Trial break: The State vs Jodi Arias; trial resumes 4 February 2013

[LotusPawprint]

This is not to be argumentative, because I agree with you. I don't think she will testify. Between Juan and jury questions, even she would crumble. But if she did, I don't think she would have to come up with a new unbelievable story. She has gotten very good at telling the one the DT is presenting in court. Since learning that Jodi had to kill Travis in self defense, her entire prison ward has rallied around her, holding up "Free Jodi":

And boy, Phoenix TV reporter Troy Hayden sure did appear to be become swayed (and smitten!):

Troy Hayden's report - An Exclusive Look at Jodi Arias' Life Behind Bars

JMO

That's one sick sorority.


Also I'm sure her lawyers have been preparing her to testify and doing mock cross-examinations for a while "just in case". As if that will prepare her for Juan. Oh please let her testify lease:

 

[lil_buddy]

I am insanely curious to know the conversations between JA and her attorneys.
Does anyone think she tells them the truth?

LOL I don't even think she tells herself the truth...

 

[minor4th]

I believe the DT has figured this out too. In reading the court minutes, so many of the motions pertained to the sentencing or mitigation phase of the trial. We have to keep in mind, that although Beth had a scheduled interview with JA, her attorneys called it off, and Jodi complied by refusing the interview. She may be listening to them a little closer now that the trial is falling apart for her. I believe she will follow her attorneys advice, no matter what that is.

ETA: the jury thinking she's lying. ------------She WILL be lying. lol But will her lies be any more believable than the DT's lies? Which is worse for the jury to hear?

It may be a little less insulting to be lied to once (during penalty), than being lied to twice (guilt/innocence and penalty)

 

[JusticeJunkie]

That's one sick sorority.


Also I'm sure her lawyers have been preparing her to testify and doing mock cross-examinations for a while "just in case". As if that will prepare her for Juan. Oh please let her testify lease:

It does speak to her powers of manipulation, though, and that's a little scary.

 

[minor4th]

I am insanely curious to know the conversations between JA and her attorneys.
Does anyone think she tells them the truth?

I do not think she tells them the truth

 

[Shelby1]

I must have missed this a couple days ago--was it discussed here?

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/01/30/jodi-arias-girlfriend-behind-bars-nancy-grace

 

[Nosey Parker]

I am insanely curious to know the conversations between JA and her attorneys.
Does anyone think she tells them the truth?

They wouldn't believe her anyway!

 

[JusticeJunkie]

That's one sick sorority.


Also I'm sure her lawyers have been preparing her to testify and doing mock cross-examinations for a while "just in case". As if that will prepare her for Juan. Oh please let her testify lease:

Can't you just see her tilting her head with that "smile"? Barf

 

[Curious Me]

guys.. didn't minor4th transcribe the opening statement? I cannot find it!

Yes and thx Minor4th:

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - *graphic and adult content* Jodi Arias Trial media/ timeline thread **no discussion**

Big Thanks to Minor4th.

Here it is in case anyone wants to read the defense's opening statement to see the direction they intend to go.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

I must have missed this a couple days ago--was it discussed here?

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/01/30/jodi-arias-girlfriend-behind-bars-nancy-grace

Shelly, I saw the piece, but took it with a grain of salt. I don't believe the "girlfriend" was ever actually reveled. It was met with complacency here, I believe.

 

[Shelby1]

Shelly, I saw the piece, but took it with a grain of salt. I don't believe the "girlfriend" was ever actually reveled. It was met with complacency here, I believe.

Nancy G. is habitually wrong about things, so I agree.

 

[kkdj]

Wonder if jurors are considering Jodi as a potential blackmailer and stalker. Now, if defense plays the recorded private sex conversation, it could very well add to jurors sense that Jodi was setting Travis up to blackmail him, or threaten him at a later date.

I'm trying to brace myself for what the defense is going to pull next week. It is making me upset that the only way they can defend her is to completely destroy this young man further than what Jodi already did.

I agree with what you said with the exception of the defense destroying Travis. They may be trying to for her defense, but IMO opinion it's not working at all! What I am hearing about is a very normal young man with maybe better than the average morals, who lived, laughed, loved, and brought it to others lives. I could care less what kind of kinky sex they played, as long as all participants were good sports. I do not believe he was abusive in any way, but rather too nice for too long. Some people just can't take a hint! That's when one needs to get more obvious.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

I do not think she tells them the truth

I'm curious at your conclusion. Is it based on the fact that you believe the DT is presenting her case in the same way she presented it to them? In other words, they are following their ethics?
Or is it something else? I value your opinion.

 

[PASA]

i thought she lived in palm dessert and worked in rancho mirage - and at one point also worked in big sur - i don't remember her ever being in la jolla - and la jolla is hours away from both palm desert and big sur??

IIRC LaJolla was where she got the breast implants. I believe it was mentioned during DB's testimony.
HTH

 

[Carol2]

Someone testified it was like she wanted to BE Travis. Chris Hughes?

No, I think it was a female friend that used to work with Jodi. It was a TV interview. I will try to find it.

 

[borndem]

Does it work? I seen this on Dr. Oz.....

Yes, it does for me. I have not experienced weird dreams or nightmares. I think it's pretty mild.

 

[minor4th]

The onus would be on the defense to prove they were acquired legally, if legality is necessary for it to be admitted.

I know that such evidence would not be admissible if it was obtained illegally by LE because it'd be considered fruit of the poisonous tree - the recording was illegal, so anything gained from the recording is inadmissible. I don't know if that same standard applies to civilians, though. Perhaps one of the attorneys can chime in.

In some states, in a criminal trial, even evidence obtained illegally by civilians is subject to exclusion from being admitted against the defendant. In this case, the potentially illegally obtained evidence is being offered by the defendant, and I don't think the same exclusionary rules would apply.

 

[nightwatch]

LOL I don't even think she tells herself the truth...

you are correct. it was shown that see even lied in her diary writings. i'm not sure if she did that to cover her actions or she believed what she wrote. smh

 

[Carioca]

K_Z, thank you for the excellent Cluster B / Axis II disorder explanation! Very interesting how the criminal justice system justifies a mental insanity plea, or not.
(posted today page 3).

Hope4More, your synopsis today on page 4 is absolutely brilliant. Thank you!

Sorry to interrupt folks. Trying to keep up… Just had to make these 2 comments

 

[minor4th]

I'm curious at your conclusion. Is it based on the fact that you believe the DT is presenting her case in the same way she presented it to them? In other words, they are following their ethics?
Or is it something else? I value your opinion.

I think these personality types do not tell the truth to their lawyers as a rule. They lie to get sympathy and to paint themselves in a more favorable light. I've seen it so many times -- their lawyers believe them and prepare their case accordingly. Then you get the person on the stand and they fall apart because their lies are exposed and their lawyers are completely unprepared for it because they had no idea there was all this information that their client selectively did not tell them or lied about.

In this case, I think her lawyers know she is not telling them the truth, though.