Prosecutor Juan Martinez releases new book, February 2016 - #2

I'm going to have to go full cold turkey and not even read here these next weeks.

To read is to respond, and for the next weeks, KRKRJX, I've committed to full time research and writing of presidential campaign info for SM distribution, mostly in support of my DH (I posted a bread crumb trail note about this on Sidebar yesterday).

I'm being bad to be here at all, but ;

Steve. Compare Day 21, 2 of 3, first 30 minutes at least to Day 25 1 of 3, first 40 minutes. ( David Lohr videos on YouTube).

Watch her body language when she's feeling smug and confident and thinks she's one step ahead of JM, even what she does verbally when she can't keep up (Day 21) vs. the static slow on Day 25.

I'll be interested to see your take, though if I have any discipline it will be a while before I read it.

TruthWatcher- I noticed that intent look too. I watched the vid one time through just looking for her reaction to discussion of the nudes. IMO she was so intent because she didn't know yet if LE had figured out how she had (perhaps) manipulated the pics.

Pics discussion for me right now has a gigantic warning sign screaming danger, rabbit hole ahead!!!!!

Gitting off while I still can.....

krkrjx said:

She won because she had the last word. She always has to have the last word and regardless of the circumstances feels it is a victory. She may be going to jail but he's dead and because she made that happen, she wins.

Click to expand...

She definately wanted the last word. Like with the cut on her finger. She argued for days about which finger, which hand, glass cut, metal cut, employee accident reports, cats, margarita glasses etc

She already admitted she killed him. With a knife. Why not just admit "while I was defending myself from Travis, the knife I just happened to find in the bathroom slipped in my hand and I was injured!" ? Or "I was defending myself! Travis tried to get the knife I luckily found in the bathroom and it cut me".

TexMex said:

What day is that testimony? I reviewed his direct, cross and redirect on Day 12/13 and it's not in there...
He did testify later...rebuttal? But I thought it only dealt with "*advertiser censored*" on TA computer....
Tia

Click to expand...

IIRC Dworkin testified in the second penalty phase as a prosecution witness. That was when the *advertiser censored* issue was uppermost.

RickshawFan said:

IIRC Dworkin testified in the second penalty phase as a prosecution witness. That was when the *advertiser censored* issue was uppermost.

Click to expand...

I think you're right. On day 12/13 in first trial he testified for the defense. The last witness they called before Jodi took the stand for the next month.

Hope4More: I would root for your DH to win, but then that will make an additional delay before you return to WS? Bummer! The truth needs you!

One of the best lines of the trial.

39:20 they are sparring about her versions about why the shower pic session started. 1. Calvin Klein water effect. 2. Travis proud of his body prior to Cancun. JM asks her so which one is it? Pick one. Arias acts confused..what Cancun issue?

At 39:50
To refocus her JM asks "Do you remember we are talking about Travis Alexander? Let's start with that.
Arias. "Yes I remember that."
JM. "that's why we're here, because you killed him, right?"
Arias "yes"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iIpwiPxPn7Y

Hope4More said:

I'm going to have to go full cold turkey and not even read here these next weeks.

To read is to respond, and for the next weeks, KRKRJX, I've committed to full time research and writing of presidential campaign info for SM distribution, mostly in support of my DH (I posted a bread crumb trail note about this on Sidebar yesterday).

I'm being bad to be here at all, but ;

Steve. Compare Day 21, 2 of 3, first 30 minutes at least to Day 25 1 of 3, first 40 minutes. ( David Lohr videos on YouTube).

Watch her body language when she's feeling smug and confident and thinks she's one step ahead of JM, even what she does verbally when she can't keep up (Day 21) vs. the static slow on Day 25.

I'll be interested to see your take, though if I have any discipline it will be a while before I read it.

TruthWatcher- I noticed that intent look too. I watched the vid one time through just looking for her reaction to discussion of the nudes. IMO she was so intent because she didn't know yet if LE had figured out how she had (perhaps) manipulated the pics.

Pics discussion for me right now has a gigantic warning sign screaming danger, rabbit hole ahead!!!!!

Gitting off while I still can.....

Click to expand...

Thanks Hope. Well patience is a virtue, no need to hurry, which is why, I'm sure, Arias will be having an increasingly difficult time while waiting for the Pine Box Express to 'freedom'.

Wow, I must have been too tired to be posting in the wee hours of today. I see my post above where I state psychopaths do not know right from wrong...and that is inaccurate! They DO know the difference between right and wrong, they just don't care and they believe that the rules apply to everyone but them.

Steve44 said:

Thanks Hope. Well patience is a virtue, no need to hurry, which is why, I'm sure, Arias will be having an increasingly difficult time while waiting for the Pine Box Express to 'freedom'.

Click to expand...

Agree. For all those who believe Arias is not being punished, that she is too comfy where she is, be patient. She will become more and more uncomfortable over time and she herself claimed longevity in her family so her increasing discomfort will eventually be quite painful for her, imo. She may have no capacity for empathy but she definitely has capacity to feel her own pain.

krkrjx said:

Wow, I must have been too tired to be posting in the wee hours of today. I see my post above where I state psychopaths do not know right from wrong...and that is inaccurate! They DO know the difference between right and wrong, they just don't care and they believe that the rules apply to everyone but them.

Click to expand...

Yet esoterically accurate just the same. She does not 'know' the difference between right and wrong in the sense that to 'know' is to assimilate and incorporate knowledge into ones character and life-principle, as most people would regard their individual knowledge of right and wrong. She knows it only as a social convention, one to which her existentially isolated identity is not subject.

Val1 said:

I'm talking about the memory card, though in testimony they kept referring to it as a stick even though the evidence only shows what I call a memory card. That may be because the memory card had some sort of adapter attached to it so it would fit in the camera, the micro ones need an adapter.

View attachment 89699

Click to expand...

Gotcha! Thanks so much, and sorry again for using your post to ask my question. Although I've never heard of an "adapter" for a digital camera before, so that's something else I'll read up on today. So some camera cards connect to a camera with an adapter and sort of just dangle around by the data cable? That's weird.

But I do remember the evidence photo of the camera "card" now. I just wasn't clear on what the memory "stick" was in reference to. Some people have theorized Jodi could have planted image files on Travis' camera, and one way to do that would be to transfer data from a memory stick to a camera card via a card "reader" (after both the card "stick" and the card "reader" are inserted into USB ports on a computer. I think it was Hope who asked if data can be transferred from "stick" to "stick". The answer is yes, but you need a computer and two USB ports. Data can also be transferred from "stick" to "card" but a card "reader" and a computer is needed. If that makes any sense.

Ok... thanks again, Val. I do appreciate it.

Edited to add: maybe Jodi kept referencing a memory "stick" because she DID do some data transferring from a stick to his computer harddrive and/or maybe even his camera card. Hmm...

Hope4More said:

I'm going to have to go full cold turkey and not even read here these next weeks.

To read is to respond, and for the next weeks, KRKRJX, I've committed to full time research and writing of presidential campaign info for SM distribution, mostly in support of my DH (I posted a bread crumb trail note about this on Sidebar yesterday).

I'm being bad to be here at all, but ;

Steve. Compare Day 21, 2 of 3, first 30 minutes at least to Day 25 1 of 3, first 40 minutes. ( David Lohr videos on YouTube).

Watch her body language when she's feeling smug and confident and thinks she's one step ahead of JM, even what she does verbally when she can't keep up (Day 21) vs. the static slow on Day 25.

I'll be interested to see your take, though if I have any discipline it will be a while before I read it.

TruthWatcher- I noticed that intent look too. I watched the vid one time through just looking for her reaction to discussion of the nudes. IMO she was so intent because she didn't know yet if LE had figured out how she had (perhaps) manipulated the pics.

Pics discussion for me right now has a gigantic warning sign screaming danger, rabbit hole ahead!!!!!

Gitting off while I still can.....

Click to expand...

I watched the Westminster Dog Show in February, so perhaps I can get a doggie to help you get out of the rabbit hole if you fall in. I know which breed is best

:giggle:

TrialWatcher said:

I don't believe that Arias cared for her reputation. She pretended to as it was part of her play Mormon act. What Arias cared about was getting what she wanted - Travis. Psychopaths are goal orientated and you hear her describing goals in court and interviews.

The evidence that she didn't care about what others thought of her relentless pursuit of Travis is plentiful. She slept under his Christmas tree when not wanted. She crept in through his doggy door. She endured the showdown with the Hughes' and rejection. She spied on him and he and others knew it. Brazenly, she powered through where normal women would be embarrassed and retreat. His friends knew that he didn't seriously want her from very early on. That's why she tried to manipulate the Hughes and succeeded, for a very short time.

Arias read his journals, knew she was mocked by his friends from quite early on but none of that mattered. Her eyes remained on the prize. When she lost that - she lost it and wanted Travis to pay. Any allusion to her reputation was merely to cover for her actions or create a Mormon smokescreen. I doubt she had any interest in Ryan Burns beyond an alibi. Offering Travis a last, apologetic, no strings sex session sounds exactly what she would do. With the bonus that Travis got an insurance policy of naked pictures of her should she try to blackmail him.

You only have to watch her in court to see how little she cares about how people perceive her. Despite tutoring form Nurmi, she couldn't play the victim with a reputation to maintain. What the lying psychopath cares about is winning, at all costs. Thanks to Juan Martinez and Detective Flores, she lost.

Click to expand...

She didn't care about her reputation when weighed against her self-will in the field of action, but as an instrument of manipulation it was necessary to give it a certain importance. Any conflict that arose between the two she was sure she could handle through further manipulation.

TexMex said:

the images (except two which had been overridden) contained the date and time they were created. They did not contain the time they were deleted...

13 min in

JM : let's talk about the first set of photographs 164-169 exhibits (nudes) recovered from the unallocated/deleted space of the camera. Were you able to find the date and time these images were created?


Melendez: "Typically you may not, but in this case these images when taken with this camera it embeds the date and time to the file itself."

Melendez testifies the pics all have file information and also metadata/EXIF
When a photo is taken, the camera makes two copies. One copy is the original size, and the other copy is the thumbnail that we view when we replay photos on the camera. The earlier the photo is deleted, the more of its info is overwritten. Since the sex pics were deleted first, they lost more of their information than say the murder photos, which were the last pics deleted.

Melendez said he got the information on the front of the pics from the metadata. He was indicating that he put it on the photos in red, and the reason two sex pics don't have the red date and time stamp is because he could not recover even the meta data, but Juan Martinez cleared this issue up by pointing out that the KY Jelly was in a dated pic by Travis' arm and pillow, and in a pic of Jodi, the KY was still in that same spot, though the pillow and Travis were no longer in that spot.

Click to expand...

BBM - This is the problem, when they were created... was that by transferring them to the camera or is there corroborating metadata showing the pics had actually been originally taken by the camera?

Again, if you read the Encase info, or pretty much any of the software available at that time, it appears that it is up to the technician to decide which date applies when all of the metadata is not available, part of that being going by the dates they would deem most condusive to fitting within the timeframe that they were looking for and that the "creation" time could apply.

https://whereismydata.wordpress.com/tag/dates/

"Electronic Discovery: Dates and Questions
August 9, 2009 — 585

“When was the document created?”
“When was a file last modified?”

These are two of the most common questions asked by lawyers in relation to dates. They are easy to ask, very fair, and reasonable to expect an answer to.

But there are so many problems answering these questions “correctly”.

Firstly the question asked by the lawyer needs to be interpreted by those conducting the investigation. Do they mean the date the document was “first created”, when it was created on the “current computer”, or when it came to be “created” in its current state."

https://whereismydata.wordpress.com/?s=File+Created

"File Created: This is the date the file was “created” on the volume. This does not change when working normally with a file, e.g. opening, closing, saving, or modifying the file."

Val1 said:

BBM - This is the problem, when they were created... was that by transferring them to the camera or is there corroborating metadata showing the pics had actually been originally taken by the camera?

Again, if you read the Encase info, or pretty much any of the software available at that time, it appears that it is up to the technician to decide which date applies when all of the metadata is not available, part of that being going by the dates they would deem most condusive to fitting within the timeframe that they were looking for and that the "creation" time could apply.

https://whereismydata.wordpress.com/tag/dates/

"Electronic Discovery: Dates and Questions
August 9, 2009 — 585

“When was the document created?”
“When was a file last modified?”

These are two of the most common questions asked by lawyers in relation to dates. They are easy to ask, very fair, and reasonable to expect an answer to.

But there are so many problems answering these questions “correctly”.

Firstly the question asked by the lawyer needs to be interpreted by those conducting the investigation. Do they mean the date the document was “first created”, when it was created on the “current computer”, or when it came to be “created” in its current state."

https://whereismydata.wordpress.com/?s=File+Created

"File Created: This is the date the file was “created” on the volume. This does not change when working normally with a file, e.g. opening, closing, saving, or modifying the file."

Click to expand...

The metadata is created when the shutter is pressed and the image is created


Melendez: "Typically you may not, but in this case these images when taken with this camera it embeds the date and time to the file itself."

atthelake said:

I watched the Westminster Dog Show in February, so perhaps I can get a doggie to help you get out of the rabbit hole if you fall in. I know which breed is best

:giggle:

Click to expand...

Too few indications of discipline so far, since I'm responding, eh?

But as long as you're asking, please send a St Bernard with a big flask of coffee...and Kalhua. .

This saving the nation and world and only one candidate will do stuff is just not as interesting as trying to figure out when Travis knew she was there on June 4.

TrialWatcher said:

I don't believe that Arias cared for her reputation. She pretended to as it was part of her play Mormon act. What Arias cared about was getting what she wanted - Travis. Psychopaths are goal orientated and you hear her describing goals in court and interviews.

(snipped for space)

You only have to watch her in court to see how little she cares about how people perceive her. Despite tutoring form Nurmi, she couldn't play the victim with a reputation to maintain. What the lying psychopath cares about is winning, at all costs. Thanks to Juan Martinez and Detective Flores, she lost.

Click to expand...

I did not see that she didn't care much about how she was perceived; I saw a person who was delusional about how she was being perceived. I agree she had to win at any cost--that's the psychopath for you. I am not sure she had a reputation even worth protecting but maybe she thought she had. Travis had that, so she took the opportunity of her murder trial to not only try to get away with murder but to take him down reputation-wise in the process. That was for some reason extremely important for her to do...to the point of obsession. The obsession is usually part of the borderline thing.

I bet each of her attorneys throughout tried to convince her to go about her case from a different stance (self defense might have a chance of raising some reasonable doubt but not if you include pedophile accusations, maybe?) but she refused every suggestion ever made. She was obsessed with taking Travis down and the only way to do that after a person is dead is to target their reputation; she did so with relish even though it damaged her case.

You can find the interview with JM and Dr. Phil on youtube. Its in 3 parts. Also his interview with Nancy Grace is on youtube now. Just thought you might want to know in case you missed it.

Val1 said:

BBM - This is the problem, when they were created... was that by transferring them to the camera or is there corroborating metadata showing the pics had actually been originally taken by the camera?

Again, if you read the Encase info, or pretty much any of the software available at that time, it appears that it is up to the technician to decide which date applies when all of the metadata is not available, part of that being going by the dates they would deem most condusive to fitting within the timeframe that they were looking for and that the "creation" time could apply.

https://whereismydata.wordpress.com/tag/dates/

"Electronic Discovery: Dates and Questions
August 9, 2009 — 585

“When was the document created?”
“When was a file last modified?”

These are two of the most common questions asked by lawyers in relation to dates. They are easy to ask, very fair, and reasonable to expect an answer to.

But there are so many problems answering these questions “correctly”.

Firstly the question asked by the lawyer needs to be interpreted by those conducting the investigation. Do they mean the date the document was “first created”, when it was created on the “current computer”, or when it came to be “created” in its current state."

https://whereismydata.wordpress.com/?s=File+Created

"File Created: This is the date the file was “created” on the volume. This does not change when working normally with a file, e.g. opening, closing, saving, or modifying the file."

Click to expand...

The article you're quoting is about Windows file structure and the dates discussed are in relation to the Windows computer. Metadata/exif info is created by software contained on whatever is used to actually create the picture/doc, etc from a blank state. It is embedded into the binary code that makes the picture/doc by the software used to make it, which in turn can read by a computer and turned into a viewable format. In the case of pictures, that creation software would be in the camera's 'computer', for Docs it could be MS Office Word or Excel. In pictures, it contains quite a bit of info about not only the dates, but what settings the camera used when taking the picture, etc.

LinTX said:

The article you're quoting is about Windows file structure and the dates discussed are in relation to the Windows computer. Metadata/exif info is created by software contained on whatever is used to actually create the picture/doc, etc from a blank state. It is embedded into the binary code that makes the picture/doc by the software used to make it, which in turn can read by a computer and turned into a viewable format. In the case of pictures, that creation software would be in the camera's 'computer', for Docs it could be MS Office Word or Excel. In pictures, it contains quite a bit of info about not only the dates, but what settings the camera used when taking the picture, etc.

Click to expand...

Yes I know all that,my question pertains to the metadata they were able to pull, if they were able to access enough of the file to give a "creation" date, whatever that actually means in this case(File Created: This is the date the file was “created” on the volume.), then why no deletion dates or anything else that could verify that it was the Sony and not JA's Canon or Olympus that created the original exif data?

In response to the jury questions Dworkin had said:
-----------
JURY QUESTIONS

1) are date and time stamps on photos taken by digital cameras, can they be manually manipulated?
Answer: the photo of the file would have to exist first and then go and change the time/date.
It applies to "exif" information as well.

Dworkin did not attempt to turn on the camera as it had been stored for a long time and there was no reason to do it at the time. Dworkin did not see any evidence of time stamp manipulation.

Martinez asks about #413, is it possible that the photo of Jodi and her sister, could it have been taken in 2007 and then uploaded or downloaded in 2008? Witness answer : "anything is possible"."
------------
What I would like to know is why some people seem to want to believe the worst of TA? Heck, I still don't believe they had intercourse more than once or maybe twice, don't forget JA herself sees any form of sexual contact as "doing the deed" instead of what most nowadays would consider heavy petting.

Is it that impossible, knowing what we do about JA and her propensity for spinning tales, that the sexual pics may have been part of her "plan", like the shower pics apparently were? I don't hear anyone here disputing that those were legit(though some like me are still questioning whether the date/time stamp was accurate even on those, there is no evidence to prove it was), or that the bedroom pics may indeed have been from a previous time on an "recycled" card, had been deleted by TA once he got his new camera so he could use it for his new life without her, and then recovered in the unallocated spaces(much to JA's surprise, observed in her first interrogation that they were even there, but gave her another story line she could spin since she had also learned they had enough other evidence to put her there... enter the sex and ninja story?)

Why else would the defense not be disputing them if they didn't think they helped her case when trying to show how TA used and abused her, even up to that last day?

For those interested in how easy metadata is to manipulate...

http://www.lemkesoft.de/en/products/exif-sync/

"With EXIF Sync, correcting time records is no longer a problem — the application allows you to align the times of shots taken with different cameras in just a few clicks. The date and time data will be changed in the image files themselves."