04/22/2013 - waiting for rebuttal to continue

[EquallyDivided]

I shall go upstream and re-read what was posted...I usually agree with LB...I might have mis-characterized a post or two...my bad.

(But I still love Red Green!)

As in Red Green show, Moose Lodge? If so, I thought I was the only person on the planet!!

 

[Bernina]

Did JA ever give a good reason for renting a car for the fateful trip? And I think she said she went to her brother's house near the Redding airport to rent it. A Was her car "unreliable" or something according to her?
As broke as she seemed to stay, I can't believe the jurors would ever believe she could rationalize the expense of a rental car when she could have driven her own car or borrowed one from any number of people...
Hope the jurors see it the same way I see it: with a HUGE WTH?

After blowing up the engine of TA's BMW enroute back to Cali from Ariz., she decided her own vehicle needed repairs (Jodiism for "the bank is looking for it to repo") and didn't do well on gas (Jodiism: "Must drive it 90 miles (to get to a non-local rental place) to hide it brother's house")

 

[panthera]

If the past is anything to go by the Defence should be able to reverse Juan's good work in this area.

They do have a history of snatching ultimate defeat from the jaws of a minor victory.

That is what scares me. I seriously doubt, however, they will succeed with the "manslaughter"....even if the Judge does allow it.

Premeditation is written all over this crime.

MOO

 

[Hatfield]

Unbelievable. The defense is only digging the hole even deeper, in my opinion.

But then again, on the last part of JVM's program tonight, someone said the prosecution may have spared JA from death row by their own witness (Dr. DeMarte) suggesting she has Borderline Personality Disorder.

:doh:

Re: BBM

Someone mentioned already that surely the defense team had gotten the report that Dr. D created. At least I hope they had it and if they did, then surely they are themselves to blame if they did not expect it to be testified to.

I am no attorney, but I dont think the prosecution has to tell them exactly what the witness is going to say or do they. I always thought they would just generally tell them the witness is going to testify about her opinions based on her analysis and report.

I will be curious to see the ruling on this and hear other attorneys opinion on the ruling. I hope they dont allow the defense to bring in another person.

 

[G&AMom]

Thank you wasn't good enough. I wanted to say that I think you are really cool.

Thanks! Could you tell my son, the bum? :floorlaugh:

Not too much about this trial upsets me. I look on it as a marathon, not a sprint. I want to win the war, not each individual battle.

Why am I talking in sports/military metaphors?! (I actually had a friend in the 1970's who claimed she was being sexually harassed by people using sports metaphors. My left eye was permanently injured during my extreme eyeroll.)

So let me put it this way: I was taking out a bunch of knitting one night and rolling the yarn back into a ball. One of my kids asked me what on earth I was doing. I told him if you aren't willing to go back and re-do what wasn't done right, you've got no business knitting. Not that I'm suggesting Juan is doing anything wrong. But I'm in for the long haul. The DT can bury us all in paper, I don't care. I'm sure JA's off to jail for the rest of her life.

 

[katiedid2]

Good point. She claims to be so worried about money to be sure and get gas at a certain place to save money, so she rents a car too....LMAO I guess she thought it got better gas mileage than her car-NOT

And of course dont get RED color rental car because it would cause her to get noticed by LE. She was afraid of more than just traffic tickets of couse.

Her car the infinity! was repossessed and the BMW she was buying from travis was jacked up by Jodie.
Jodie wasn't very stable in her actions, she was always chasing down men and their new girlfriends.
Good country western song fits Jodie!
On the road again.

 

[Ammonitida]

That is what scares me. I seriously doubt, however, they will succeed with the "manslaughter"....even if the Judge does allow it.

Premeditation is written all over this crime.

MOO

I'm probably alone on this one, but I hope this motion is granted. I'm really worried about an acquittal. This option will guarantee that no acquittal will happen.

 

[ClosArgs]

We need an excuse to start drinking? :waitasec:

Right G&A no excuses needed, I'm enjoying a wine and reading y'all's posts. For some reason still feel confident. DT can throw as much *advertiser censored* at the jury as they want. But it comes down to the events of 06/04 and whether jury is buying self defense. They have not proved any of the allegations of physical abuse, nor made them believable as they were unable to corroborate any of her testimony of physical abuse. "Alleged mental abuse" does nothing to demonstrate fear for her life on 06/04.

As for the new doctor, I find it difficult to believe they will be able to justify new evidence as they have had Doc D's report and questioned her about her testimony. Just because DT's experts were made to look lame by Juan isn't an legal basis to bring in another shrink, imo.

 

[Sleuth5]

I hear what you're saying Sleuth, but do you think the DT would have gotten away with as much latitude as they have if they were in JBP's courtroom? Other judges can run their courtroom for these high profile trials in a much more efficient manner, so why is her courtroom any different? There comes a time when the excuse that it's a DP trial just doesn't fly anymore.

I KNOW JBP rushed jury selection too fast, but even so, the actual CA trial was six weeks from opening statements to closing arguments. There HAS to be some control over what the DT is allowed to pull. It has gone beyond ridiculous IMO.

I think I'll just be honest in my response. I don't know anything about being a judge. I understand something about the law, but nothing to the level of sophistication necessary to begin to comprehend the role of the judge in the courtroom when it comes to dealing with larger appellate issues, scheduling, caseloads, etc. I don't personally want to compare her with other judges, because I think every case is different and judges certainly have their own styles.

Given that, I'm evaluating her solely based on what I see. She has been even-tempered and, from my perspective, fair in dealing with both sides. She seems supremely concerned for preserving the right of the defendant to a fair trial. For my part, that's all I can really tell from my seat out here.

Hopefully, our cadre of lawyers will not pounce upon me to express their displeasure. Please note that I have stated that I am not a judge, do not know anything about being a judge beyond the basic functions they serve in the courtroom, and am not remotely qualified to judge their performance. So, my saying that I think she's doing well is perfectly worthless as an opinion, but there it is all the same.

:cow:

 

[kaydono]

BBM. My older son spent the afternoon at the DMV (known in these parts as the MVA) trying to get his car back. I offered to discuss this case with him to pass the time and he TURNED ME DOWN. I have a call in to my lawyer to have written out of my will. :furious:

Hilarious!!! Thanks. I needed that laughter. :floorlaugh:

 

[AZWatcher]

Thanks! Could you tell my son, the bum? :floorlaugh:

Not too much about this trial upsets me. I look on it as a marathon, not a sprint. I want to win the war, not each individual battle.

Why am I talking in sports/military metaphors?! (I actually had a friend in the 1970's who claimed she was being sexually harassed by people using sports metaphors. My left eye was permanently injured during my extreme eyeroll.)

So let me put it this way: I was taking out a bunch of knitting one night and rolling the yarn back into a ball. One of my kids asked me what on earth I was doing. I told him if you aren't willing to go back and re-do what wasn't done right, you've got no business knitting. Not that I'm suggesting Juan is doing anything wrong. But I'm in for the long haul. The DT can bury us all in paper, I don't care. I'm sure JA's off to jail for the rest of her life.

Hey Everybody.... See why I dig our GA-Girl so much?

 

[ElleElle]

This trial withdrawal is getting to us I see.

With that being said, I just thought simply today.

I thought to myself, self-defense?

Self-defense does not equate to 27+ stabs wounds, a slit throat nearly decapitating, and a shot to the head. NO.

It's not that complicated if it's kept simple.

 

[geevee]

Lol, I get you, my husband wanted to know if he could sue for alienation of affection!

Hahaha That is so my hub!

 

[katiedid2]

Thanks! Could you tell my son, the bum? :floorlaugh:

Not too much about this trial upsets me. I look on it as a marathon, not a sprint. I want to win the war, not each individual battle.

Why am I talking in sports/military metaphors?! (I actually had a friend in the 1970's who claimed she was being sexually harassed by people using sports metaphors. My left eye was permanently injured during my extreme eyeroll.)

So let me put it this way: I was taking out a bunch of knitting one night and rolling the yarn back into a ball. One of my kids asked me what on earth I was doing. I told him if you aren't willing to go back and re-do what wasn't done right, you've got no business knitting. Not that I'm suggesting Juan is doing anything wrong. But I'm in for the long haul. The DT can bury us all in paper, I don't care. I'm sure JA's off to jail for the rest of her life.

Rose
Thank you for the reassurance :seeya:

 

[Nana46]

Grrrrrrrrrr....that old song and dance of 'defense has to really put on a case and they can't help they were given this defendant'....wears thin. Sure they need to do all they can to keep her from the death penalty but my word......they are going above and beyond and over the moon....it has become personal to them...they really and truly want her to win this case............IMHO.:banghead::banghead::banghead:


They friggin know she did this.

 

[G&AMom]

Fried bologna on white bread with mayo...mmmmmm

:anguish:

My mother would never have allowed bologna in any form inside our house. OTOH, she did eat scrapple. Go figure.

 

[Ammonitida]

I'm relieved on who the defense rebuttal witness is. There's little chance the motion will be granted and even if it is, there's enough dirt on this guy to destroy him on cross.

 

[katiedid2]

:anguish:

My mother would never have allowed bologna in any form inside our house. OTOH, she did eat scrapple. Go figure.

Yummiest fried boloney.:fence:

 

[LambChop]

I hear what you're saying Sleuth, but do you think the DT would have gotten away with as much latitude as they have if they were in JBP's courtroom? Other judges can run their courtroom for these high profile trials in a much more efficient manner, so why is her courtroom any different? There comes a time when the excuse that it's a DP trial just doesn't fly anymore.

I KNOW JBP rushed jury selection too fast, but even so, the actual CA trial was six weeks from opening statements to closing arguments. There HAS to be some control over what the DT is allowed to pull. It has gone beyond ridiculous IMO.

KC never testified and obviously six weeks was not enough because the jury just did not get it right. Their defense witnesses were not on the stand for 8 or 9 days each. That is part of the difference. Defense started asking Jodi about her past almost before she was born. Not really but it certainly felt that way. ALV had to give us days and days of her cases, experiences, etc. to make it appear she was so much more than she actually is. We had to go through all the different variations of test results that Dr. Samuels managed to mess up only to learn, from himself, that maybe he should have retested her when she changed her story. The State went through their case pretty fast. Defense has had this tied up for weeks. It would be far more expensive for the State to have to do it over again because the Judge denied a defense witness because she felt the defense was taking too long to present their case. It's the law and the judge has to abide by it whether the public likes it or not.

 

[Bernina]

I would like to know how that conversation came up. Didn't she call him to confirm that Travis had died? Did she then ask who was going to Cancun with him? And then did she then ask if Travis was dating Mimi? That is just odd.

She mentions it in Det. Flores's first interrogation, the one where she is still in her "civies".