Post Verdict -Working Out The Unresolved Questions

[pocketaccent]

It's been a long time since I concerned myself with what the numbers on the bottom of the checks mean, so help me out because the first numbers appear to be the same. The second set are different. Correct?

ETA--I looked it up. The first number that's the same is the routing number. This routing number indicates that the bank its drawn upon is either in California or Nevada. The second number is the account number, which appear different on the two checks in question.

There is no routing number to signify AZ. I don't know any way to figure out if Travis actually banked at WAMU or if both these checks belonged to Jodi. It does kind of look like it's a checkbook beneath her check, though. what do you think?

I find it very odd that he'd put her check in that drawer on top of his other checks, personally. It is normal to put a check in a drawer and not in your wallet, so you can go cash it? I guess it might have been convenient to do that if she gave it to him while they were in the office, but I don't think she gave it to him. I think she planted it with an earlier date on it to make it appear as if she'd mailed it back on the 25th so that it would appear that she was paying her debt to Travis and not scamming him. She could have given it to him with the same motive, but for some reason, I find the placing of it in the drawer in plain sight kind of odd.

It does look like there are bunch of blank checkbooks and maybe a check register (probably Travis's) and on top of them, there are two loose checks. But with glare, it is hard to tell. One loose check is from Jodi $200, acct #4412368006. The other has the same style of check, the same routing #, different acct #484x8xxxxx.

Yes it is unusual for a person to place checks paid to you in your own checkbook box. Whether Jodi gave it to him in person on June 4, or planted it after murdering him, I agree that she really wanted LE to find that check with May 25 date on it. After the murder, she sent Travis an email (or texted) asking if he cashed the check. And during interrogation, she asked again if Travis cashed the check (I think more than once). She thought that check was going to save her from something incriminating her and wanted to make sure LE had noticed that check. She makes me sick.

 

[pocketaccent]

She might have maxed out her credit cards trying to pay the mortgage, but they lost the house back in, what 2007? This is a whole year later that she makes these deposits in June 2008.

I recall, and I could be wrong, that Darryl was trying to save the house but I thought he said he couldn't pay anymore in 2007. I believe it can take 9 months or more for a property to actually foreclose after you stop paying, but I don't know that for sure. So if I am correct, then Jodi had to stop paying, too, right? Or there is no foreclosure? I really don't know how that works.

And I am going to assume that once Jodi left the house, she was not trying to pay on it. It was my understanding, which could be incorrect, that Darryl was still trying to pay on the house after he moved, and she was still in there for a time.

I personally have never seen a debit card statement before. Debit cards are tied to a checking account, if I'm correct, and that means you will see deposits and debits at the same time. This could possibly be an "advanced search" copy, where they only wanted to look at the debits, I suppose.

It was my understanding that she was not making deposits, according to her testimony, but she was switching money between accounts. She said something about part of her trip was business, so she was "borrowing" money from her business account or something like that. It was what I was telling pocketaccent earlier that I really didn't understand because Pocketaccent was trying to explain a check-floating thing Jodi appeared to be doing when she made these deposits. PC could be right about that, but I just didn't understand the explanation of how it worked, which is why I want to see these checks on her bank statement. I want to see these actual deposits on her bank statement. They are not there.



If Darryl stopped trying to pay for the house in spring of 2007, whereabouts, then a January 2008 foreclosure sounds right to me.

Actually I wasn't describing a check-floating or checking-kiting scam when I was analyzing June 3 deposits. The scam requires two different banks. It would be very hard to kite checks between two accounts at the same bank.

I was only saying that Jodi wrote a check from her personal account and deposited into her business account and the reasons for it. That is not really a check kiting because the check would clear her personal account that same night and she wouldn't be able to 'float' her check.

I think Observer in Arizona a few days ago mentioned that Jodi could have used Travis to pull a check kiting scam, without Travis realizing what is what. And Observer also reminded us a fraud investigator from Chase bank (Chase bought WAMU) was supposed to testify during rebuttal but didn't. I remember that too. We really can't tell what Jodi was up to without more information. Maybe Matt is involved in this scam but I'm 100% speculating.

 

[Niner]

respectfully snipped...

I personally have never seen a debit card statement before. Debit cards are tied to a checking account, if I'm correct, and that means you will see deposits and debits at the same time. This could possibly be an "advanced search" copy, where they only wanted to look at the debits, I suppose.

Okay - I have a checking account where I can use my card either as a Debit or Credit (MasterCharge).
My bank statement first lists my checks in one section, then my Debits and Credits are listed in an another section. And my Deposits also in a separate section of the statement.

My Debits always appear on the date I use it and the MC appears (posted) maybe 2 to 3 days later.

Hope that might explain the bank statement that's been posted on here. It looks like the all say "MC" before each description. So I would think that would mean she used her Debit/Credit(MC) card from her checking account.

:wave:

 

[wasnt_me]

It does look like there are bunch of blank checkbooks and maybe a check register (probably Travis's) and on top of them, there are two loose checks. But with glare, it is hard to tell. One loose check is from Jodi $200, acct #4412368006. The other has the same style of check, the same routing #, different acct #484x8xxxxx.

Yes it is unusual for a person to place checks paid to you in your own checkbook box. Whether Jodi gave it to him in person on June 4, or planted it after murdering him, I agree that she really wanted LE to find that check with May 25 date on it. After the murder, she sent Travis an email (or texted) asking if he cashed the check. And during interrogation, she asked again if Travis cashed the check (I think more than once). She thought that check was going to save her from something incriminating her and wanted to make sure LE had noticed that check. She makes me sick.

I completely agree with this. She thought it could be part of her alibi. "Look. Travis and I are on good terms. I'm paying him. Look, it's dated May 25th. I mailed it because I knew I wouldn't see him until after Cancun." I bet if she could have faked an AZ mailing stamp, she would have.

 

[wasnt_me]

Actually I wasn't describing a check-floating or checking-kiting scam when I was analyzing June 3 deposits. The scam requires two different banks. It would be very hard to kite checks between two accounts at the same bank.

I was only saying that Jodi wrote a check from her personal account and deposited into her business account and the reasons for it. That is not really a check kiting because the check would clear her personal account that same night and she wouldn't be able to 'float' her check.

I think Observer in Arizona a few days ago mentioned that Jodi could have used Travis to pull a check kiting scam, without Travis realizing what is what. And Observer also reminded us a fraud investigator from Chase bank (Chase bought WAMU) was supposed to testify during rebuttal but didn't. I remember that too. We really can't tell what Jodi was up to without more information. Maybe Matt is involved in this scam but I'm 100% speculating.

Yeah, that's why I was telling you I didn't quite understand what you were describing. I thought you were describing check floating, but just as you explained here, I didn't think it could be done on the same bank. That's why I was confused. Thanks for clarifying, but I still don't "get" the point of her writing the checks.

What's wrong with a "transfer," unless of course, she did this to make it look a certain way for "business" purposes? Just trying to figure it out, for real.

 

[wasnt_me]

respectfully snipped...


Okay - I have a checking account where I can use my card either as a Debit or Credit (MasterCharge).
My bank statement first lists my checks in one section, then my Debits and Credits are listed in an another section. And my Deposits also in a separate section of the statement.

My Debits always appear on the date I use it and the MC appears (posted) maybe 2 to 3 days later.

Hope that might explain the bank statement that's been posted on here. It looks like the all say "MC" before each description. So I would think that would mean she used her Debit/Credit(MC) card from her checking account.

:wave:

Thanks. Yeah, I completely forgot about the option to use a debt card as a credit card. I VERY rarely even do that, and even more rarely do I check the dates to see if they match up. If I recognize the institution, then I know I did the debit and I don't too much look at anything else. It's so funny to me the things I'm noticing that I DO NOT pay attention to while trying to figure out what JA was doing.

And this would make sense because, as I was saying in another post, what institution in its right mind would give Jodi a straight out credit card with over $1000 limit? Esp. after what Lambchop was talking about with the maxed out CC's with mortgage payments on them only about a year to a year and a half prior.

I'm gonna go ahead and seriously doubt she tried to pay down her maxed credit cards. Did anyone recall if they'd filed bankruptcy. I know Lambchop just gave us some of Darryl's loose transcript, but I didn't see the word "bankruptcy" in there.

 

[LambChop]

Witnesses who had nothing to do with the crime are off limits in terms of sleuthing. Same TOS rules apply in JA's case. lease:

 

[ElleElle]

Yes I remember Sep/Oct 2008 shock when the market got crushed. That year we lost over 35% of our retirement acct. But the signs of troubles were all there a few years prior to 2008. There were so many people buying houses with no down, with very low initial adjustable rate, not foreseeing what their mortgage would eventually be down the road. Banks were handing out credit cards w/ high credit limit to just about everyone too. Soon a lot of people maxed out on their credit cards and filed bankruptcy when they couldn't pay anymore.

Looks like I just described Jodi's situation above. I wonder if she and darryl filed bankruptcy??

BBM ~ A little late answering, it seems like their Palm Desert home was foreclosed in Feb. 2007.

Perhaps Travis was on the verge of foreclosing his home?

http://crimeandcourtsnews.blogspot....-travis-alexander-mormon_20.html#.Uu5w_PaH82c

 

[ElleElle]

It's been a long time since I concerned myself with what the numbers on the bottom of the checks mean, so help me out because the first numbers appear to be the same. The second set are different. Correct?

ETA--I looked it up. The first number that's the same is the routing number. This routing number indicates that the bank its drawn upon is either in California or Nevada. The second number is the account number, which appear different on the two checks in question.

There is no routing number to signify AZ. I don't know any way to figure out if Travis actually banked at WAMU or if both these checks belonged to Jodi. It does kind of look like it's a checkbook beneath her check, though. what do you think?

I find it very odd that he'd put her check in that drawer on top of his other checks, personally. It is normal to put a check in a drawer and not in your wallet, so you can go cash it? I guess it might have been convenient to do that if she gave it to him while they were in the office, but I don't think she gave it to him. I think she planted it with an earlier date on it to make it appear as if she'd mailed it back on the 25th so that it would appear that she was paying her debt to Travis and not scamming him. She could have given it to him with the same motive, but for some reason, I find the placing of it in the drawer in plain sight kind of odd.

BBM ~ I personally don't find it odd. There was a reason he was hoarding cheques, as we don't know what cheques are underneath Jodi's?

Do you think she planted it there? What would be the point of that?

Regardless, there is something fishy going on. After the May 25/26 texts, Jodi manipulated Travis into believing something that will help him financially? (legal or not).

 

[ElleElle]

She didn't appear to have enough money in her accounts for all these charges to go through--especially if Budget had held onto any amount for a deposit, and I'm noticing deposits are not shown on this statement. Money had to go in at some point for her spend over $1000--or it was a credit card.

I don't know what bank in their right mind gave her a credit card, but because the dates of the sales are not exact on it and because I don't see deposits, I'm assuming it's a credit card. We discussed my confusion about the dates not lining up before. I believe with my debit card, if I buy it today, I will see it marked as today, but I have to go back and double-check.

BBM ~ She could of have a credit card pre-2008 burst, or perhaps Travis had her as a "secondary" on one of his cards?

Maybe the guy at the pub did give her cash, but she never deposited it?

 

[janx]

Judge and counsel discussing phone sex evidence! I had not read this before. The lack of logic used by the defense counsel ... :facepalm:

http://www.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/0607arias-sex-tape-proceeding.pdf

 

[ElleElle]

Thanks, Truth. That's interesting and probably true since her mother rushed to AZ to make Jodi move. And I don't believe it was ever brought up that she had trouble with the move OUT of AZ, but she kept trying to make it a point that Travis gave her the money to move TO AZ, which as you know, I believe was Paul Stern who did that in truth.

But that doesn't solve why there are no deposits on that statement. There are no credits indicating payments either....

I'm thinking that's a credit card statement.
View attachment 40651

Notice there are no "-" to indicate something taken out, but there are "+" to indicate fuel credits. I haven't had a CC in a long time. Do CC statements put "-" signs before the dollar amounts?

My bank statement uses debit and deposit columns, so it's very clear when something went in and something came out. It doesn't use "+," but it does use "-" to indicate money going out.

I wish we can see pre- Jun5. Also notice there are no transactions between Jun5-Jun9. Why are there charges in Nevada on Jun9? Does it take that long for a transaction to clear? IDK - In Canada, you see your purchase immediately on your statement.

Also, on Jun25, there is a deposit for 19.95 from PPL?

 

[ElleElle]

It does look like there are bunch of blank checkbooks and maybe a check register (probably Travis's) and on top of them, there are two loose checks. But with glare, it is hard to tell. One loose check is from Jodi $200, acct #4412368006. The other has the same style of check, the same routing #, different acct #484x8xxxxx.

Yes it is unusual for a person to place checks paid to you in your own checkbook box. Whether Jodi gave it to him in person on June 4, or planted it after murdering him, I agree that she really wanted LE to find that check with May 25 date on it. After the murder, she sent Travis an email (or texted) asking if he cashed the check. And during interrogation, she asked again if Travis cashed the check (I think more than once). She thought that check was going to save her from something incriminating her and wanted to make sure LE had noticed that check. She makes me sick.

And this is how she got Travis to agree to see her on Jun4. :moo:

I can just hear her saying: "Oh Travis, I can stop by and drop you off the cheque".

 

[ElleElle]

Actually I wasn't describing a check-floating or checking-kiting scam when I was analyzing June 3 deposits. The scam requires two different banks. It would be very hard to kite checks between two accounts at the same bank.

I was only saying that Jodi wrote a check from her personal account and deposited into her business account and the reasons for it. That is not really a check kiting because the check would clear her personal account that same night and she wouldn't be able to 'float' her check.

I think Observer in Arizona a few days ago mentioned that Jodi could have used Travis to pull a check kiting scam, without Travis realizing what is what. And Observer also reminded us a fraud investigator from Chase bank (Chase bought WAMU) was supposed to testify during rebuttal but didn't. I remember that too. We really can't tell what Jodi was up to without more information. Maybe Matt is involved in this scam but I'm 100% speculating.

BBM ~ This is precisely what I believe. May25/26 texts indicate Jodi "scammed" Travis.

Since he was so upset with her, she had to find a way to fix it. She had a bigger scam going on after that, and Travis was naive to her tactics.

You guys are better at the American monetary system. Thanks for the education! :loveyou:

 

[ElleElle]

Yeah, that's why I was telling you I didn't quite understand what you were describing. I thought you were describing check floating, but just as you explained here, I didn't think it could be done on the same bank. That's why I was confused. Thanks for clarifying, but I still don't "get" the point of her writing the checks.

What's wrong with a "transfer," unless of course, she did this to make it look a certain way for "business" purposes? Just trying to figure it out, for real.

BBM ~ wasnt_me, you said it before, it was part of her alibi. It seems as though she was very concerned about the financial impact regarding this case.

 

[janx]

I wish we can see pre- Jun5. Also notice there are no transactions between Jun5-Jun9. Why are there charges in Nevada on Jun9? Does it take that long for a transaction to clear? IDK - In Canada, you see your purchase immediately on your statement.

Also, on Jun25, there is a deposit for 19.95 from PPL?

That's another debit, EE. It went to PPL's web services; she may have had a web page associated with her PPL business--such that it wasn't...

 

[Truth Detector]

Judge and counsel discussing phone sex evidence! I had not read this before. The lack of logic used by the defense counsel ... :facepalm:

http://www.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/0607arias-sex-tape-proceeding.pdf

Yes, I recall this and the utterly foundation-less pedophile slander that the Court allowed.

The Court has humored the DT and granted significant leeway in this case.

I'm just thankful that the jury saw through the lying victim and her sex-crime counsel.

The next jury needs to seal the deal by returning a DP sentence.

 

[Tiger09]

I'm going to be dumb for a minute. What is a check kiting scheme?

 

[Truth Detector]

I'm going to be dumb for a minute. What is a check kiting scheme?

Check kiting is typically characterized by the perpetrator passing checks written against accounts whose balances are insufficient to cover them. But by 'moving' the exposure around frequently, among numerous accounts, they can float themselves for a time until the bad checks catch up to them -- which doesn't take long. Thus, in order to remain afloat, they have to keep moving, involving more banks which haven't yet been burned by their bad checks.

Often the perps will change identities, use aliases, steal checks or write them on closed accounts, etc.

If they don't keep moving, hiding, changing, they are eventually caught, and eventually they will be anyway.

The ACH (Automated Clearing House) electronic systems have expedited the accounts settlement processes between U.S. financial institutions making this form of fraud more difficult to perpetuate than it was even a decade ago.

Years ago, banks routinely placed holds on deposited funds, especially those meeting certain criteria; e.g., drawn on out-of-town banks, exceeding certain dollar amounts, etc. Some banks may still employ this procedure.

But most accounts can be 'settled' in near real-time now.

Case in point = the debit card.

 

[ElleElle]

Check kiting is typically characterized by the perpetrator passing checks written against accounts whose balances are insufficient to cover them. But by 'moving' the exposure around frequently, among numerous accounts, they can float themselves for a time until the bad checks catch up to them -- which doesn't take long. Thus, in order to remain afloat, they have to keep moving, involving more banks which haven't yet been burned by their bad checks.

Often the perps will change identities, use aliases, steal checks or write them on closed accounts, etc.

If they don't keep moving, hiding, changing, they are eventually caught, and eventually they will be anyway.

The ACH (Automated Clearing House) electronic systems have expedited the accounts settlement processes between U.S. financial institutions making this form of fraud more difficult to perpetuate than it was even a decade ago.

Years ago, banks routinely placed holds on deposited funds, especially those meeting certain criteria; e.g., drawn on out-of-town banks, exceeding certain dollar amounts, etc. Some banks may still employ this procedure.

But most accounts can be 'settled' in near real-time now.

Case in point = the debit card.

:floorlaugh: You just reminded me of this movie:

Catch me if you can.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0264464/