Aggravated waiting for the aggravation phase #6

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
noonie said:
Tomorrow surely will be very interesting indeed. Will she wear glasses? wear make-up? Hmmmmm She thought all this out well. Probably don't listen to JW anymore. Will do her own thing. Hurry tomorrow!!!! Can't wait!
Click to expand...

Even if Jodi comes into court tomorrow with a change in appearance, this jury will not feel any differently about her than they have previously. They didn't buy her "act" during the trial, and they won't allow themselves to be manipulated during the Aggravation phase. These jurors know exactly who Jodi Arias is - with or without glasses, makeup, trendy apparel, etc. She's a calculating, cold-blooded murderer, and there's nothing attractive about it. :moo:
 
I finally broke down and watched that interview and I have a couple of questions for those who have followed this for a long time.

JA said something like one or more of her siblings saw bruises that she claims came from TA beating her but that her attorneys didn't put them on the stand for reasons of their own...any clue what she is talking about or is this just more lies?

I heard during Nurmis closing and again as part of this interview that JM supposedly withheld discovery information concerning the texts and messages...whats the deal with that accusation?

TIA
 
spooky.jpg

Much as this freaks me out, the more I look at it the more I think they HAD to know she was there. I dunno.
 
Itsy said:
(respectfully snipped)
Yep, she'll be the Queen Bee if she ends up in GP, IMO :facepalm:
Click to expand...

<ahem>

she's not fit to shine my stinger :D

can't wait until tomorrow!!! justice is so sweet............
 
Melanie said:
I'm glad she's getting a bit of solitary confinement - it must be driving her mad. 23 hours in her cell and one hour to take a shower and make phone calls.

I guess we're in for some tweets!

MOO

Mel
Click to expand...

And no one to take advantage of except herself!
 
Steft50 said:
I finally broke down and watched that interview and I have a couple of questions for those who have followed this for a long time.

JA said something like one or more of her siblings saw bruises that she claims came from TA beating her but that her attorneys didn't put them on the stand for reasons of their own...any clue what she is talking about or is this just more lies?

I heard during Nurmis closing and again as part of this interview that JM supposedly withheld discovery information concerning the texts and messages...whats the deal with that accusation?

TIA
Click to expand...

here's my rule of thumb, if Jodi says it, it's a lie.

of course her attorneys would have withheld exculpatory evidence from the jury, ask Jodi and it will because she turned them both down for sexual favors (hmmm... truth or lie, I'm guessing "lie") ........ every layer of lies (even the ones I'm making up) is just another layer of richness.

I think we should poll on the next storyline......somehow she is going to work the CIA into her next version (oh the SNL with Joid answering Benghazi questions was pretty funny)
 
Steft50 said:
I finally broke down and watched that interview and I have a couple of questions for those who have followed this for a long time.

JA said something like one or more of her siblings saw bruises that she claims came from TA beating her but that her attorneys didn't put them on the stand for reasons of their own...any clue what she is talking about or is this just more lies?

I heard during Nurmis closing and again as part of this interview that JM supposedly withheld discovery information concerning the texts and messages...whats the deal with that accusation?

TIA
Click to expand...

Rumour (no link) is the person who saw the bruises was Matt McCartney. This is from a site, that I'd prefer not to list here -- so take it for what it's worth.

I personally witnessed the purple finger shaped bruises on her neck. She originally claimed was from a seat belt. Later, after much debate, she admitted they were from him. She assured me that: “He is a good man” and “He didn’t mean it”.

There was much angst between MM and JM, who after finding out about the forged letters, said if he testified he would be impeached before his butt hit the witness chair (or words to that effect).

MOO

Mel
 
lil_buddy said:
It really bugs me that https://www.facebook.com/Justice4Travis
is targeting JA's sister.

I would post, but there's no way I'm gonna let my name be tracked there.
Click to expand...

That's why I am here...no way I am gonna have my name out there. Ain't nobody else in the world with my name, so if one were to google it, my life is there for all to see. Not that I have anything to hide and everything to be proud of...I just like my privacy.

In this electronic age, it is scary to see what kind of footprint a person leaves. This trial and other news proves that more and more each day (think of the Boston Marathon bombing).
 
Steft50 said:
I finally broke down and watched that interview and I have a couple of questions for those who have followed this for a long time.

JA said something like one or more of her siblings saw bruises that she claims came from TA beating her but that her attorneys didn't put them on the stand for reasons of their own...any clue what she is talking about or is this just more lies?

I heard during Nurmis closing and again as part of this interview that JM supposedly withheld discovery information concerning the texts and messages...whats the deal with that accusation?

TIA
Click to expand...

I think it's pretty safe to say none of that is true. Notice how she ups the severity of the abuse and the marks it left. She also increases the amount of people that know about the abuse from just Matt M. to her sister and a few other people.

She really thinks people are stupid. She thinks if she puts it out there we'll think it's the truth. Common sense tells you that if these things existed they would have been used. If Angela really did see the bruises she would have been put on the stand, assuming she has no credibility issues, as Matt does.

Also, re: discovery violation, again, she thinks if she says this people will just assume it to be true. Common sense says if Juan had violated discovery and with held info the attorneys would have gotten a re-trial with the new evidence. Common sense says Juan didn't withhold anything because they were still able to use damning texts against him. I don't think she actually knows what a discovery violation is. Motioning and having the motion granted to have certain texts and emails withheld is not a discovery violation. Discovery violation is when the state has info that could help the defense and doesn't turn it over. It's apparent Juan did not do that and would not do that. He's not stupid.
 
SusieD said:
Jodi waived her right to counsel.

At one point in the interview when it sounds like she's going to confess, she tells Flores that maybe she should talk to a lawyer first. (On Law & Order, where the mere mention of an attorney would have shut the interview down) Just to get it right, what she's going to say (paraphrasing here)

Then Jodi asks what will happen when she talks to a lawyer and Flores says that their relationship would be at an end because an attorney wouldn't let her talk to him and he's not hanging around Yreka once she has a lawyer.

Guess who decided she'd rather continue to try to seduce Flores with her patented pelvic thrusts than talk to a lawyer?

It was a very interesting sequence in the tape.
Click to expand...

I didn't see that part of the tape...so interesting! Thank God she didn't have a lawyer!! I don't think it would have mattered whether she had a lawyer or not...remember in the 48 hrs and Inside Edition interviews she had an attorney then who I"M SURE advised AGAINST her doing it. And in this latest debacle - post-interview verdict - she obviously has counsel here working very hard to defend her....so thus it's obvious she doesn't listen to anyone's advice...lol.
 
AZWatcher said:
I can't think of any reporter who would have turned down that interview with Jodi minutes after her conviction. I also think editing out the offensive parts would have been doing HER a favor. Let her hang herself with her own words.
Click to expand...

Anderson Cooper might have said no. Or at the very least edited it to take out all her vile slams. He just seems to have a slight bit more integrity than other media TH's, IMO. (Basing this on his Boston Bomber coverage, he refused to throw out *advertiser censored* that was not a confirmed fact, left the rumors to others. I respect him for that).
 
Sherazhad said:
There's been much criticism about the reporter Troy who interviewed JA. I totally disagree. Nancy Grace does not let her guests speak & brings every comment back to herself, usually whilst near to hysteria. The best thing Troy did is to let her talk & hang herself & she did that beautifully, giving JM plenty ammunition for the next phase. She repeated her accusations, but all that did is reinforce she is unrepentant & made everyone dislike her even more. If he had gone in all guns blazing she would have shut down & played the victim.
Click to expand...

I disagree....Troy allowed her to spew more vile lies about Travis Alexander. For his 15 minutes of "fame"....he and Jodi were a duo. She got what she wanted and he did too. May the soul of Travis haunt them both, forever. :twocents:
 
Where is her dear friend Matt? Her siblings?

....not even sitting in the galley


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 124 more.
Total: 2,719 (members: 125, guests: 2,594)

Online statistics

Members online
125
Guests online
2,594
Total visitors
2,719
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,279
Messages
18,121,837
Members
230,996
Latest member
unnamedTV
Back
Top