Verdict Watch 05/03/2013

[Hatfield]

I'm watching HLN. They have 2 jury panels (24 total mock jurors) they were just asked if they believed JA returned the gas can. Not one person said they thought she did.

If the real jury thinks the same way, I would think they would have to see the gas can issue alone as proof of premeditation, right? She was planning it right there in Salina. If it wasn't premeditation, why would she lie, and they know she lied if they took notes during JM's cross.

Forget the bullet/knife first, DV, rental car, all of it. To me, the fact that the gas can was not returned as she lied about is enough for 1st degree, am I correct?

I agree with you that the gas cans would be enough for premeditation proof. The reason for me is because it shows she tried to never stop in AZ for fuel and needed 3 to get all the way in and out of AZ without stopping for fuel.

The 3rd can was critical for that. She lied about even having the 3rd can and the receipts proved she filled up all 3 based on the amounts of gallons of gas. 10 gallons covered 2 gas cans and 5 gallons covered the other one.

 

[indycornstalk]

Anyone know where I can find the text messages from Travis and her from the May conversation where Travis tells her she is a Sociopath and the worst thing that ever happened to him?

 

[Whisperer]

Ha! Natisha Lance on HLN afterdark is being sent to walmart to buy a gas can and then has to go to another walmart and return the can and get cash back...

What will happen?
(It's on 4 hours tonight)
Why? JA had 3 cans in Salt Lake City!!!

Of course she did. Simple math tells us that.


I don't understand why they just didn't give the tank capacity of a 07 ford focus. It holds about 12/13 gal. If she purchased over 22 gal ( allowing her tank + 10 gal for 2 cans) at any time, she had to have THREE gas cans. The receipts have her at about 25 gal. Why even argue her returning the cans?

They went round and round. All they have to do is go with the total number of gallons purchased to prove the point.

 

[GreenEyesBlue]

Really? wow. good idea.:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

Oh Lord, these people are idiots!

 

[Observer in AZ]

Thank you <insert humbled tears> it is an honor and so easy to do with members like you and all here at Websleuths. I am kinda feeling sad tonight, realizing this is for the most part my last big trial online. My eyes have grown so bad and the computer makes them worse - so I have to cut way back after the case. But, I will be here when I can and I will always remember the wonderful people I met and was touched by along the way!
(Won't need the moisturizing eye drops tonight! LOL)

(((((((((((ANJ))))))))))))))) Thank You for EVERYTHING!

I'm with you.. I feel some sadness as we've all been meeting here every weekday sometimes weekends & until late at night to discuss the case, support TAs family & sometimes joke because we've been so crazed by what we've heard!

I'll miss this everyday meeting of Great Minds & sometimes Snarky tongues!

 

[Boots-OK]

I guess it's not politically correct to state this but really, this woman had been living on her own since she was 18 and at age 28, she had all of $750.00 to her name? Geez...Talk about NOT taking responsibility for herself as an "adult"!

Sorry if I offend someone who has found him/herself in a bad situation but I don't think I've had that little money since I started working part-time.

moo

Hello, PPanther...wasn't that $750 part of the $1500 she borrowed from a friend?

 

[kaydono]

The ONLY reason CA was brought up was because this is the first case I have watched since. No PTSD here. I learned a lot from that case. I learned that 99% of us on that thread thought it was a slam dunk for SOME charge. That case taught everyone a little something about our judicial system. I've watched this trial since January, make no mistake about it, I know exactly who this trial is about. Amen.

Yes, the cases are nothing alike, other than both involved young females in their 20's who lied every other second. I watched FCA from start to finish. I just, at times, get annoyed with our Criminal Justice System. It is not set up to protect victims. We have moved at a snail's pace to make changes in this area. AND no, I am not criticizing our system, entirely. I am a graduate with a Bachelors in Criminal Justice, and am well aware that our system, as a whole, is far superior to those found in most countries.

 

[prima.facie]

Yes....I just go on Safari and go on Websleuths and read and post

anyone with ipad or a smartphone (of any brand) does not need taptalk or some app to view/post on WS. certainly don't need to pay for something in order to read/post to this site! all smartphones have browsers and WS works perfectly fine on any browser. ipad/iphone has a browser.

now speed may be another issue...depends on your carrier and location/signal.

 

[Niner]

Just in case you missed it from the previous thread:

Closing for Proscutors - Defense Objections: 10 total: 9 overruled / 1 sustained / 2 sidebars

Closing for Defense - Proscutors Objections: 6 total: 4 overruled / 1 sustained / 1 ? approach / 1 sidebar

Rebuttal Closing for Proscutors - Defense Objections: 16 total: 12 overruled / 2 sustained / 2 approach

:seeya:

how will we know the verdict?

Didn't you get the memo? ... JVM will show up at your door screaming into a microphone. Brace yourself.

I just HAD to bring this over... too funny AZWatcher! Good answer!

:silly:

 

[MD MOMMY]

She actually had a negative balance in one of her bank accounts before depositing that money on the murder trip.

I still think JM should have highlighted the fact that JA asked during her interview if her $200 check to TA was going to be cashed. As if she had nothing else to worry about.

 

[Arishia]

Haha that just made me think of those mafioso ninjas she was so scared were going to hurt her family b/c she had watched the Sopranos.

:lol:

Didn't ALV try to extricate herself from the comment about how she thought the opinion of someone in her position was as objective as what police investigators do, and Juan asked her if she really thought her opinion was as objective as dna evidence, and she said yes and then something about degraded samples? Then he asked he if she was an expert on dna, and she no, but she knew about it from watching CSI? Am I remembering this right?

 

[gwenabob]

I guess it's not politically correct to state this but really, this woman had been living on her own since she was 18 and at age 28, she had all of $750.00 to her name? Geez...Talk about NOT taking responsibility for herself as an "adult"!

Sorry if I offend someone who has found him/herself in a bad situation but I don't think I've had that little money since I started working part-time.

moo

I don't think she really even had $750. IIRC, she was heavily in debt with credit cards, etc. She owed more than that to Travis!

 

[kaydono]

Just in case you missed it from the previous thread:

Closing for Proscutors - Defense Objections: 10 total: 9 overruled / 1 sustained / 2 sidebars

Closing for Defense - Proscutors Objections: 6 total: 4 overruled / 1 sustained / 1 ? approach / 1 sidebar

Rebuttal Closing for Proscutors - Defense Objections: 16 total: 12 overruled / 2 sustained / 2 approach

:seeya:






I just HAD to bring this over... too funny AZWatcher! Good answer!

:silly:

Originally Posted by AZWatcher
Didn't you get the memo? ... JVM will show up at your door screaming into a microphone. Brace yourself.

Worst nightmare ever, JVM screaming @ my door.

 

[Sistah Sleuth]

So yeah, I was watching Nurmi and he put me asleep. Is the jury deliberating at this time or did they go home for the night or weekend? Please advise. Thanks.

 

[Niner]

okay - no cell phone here, yeah, I know... probably the only one on this forum who STILL has ONLY a landline!! :floorlaugh:

But was wondering if the might be an EMAIL ALERT anywhere to sign up for??

TIA!!

:seeya:

 

[Sophieandme]

I recall a trial where the jury was not allowed to see transcripts/videos of testimony...they had to rely on their memories/notes during deliberations.

So does Arizona allow testimony transcripts/video?

:banghead:

Found this answer by AZLawyer in the legal thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sign
(snipped)
are jurors not even allowed to request specific transcripts during deliberation (understanding that as you said, they will not have them as a matter of course)?


(reply by AZLawyer)
They can ask, but I have never seen a judge in Maricopa County agree to this. The judge will tell them to rely upon their memories and notes.

__________________

 

[GoAskAllie]

KN used the only ONE question that was really nagging me in this case--why call Ryan burns and tell him she was coming straight away. A lot of people disputed me on that question, but it's a really important question.

but KN, can you explain to me what conversations Jodi had with Travis for any length of time to prove he'd ask her to come there? Her call with Travis, the 2 minute one, was a couple hours before she talked to Ryan, yes? So she already knew at that point she was going to see Travis (if Travis had talked her into it). So yes, why DID she tell Ryan she'd be there straight away instead of making up a lie?

That is a good question for either side of this case.

Perhaps she just wanted Ryan to "think" she was coming straight away (part of her alibi), when she knew all along that she would blame her late arrival on getting lost/being an airhead/falling asleep in the car--and of course she couldn't call him because her phone died/she lost her charger/had crappy cell reception.

Jodi was headed to Travis's with murder in mind, but she didn't know exactly how much time she'd spend at his home before she killed him. She couldn't very well tell Ryan that she was taking a detour to Mesa, and there was no other way to explain her whereabouts, so WHAT'S A GIRL TO DO? Tell Ryan that she's on her way and she'll see him soon, then shut off the phone, drive to Mesa, murder Travis, then be on her way to Utah and tell a bunch of lies to Ryan.

 

[kaRN]

Yeah, I totally agree that this case calls for it. I am glad there are people that can handle the responsibility. I am also glad it is part of our judicial system because I truly believe it helps prevent more murders.

Some people dont think it helps, but I do think having the DP helps prevent murders. Just ask Texas and some criminals are well aware that DP is always a chance they take if they choose to murder in that state. I respect Texas and other states that are not afraid to use it when necessary.

I could vote for the DP in this case and never look back. My empathy lies elsewhere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTPaCqiia6k&NR=1&feature=endscreen

 

[ElleElle]

:rocker: Great post! It still boggles my mind as to why Jodi/DT just didn't go for the "crime of passion" defence in the first place.

I know don't even know why manslaughter and 2nd degree is allowed in as a verdict. :stormingmad:

<snip> In a self-defense claim it's the person that had to defend themselves that CAN'T be the aggressor or it isn't self-defense, so how on earth to you make this claim and spend the entire trial insisting it is true and then suddenly change to JODI being the one who "snapped" and was the aggressor in some crime of passion ludicrous defense especially when a crime of passion homocide is STILL a murder charge - not manslaughter?

<snip>.

 

[MD MOMMY]

Yes, the cases are nothing alike, other than both involved young females in their 20's who lied every other second. I watched FCA from start to finish. I just, at times, get annoyed with our Criminal Justice System. It is not set up to protect victims. We have moved at a snail's pace to make changes in this area. AND no, I am not criticizing our system, entirely. I am a graduate with a Bachelors in Criminal Justice, and am well aware that our system, as a whole, is far superior to those found in most countries.

I'll be the first to admit that case made me salty for a bit! How could it not? I'm a paralegal for a Prosecutor. I've seen it all. I've seen the system work like butter BUT I've seen it work like a dingle berry on a dog as well. The profiles of the defendants in the two cases are similar. In fact, I believe if given the chance they could be BFF's.