clark says the parties and the jury will meet at 8 a.m. tomorrow to view the SUV. She's talking about how the media's camera will be positioned and her prohibition that the camera not capture any member of the jury. She then directs the parties to work out the details during the court's lunch break.
The lawyers in the case are choosing a location where Ross Harris's Hyundai Tucson will be parked outside the courthouse. The jury is expected to view the vehicle, with Cooper's child seat placed inside, tomorrow.
