a view from the inside: observations from our own court observers #4

[katiecoolady]

Wasn't the doctor incorrect saying there isn't a test to tell if she's faking amnesia?

He sure did answer that one quickly didn't he? There are checks and balances IN these tests but that PSD one, to me, seemed pretty rudimentary and not comprehensive like say the MMPI so....I don't see where veracity scales are written in to it (but hey I'm not a Dr. I just play one on Websleuths lol)

 

[Goldpan]

Exactly how I feel

Katie, I don't think there is one person - a "poster" or a "lurker" who don't appreciate the time and effort that you and that other courtroom observers who share your experiences have made. I know I appreciate all the time you have devoted to this case (OT - have you seen the pm I sent you yet?), and don't take it for granted.

I suspect that some of the OT stuff has been cleaned up off these threads by the time you see it. Personally, I think the people who "complain" about it aren't complaining about the discussion on what you are sharing. More than once I've seen people posting about what they are making for dinner, their weather, funny YouTube videos, etc. on the courtroom observers thread - that have absolutely nothing to do with the trial. IMHO, that kind of stuff doesn't belong here. Discussing what the courtroom observers have seen does.

You are welcome to tell me to "stuff it", but unless I'm really mistaken, I think that's the kind of stuff people are referring to. :twocents:

 

[katiecoolady]

(ooopps, now I'm embarrassed...that wasn't the hippocampus I was referring to..
Someone posted a pic yesterday of the back end of a hippo, and it made me think of her hippocampus being flooded and...please pay no attention to me while I blather...)

Isn't it the hippocampus? I'm all confused now....lol

 

[gamatilda]

For that to work:

1. There would have had to have been some need for deadly force against Travis BEFORE the gunshot. I guess even Jodi agrees there was no need for deadly force, because she says she had no intention of shooting him and thought the gun was unloaded.

2. The gunshot would have to have been something from which Travis could have been saved by, e.g., Jodi calling 911. In other words, it would have to not kill him.

3. The deadly threat from Travis would have to have been over after the gunshot (well, that's the easy one).

4. Jodi would have to have decided, you know what, I'm not gonna call 911 to save this creep--I'm gonna stab him to death instead.


Then, yes, she could have acted in self-defense at first and with the premeditated intent to kill later.

Thank you. I hope this jury finds her guilty. I am so worried because it only takes one person. I was wondering the above due to the fact that it could be a possibility one of the jurors believes her self defense nonsense and another juror could say that if it was SD, then why did she use excessive force to finish him off instead of wounding him enough for her to get away.

 

[tater4332]

Ditto! :seeya:

:goodpost:

I am glad that you said this. You do sooooo much and so do the other 'observers'. You owe NOTHING. I am happy to wait and scroll and refresh anytime for such insightful observations. Know you are all appreciated by a great many. :rocker:

 

[Tsunvirtual]

This came from another thread. I'd like to give credit to the poster Liebchenmutti . I don't know how to bring the post over. Appears there's a test called "Symptom Validity Testing" that can be used.


http://kristinarandle.com/blog/jodi-arias-trial-how-expert-was-dr-samuels-expert-testimony/

 

[gcharlie]

Katie:

Great notes today and I thank you so much for all that you are doing.

What is the sense of you and your courtroom buddies about how many of the jurors are asking questions? My sense is that it may be 5 to 8 of them. One person is definitely a note takers based on using exhibit numbers and the like. Probably writes questions down during breaks?

Does the jury as a whole pay more attention to testimony when the jurors questions are being asked?

My reason for asking is that we know 6 of these jurors will be alternates and may not deliberate. Thinking about the odds...

I do find it interesting that as much as people report the jury seems to be zoning out, the questions being posed show that people are paying attention.

Again, thanks. Blessings on you, your brother and Travis's family.

 

[Myvice]

Funny you should reference that song, considering this:

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2007-04-26/news/sympathy-for-the-devil/

Thanks for posting this link. It's unbelievable!

 

[katiecoolady]

Exactly how I feel

I suggest then you come up with a solution and contact the moderators with it. TIA

I'm ok with courtroom observations and discussions about them occuring on this thread unless otherwise advised. It's normal I think for people want to talk about the observations which kind of "buries" the actual posts so it creates no matter what a kind of "look for them" kind of situation. Mine are not hard to find as they all have the same kind of "look" compared to my other posts which I'm sure most have noticed.

Good luck and by the way, you're welcome.

 

[Liebchenmutti]

See? Did you find his "everyone goes in to flight first" comment also a bunch of *&#$?

I'm a fighter, too. I was kidnapped at age 13--long story short, I was in a car with a man who wouldn't let me out in rural Minnesota. He grabbed my crotch and I balled up my fist and hit him, screaming "Don't' you f-ing touch me!!!" Later I had to calm him down and persuade him to stop the car by promising I wouldn't call the police. I'll never forget that adrenaline when my feet touched the sidewalk--I ran almost 5 miles without pause, and I could have run even more.

I also had a man walk into my apt in Houston while I was naked & drying my hair in the bathroom--I dropped the dryer and started SCREAMING at him to get out--I was walking towards him just making this horrible screaming & f-bombs, and my neighbors said the guy looked traumatized when he ran out. He had been peeping in my window, I later found out.

There is no way for Samuels to "diagnose" all human beings and decide what they would do in any situation.

 

[LambChop]

And since I'm wishin' ~ dinner will be served at the HUGE beautiful sunny 10 bedroom / 10 bathroom fully furnished house we just secured for the duration of this trial for Travis' precious family. Enough seats at the table for all... sigh..That'd be nice..

Don't forget the pool. lol

 

[Liebchenmutti]

Solution For Those Adversely Affected by OT Chatter in this Thread:

Click on Katiecoolady's name and click 'Find All Posts'

You will then have all of her posts in one shot--no OT posts!​

 

[sparrowivy]

:goodpost:

I am glad that you said this. You do sooooo much and so do the other 'observers'. You owe NOTHING. I am happy to wait and scroll and refresh anytime for such insightful observations. Know you are all appreciated by a great many. :rocker:

I want to jump on this band wagon and give BIG OLD WHOOP *advertiser censored* shout outs to Katie (the Cool One) and (Ms. Pasa) and all others who take HOURS of their personal time to just inform US! Wow! What an amazingly generous, loving and giving women these are and I for one am sooo eternally grateful! When I got the permission to report, with stipulations, I take em and send em to those who I know care or ask. I always give credit back to these wonderful people.

I don't think you Ladies know how very much it means to THOUSANDS of us who read them! You don't get near enough credit. So, as you say, "Keeping it real," - Show some respect!

Sparrow Ivy

 

[brouhaha]

I think Samuels is coming across more as a 'defender' of JA now more than ever. I feel certain will be even more apparent after JM finishes with him Monday.

KCL.. did you notice any type of reaction from the jury from his overly used and rehearsed "possible but not probable" lines? That is such a cop out statement.

I keep hoping JM will show the jury the front of his webpage that mentions a "more favorable outcome for your client"

 

[katiecoolady]

Katie:

Great notes today and I thank you so much for all that you are doing.

What is the sense of you and your courtroom buddies about how many of the jurors are asking questions? My sense is that it may be 5 to 8 of them. One person is definitely a note takers based on using exhibit numbers and the like. Probably writes questions down during breaks?

Does the jury as a whole pay more attention to testimony when the jurors questions are being asked?

My reason for asking is that we know 6 of these jurors will be alternates and may not deliberate. Thinking about the odds...

I do find it interesting that as much as people report the jury seems to be zoning out, the questions being posed show that people are paying attention.

Again, thanks. Blessings on you, your brother and Travis's family.

You're welcome. Even though I'm being semi snotty today this all really is a labor of love for me. I just don't enjoy "entitlement" in any area of my life.

Ok to your questions:

I think your 5-8 is probably pretty accurate:

I'm thinking CEO, Paul R, Nancy, Tricolor, Housewife (for sure, lots), Ponytail, Maureen, maybe Barb and that ONE question that I saw coming down from the Wrestler are our questioners. I really hope Tri color and HW stay on the jury as they are taking TONS of notes. And of course I'm sticking with my CEO fantasy foreperson.

I agree, their questions definitely show they are paying attention. And the ones with the good notes will steer the ship and keep things on track in terms of reality.

I just don't see much dissension in deliberation but that's just how I see it through my particular set of Martinez colored glasses.

 

[vallie]

did you know that if you have PTSD, you are not required or forced to re-enact or recall the incidence in detail.? Just seems convenient to have Jodi diagnosed with PTSD , and make us believe she can't remember and explain her lying and fog? Seems like they covering her selective memory with a fake diagnosis and hope the jury buys is. How convenient for her.

 

[katiecoolady]

I think Samuels is coming across more as a 'defender' of JA now more than ever. I feel certain will be even more apparent after JM finishes with him Monday.

KCL.. did you notice any type of reaction from the jury from his overly used and rehearsed "possible but not probable" lines? That is such a cop out statement.

I keep hoping JM will show the jury the front of his webpage that mentions a "more favorable outcome for your client"

YES I did see a reaction from that. And it was, they were not taking notes. :great:

 

[fuzzybutter]

Whatever people think of how Judge Stephens is running the courtroom, she is working like a dog. Go to Maricopa county superior court site and look up her schedule. She has hearings in the same room right up until JA's case starts. Everything she does in the courtroom requires background work--judges don't just come in without any prep. Another thing about the schedule--this trial has had trial dates beginning in 2010, that for various reasons (mostly defense, but some from the state). Other trials can't be held up waiting for this trial to start. Martinez even asked at various times to move the trial because of scheduling conflicts. I am guessing that Maricopa County is as financial stressed as any other municipality in the country. They can only work with what they have.

 

[katiecoolady]

did you know that if you have PTSD, you are not required or forced to re-enact or recall the incidence in detail.? Just seems convenient to have Jodi diagnosed with PTSD , and make us believe she can't remember and explain her lying and fog? Seems like they covering her selective memory with a fake diagnosis and hope the jury buys is. How convenient for her.

Exactly..and the things she "remembers" are so convenient like Travis "threatening her life" and washing blood off her hands and disposing of things in a dumpster. Yet we know she did TONS of other complicated tasks such as deleting photos from an unknown to her camera, run a load of laundry, retrieve and pack up a non existent rope, pack up her car in such a way it was not COVERED in blood as she must have been. She was quite organized in fact. And yet he claims all someone can do during that "amnesia" are just instinctual life saving tasks. Last I checked, deleting photos from a camera isn't "life saving".

I think JM will discredit all of these things on his next cross. I imagine Alyce La Violette showing up in court in a suit of armor at this point.

 

[Tsunvirtual]

Do you remember when he was writing something in his notes on redirect and Juan busted him? He was in front of god and everybody on the witness stand doing that. How could we expect him not to change his answers to be more favorable as soon as he's out of sight?