Justin Ross Harris Motions in Limine Hearing Part 1 02/22/16 | Summary and Q&A

TL;DR

Defense argues for the exclusion of bad character evidence, specifically evidence of sexual nature, as it is not relevant to the murder charge and would be unduly prejudicial.

Key Insights

• 🈂️ The defense challenges the admissibility of evidence of sexual nature in the trial, arguing that it is not relevant to the murder charge and would be unduly prejudicial.
• 🥰 The defense highlights that the evidence in the discovery material contradicts the state's suggested motive and demonstrates a loving relationship between Ross Harris and his son.
• 🖤 The defense contends that the evidence the state wants to introduce is bad character evidence and lacks intrinsic relevance to the charged offenses.

Transcript

Read and summarize the transcript of this video on Glasp Reader (beta).

Questions & Answers

Q: Why does the defense argue for the exclusion of evidence of sexual nature?

The defense argues that evidence of sexual nature is not relevant to the murder charge and would be unduly prejudicial. It does not demonstrate motive or support the state's theory of the case.

Q: What evidence does the defense present to counter the state's suggested motive?

The defense points out that the evidence in the discovery demonstrates a loving relationship between Ross Harris and his son. There is no evidence of violence or neglect towards Cooper Harris, and the other acts the state wants to introduce show a positive relationship between Ross Harris and other individuals.

Q: Does the defense claim that the evidence of sexual nature is admissible as intrinsic evidence?

No, the defense argues that the evidence of sexual nature is not intrinsic to the charged offenses. It does not have a direct link to the alleged murder of Cooper Harris and is therefore unrelated to the case.

Q: What is the defense's main argument for excluding the evidence?

The defense argues that the evidence of sexual nature is bad character evidence and lacks relevance. It does not demonstrate motive and is not connected to the alleged murder. The defense believes that its inclusion would be unduly prejudicial to the defendant.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• The defense argues that evidence of sexual nature, including explicit digital communications and acts of infidelity, should be excluded from the trial as it is not related to the murder charge and lacks relevance.

• The defense points out that there is no evidence of violence or neglect towards Cooper Harris, and that the discovery material demonstrates a loving relationship between Ross Harris and his son.

• The defense highlights that the state's suggested motive for the murder, based on the defendant's sexual behavior and communication, is contradicted by the evidence in the discovery.

• The defense states that the evidence the state wants to introduce is bad character evidence, not intrinsic to the charged offenses, and should be excluded.