Wife guilty in death of ex-LTBMU chief
By Peter Hecht, Sacramento Bee
PLACERVILLE — Colleen Harris insisted the shotgun death of her husband was a horrible event shrouded by the “gray fog” of traumatic memory loss.
In less than two hours, a Placerville jury Wednesday returned a verdict that was crystal clear: The 73-year-old grandmother was guilty of first-degree murder for gunning down her third husband, Robert Edward “Bob” Harris, 72.
The Placerville land surveyor, known to extended family as “Grandma Cokie,” dropped her head and put her hand over her face. She cried as she tried to shield herself from the lenses of photographers in the courtroom.
The jury rejected lesser charges of second-degree murder, manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter. As a result, Colleen Harris stands to receive a punishment of 50 years to life for first-degree murder with a firearm when she is sentenced June 5.
People have heard of “shotgun” weddings, this killer pretending to be “Grandma” used a shotgun for divorces and to make sure she was able to steal the assets and estates of the men she murdered. I read that Harris had been warned by his son that this lady was trouble waiting to happen, he was right. The first jury who let her off on a pack of lies should be ashamed and her same attorney nearly thirty years later, tried the nearly same story again, this time the jury made the right decision, I wish they had before in the previous trial.
She is a BLACK WIDOW and that attorney has blood on his hands.
‘In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.’
Atomic, above is the text for the VI Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Therefore if you feel the defense attorney has “blood on his hands”, in all due fairness you must therefore hold the founding fathers AND the Constitution to the same standard, should you not?
Biggerpicture – Nicely said.
This attorney, in my opinion, has no morals and is very unethical and obviously has to be without a doubt the biggest liar in the county and he is dangerous to the safety of the people when he knows his client is guilty of murder he still tried a second time to free a double murderer on even more lies that he has to know are lies. She and her sleazy attorney should share the same jail cell and sentence and the first jury should be shamed for allowing a murderer to kill again based on deliberate lies and attacking the murder victim. It should be no surprise to anyone that the DA’s Office tried to remove this attorney from the case for unethical conduct.
Justice, you seem to have no concept of justice and the US Judicial system. From your rant it sounds like you would be more content if our system of justice was based upon a model something akin to Sharia Law.
Thanks Bigger, Seems some people don’t believe in the right to a defense. What makes this unusual is this is a woman – not a man, as in 99% of all murders. When was the last time you heard a male murderer described as a “black widower” Doesn’t happen. “Justice” maybe you need a new name as you aren’t on the side of justice and a fair trial process as described in the Constitution. Just noticing a pattern.
Some people don’t like murderers, thieves, liars, etc. and their attorneys who assist their crimes and people who are honest and ethical want to be on the side of justice for the victims of their crimes. I guess this is the difference in liberals versus conservatives because I have never met a dishonest lying defense attorney yet who wasn’t a good liberal and this does affect their judgment and ability to excuse violent crimes. Has something to do with morals and a lack thereof.
As to most of the above – she did in fact get her day in court – twice. . .the first ended up as a miscarriage of justice which cost my long-time & dear friend Bob Harris hi life. . .I speak because we cannot forget that in all these ‘legalistic’opinions. . .this time time justice was served…
The attorney may have mounted a “limp” defense in using the essentially same story. . .knowing by implication that 12 reasonable people would not “buy it”. . .in that he was right, but we’ll never know. . .
“Justice” does the most injustice with statements like his…it is not ‘morals’ that is at issue, it is ‘ethics’, which apparently he doesn’t have. . .
She is a BLACK WIDOW and that attorney has blood on his hands.
Being a defense attorney of the vile and wicked is part of the job. Choose that path only if you can sleep well at night unleashing a killer back into the community, then defending them again for yet another murder.
Sure, innocent until proven guilty, I get it. Due process is essential. Luckily a sober jury saw through the carnival act the second time around.
Jusranass is always pointing fingers, never ends…