Book released by Defense Attorney, Nov 2015 #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
I'm sorry to read that L. Nurmi has cancer. Having lost my father to brain cancer and having nearly lost my husband to leukemia, I'm all too familiar with the battle he is facing, and I wish for him a full recovery.

That said, I also hope for his sake that he finds the strength within to let go of his anger--so palatable in what I've read, and his targets seem to be many.

He says he refuses to allow cancer to take over his life and how he lives it. Why then allow a twisted sadistic murderer to do so?

He says he hopes that in the writing of his book it will become clearer to him what the "gift" was in an otherwise unbearable experience. I wish that he could open his mind and heart enough to see the gift that has been there all along. It is only because Nurmi has judged Travis so harshly that he can't see that young man's life and words as the gift he's seeking. Look, Nurmi, open your eyes.

We "The Trial Watchers" understand fully that Travis was flawed, that he struggled to live up to all that was expected of him, that he failed sometimes, that he wasn't always honest with himself or with others, that he didn't always make the best decisions, that he was insecure in some basic ways but that his show of ego often masked his insecurity.

Sound familiar?

The gift, Nurmi, is understanding that to be flawed in all those ways is simply to be human. The gift is to be able to forgive oneself for being imperfect, AND, as Travis insisted upon doing, always working towards being a better person. The gift is in seeing huge obstacles- the very things one feels "trapped" by, as "stepping stones." Remember?

The gift, if you choose to see it, genuinely is in the legacy Travis left that has inspired so many others. Travis was a flawed wonderful human being, who with every excuse and reason available to him to sink into self-hatred, despair, and aimlessness, chose instead to be generous, compassionate, successful, and spiritual. His choice. He made that choice daily, even on the too many days in the last few months of his life when he faced losing everything he had worked so hard to attain.

I have a feeling, L. Nurmi, that part of your condemnation of Travis comes from a belief that he was weak. Too weak to live the life he wanted, too weak to decisively banish his killer from his life. I think that it is on this point you understand him not at all.

Of course Travis liked having sex with the killer, but that's not why he allowed her to remain in his life. As his friends have all said- Travis felt sorry for her. He helped her financially and emotionally because he was generous and compassionate, because, as he told his disapproving friends, he believed she didn't have anyone else. Perhaps he even identified with her in that? Perhaps he remembered all too clearly his high school days, friendless, feeling nerdy and outcast and needy?

Even after she had invaded his privacy a thousand times over, even after she had interfered with his relationships and friendships, this is a man who told friends that what bothered him most of all was knowing that she was causing herself pain by doing so. Can you imagine, he told Taylor, how much it must have hurt her to hear me say I love you to Lisa?

That is not weakness. Naiviety, perhaps, but more so compassion, empathy, love.

Travis lived his belief that there is divinity within all of us. He was as intent upon nurturing it in others as he was in developing that quality within himself. Even on May 26, even at the most angry he likely had ever been as an adult, for most of the conversation with his killer he was trying to get her to admit to her lies for herself. As he said- " don't you see that YOU are the cause of what is wrong in your life"?

One of the very last things Travis ever wrote, just over a week before he was killed, was this in his journal:

"It's better to trust too much than too little."

Those aren't the words of a weak man, L. Nurmi, nor of a coward. They are the words of an exceptionally courageous young man determined, despite the risks, to live fully and to keep his heart open.

L. Nurmi- forgive yourself and move on. And for your own sake- postpone writing book 2 until you've given yourself a chance to find some peace.
 
I'm sorry to read that L. Nurmi has cancer. Having lost my father to brain cancer and having nearly lost my husband to leukemia, I'm all too familiar with the battle he is facing, and I wish for him a full recovery.

That said, I also hope for his sake that he finds the strength within to let go of his anger--so palatable in what I've read, and his targets seem to be many.

He says he refuses to allow cancer to take over his life and how he lives it. Why then allow a twisted sadistic murderer to do so? He says he hopes that in the writing of his book it will become clearer to him what the "gift" was in an otherwise unbearable experience. I wish that he could open his mind and heart enough to see the gift that has been there all along.

It is only because Nurmi has judged Travis so harshly that he can't see that young man's life and words as the gift he's seeking. Look, Nurmi, open your eyes.

We "The Trial Watchers" understand fully that Travis was flawed, that he struggled to live up to all that was expected of him, that he failed sometimes, that he wasn't always honest with himself or with others, that he didn't always make the best decisions, that he was insecure in some basic ways but that his show of ego often masked his insecurity.

Sound familiar?

The gift, Nurmi, is understanding that to be flawed in all those ways is simply to be human. The gift is to be able to forgive oneself for being imperfect, AND, as Travis insisted upon doing, always working towards being a better person. The gift is in seeing huge obstacles- the very things one feels "trapped" by, as "stepping stones." Remember?

The gift, if you choose to see it, genuinely is in the legacy Travis left that has inspired so many others. Travis was a flawed wonderful human being, who with every excuse and reason available to him to sink into self-hatred, despair, and aimlessness , chose instead to be generous, compassionate, successful, and spiritual. His choice. He made that choice daily, even on the too many days in the last few months of his life when he faced losing everything he had worked so hard to attain.

L. Nurmi- forgive yourself and move on. And for your own sake- postpone writing book 2 until you've given yourself a chance to find some peace.


So beautifully written Hope4more! Thank you for your wonderful insight and wisdom!!
 
I wonder....Did KN not make a comment about not being a lawyer in the future because of writing these books? I thought I read it somewhere on WS. Anyway, I looked at his website, he appears to be the only lawyer in his office. The cases that he 'takes on' are not the easiest, so there is no other lawyer to take some of the load. I am wondering if he will be closing his office due to health issues or doctors recommendations besides the fact of any backlash he will get on these books and from the murderer. Time will tell.

Is KN wife a lawyer? Thought if so, she could help,him?!
 
Trapped with Ms. Arias

Chapter 43

Dealing With the Media Before Trial

L was "not always thrilled with how the media conducted themselves during the trial. Many seem to attribute this...that I have.... disdain for all media outlets. That is not true"

L feels that "anyone accused of a crime deserves a fair trial. Not a trial tainted by media"

L states that "certain media outlets can infringe upon those rights...they demonize the accused and all of those around them before that person's guilt is established"

L states it was his job as murderer's atty to stop this- "either eliminate or limit"

-before trial- contesting media to cover trial that might affect outcome of trial

- didn't really care about social media (unless jurors were viewing it)- didn't care about the murderer's image "only that she got a fair trial"

-didn't care about webcasts, local news coverage of trial (they were outside courtroom)

-was concerned about "bombastic coverage....on cable " TV "where trials are treated as blood sports...battles between good and evil, where the accused and those who might speak on his or her behalf are vilified as being evil wherein the prosecutor can do no wrong because he or she is on the side of the good and the righteous." (pg. 244)

L calls the networks/commentators " 'anti-constitutional terrorists' ...[who]show no respect for our constitution and preach fear and intimidation against those who wish to exercise their constitutional rights"

"However,...on those who say I had no business contesting such things because Ms. Arias chose to take part in interviews before trial...argument was made before trial.....[it is] not legally valid. No defendant can waive his or her constitutional rights by being stupid...[this] did not give the media the right to exploit her trial to the point that it became unfair" (pg. 244)

pre-trial publicity:

-when L received case 2009- most coverage by media was CBS "48 Hours" in 2008 interviews- one when the murderer was in Calif. and one in AZ- also interview by murderer in AZ with Inside Edition ("no jury will convict me")

closer to trial- L began getting calls from news stations "who wanted to establish some sort of relationship with me"- take him to dinner/drinks "just to chat..[in hopes it] would lead to a slip of the tongue or some morsel they could use on their next broadcast"

but L thought that "real goal" was to have him "obligated to interview with them when the trial was over"

he said "No" to them

he was intrigued by BBC who wanted to follow him around filming him "throughout the trial process"- BBC wanted to create documentary- tell tale of DP process or how defense attys are "expressed to the viewer"

-L thought this documentary "might actually change a few minds on the subject of the" DP

-but L didn't want cameras following him "I lived a low-key life....I had no desire to be a reality television personality"

L states that he had no control about cameras in courtroom- up to courts- media would have to get court's permission- media, "primarily CNN" had "potential for huge profit" - more than willing to pay an atty (very expensive) to win right to film trial/live stream on internet

L worried that this would "cause a frenzy that would lead to witnesses being being harassed and jurors being exposed to harmful pre-trial coverage"

became battle between murderer's right fair trial/media's right report the news

media's argument before trial- " 'we can do what we want' "

L's argument- " 'not if it interferes with my client's right to a fair trial' "- witnesses could be threatened, jurors could be exposed to pretrial publicity

state and media's response to L's argument "were speculative, that I was guessing. While technically true, that is one of the most illogical arguments of all of them because we always speculate based on known facts that is what we do in the law" (pg. 247)

L looking back- states he was right

media won right to film trial

"I would be stunned if the media's actions during this case do not make their way into Ms. Arias' appeal"
=========================================

Chapter 44

WE Gotta Get Out of Town or Shut the Jury Down


every motion L filed, it seemed to him, "would be analyzed for hours either by news organizations and/or social media"

L states that 2 of his "most important" motions received little attention

-"perhaps ....were not discussed because they portrayed the media in a bad light...not 'sexy' enough to drive ratings"

-motions to "change venue and to sequester the jury"

-L explains "venue", "sequester"

-would be negligent if he hadn't file those motions

L states that, as to "venue", jurors of Maricopa County might be "biased against" the murderer because of pretrial publicity

L states that he "knew that there was almost no chance my motion would be granted...rarely granted....are rarely filed"

"personally" L wasn't disappointed because if motion was accepted- venue changed- he would have to live in whatever town the trial was moved to "for the duration of the trial"- inconvenient for all involved-lots of money- hotel rooms, etc., but he was willing to have "venue" changed "the Constitution means that much to me"

L states, as to "sequester", jurors could be "exposed to extraneous information...not learned in the courtroom"

"..a juror cannot render their verdict even to the slightest degree on information that they learned outside of the courtroom" (pg. 250)

L thought that "sequester" motion would be denied

- jurors would have to give up "several months" both professional and personal, of their lives

L states that because of "gravity of the case and the amount of publicity... potential for the jury to be exposed to extraneous information and opinions was too high...could be grounds for a mistrial and/or...conviction to be overthrown on appeal" (pg, 250)

L states, if he were judge, he would have granted motion, but understands why Judge Stephens denied it
================================================== =====================

Chapter 45

The So-Called Delays

too many delays according to social media

"...those who assert this theory seem to believe that I caused these delays intentionally because I wanted to drag things out so I could make more money or for some other absurd reason"

L discuss why delays before 1st trial were necessary

late summer 2009- few months before case was scheduled to go trial:

-L and Ms. Washington (former Co-counsel) received case only 2 months at that time- not enough time to prepare for upcoming trial- judge gave them a year to prepare
next delay- scheduling issues for all involved- for L and Ms. Washington, JM, judge

August, 2011- trial date set- then DV expert became ill (see chap. 37)- Judge Stephens gave them new trial date- November, 2011, but OPD asked to withdraw (see Chap. 38)- Willmott was involved with lengthy manslaughter trial

2012 holiday season- picking jury- trial started 1/2/2013

End of Section 8 (pg. 253)
====================================

Next:

Section 9
What Did I Have on My Hands

Chapter 46
So What Now?

Chapter 47
What Did I Believe Happened on June 4, 2008

Chapter 48
What I Believed the State Would Argue

End of Section 9 (pg. 281)
================================================== =======================
 
Nurmi needs to stop complaining about the criticism he recieved in the social media. Did he forget he started a Twitter account as well as that joke of a mitigation specialist? I don't believe a word that comes out of his mouth. This is a bitter man that got his feelings hurt and this book of his is his turn to diss those that hurt his widdle feelies.
 
I'm sorry to read that L. Nurmi has cancer. Having lost my father to brain cancer and having nearly lost my husband to leukemia, I'm all too familiar with the battle he is facing, and I wish for him a full recovery.

That said, I also hope for his sake that he finds the strength within to let go of his anger--so palatable in what I've read, and his targets seem to be many.

He says he refuses to allow cancer to take over his life and how he lives it. Why then allow a twisted sadistic murderer to do so?

He says he hopes that in the writing of his book it will become clearer to him what the "gift" was in an otherwise unbearable experience. I wish that he could open his mind and heart enough to see the gift that has been there all along. It is only because Nurmi has judged Travis so harshly that he can't see that young man's life and words as the gift he's seeking. Look, Nurmi, open your eyes.

We "The Trial Watchers" understand fully that Travis was flawed, that he struggled to live up to all that was expected of him, that he failed sometimes, that he wasn't always honest with himself or with others, that he didn't always make the best decisions, that he was insecure in some basic ways but that his show of ego often masked his insecurity.

Sound familiar?

The gift, Nurmi, is understanding that to be flawed in all those ways is simply to be human. The gift is to be able to forgive oneself for being imperfect, AND, as Travis insisted upon doing, always working towards being a better person. The gift is in seeing huge obstacles- the very things one feels "trapped" by, as "stepping stones." Remember?

The gift, if you choose to see it, genuinely is in the legacy Travis left that has inspired so many others. Travis was a flawed wonderful human being, who with every excuse and reason available to him to sink into self-hatred, despair, and aimlessness, chose instead to be generous, compassionate, successful, and spiritual. His choice. He made that choice daily, even on the too many days in the last few months of his life when he faced losing everything he had worked so hard to attain.

I have a feeling, L. Nurmi, that part of your condemnation of Travis comes from a belief that he was weak. Too weak to live the life he wanted, too weak to decisively banish his killer from his life. I think that it is on this point you understand him not at all.

Of course Travis liked having sex with the killer, but that's not why he allowed her to remain in his life. As his friends have all said- Travis felt sorry for her. He helped her financially and emotionally because he was generous and compassionate, because, as he told his disapproving friends, he believed she didn't have anyone else. Perhaps he even identified with her in that? Perhaps he remembered all too clearly his high school days, friendless, feeling nerdy and outcast and needy?

Even after she had invaded his privacy a thousand times over, even after she had interfered with his relationships and friendships, this is a man who told friends that what bothered him most of all was knowing that she was causing herself pain by doing so. Can you imagine, he told Taylor, how much it must have hurt her to hear me say I love you to Lisa?

That is not weakness. Naiviety, perhaps, but more so compassion, empathy, love.

Travis lived his belief that there is divinity within all of us. He was as intent upon nurturing it in others as he was in developing that quality within himself. Even on May 26, even at the most angry he likely had ever been as an adult, for most of the conversation with his killer he was trying to get her to admit to her lies for herself. As he said- " don't you see that YOU are the cause of what is wrong in your life"?

One of the very last things Travis ever wrote, just over a week before he was killed, was this in his journal:

"It's better to trust too much than too little."

Those aren't the words of a weak man, L. Nurmi, nor of a coward. They are the words of an exceptionally courageous young man determined, despite the risks, to live fully and to keep his heart open.

L. Nurmi- forgive yourself and move on. And for your own sake- postpone writing book 2 until you've given yourself a chance to find some peace.

Dont post much anymore, excellent post and spot on.
 
Legally Speaking: Kirk Nurmi Interview - Part 4

[video=youtube;oVHr2cXovUc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVHr2cXovUc[/video]
 
Does anyone else wonder if the (several) delays regarding JM's book have something to do with Nurmi's book and the subsequent revelation of a cancer diagnosis? Do you think they (his publishers) are re-tooling things? Just wondering...

I was wondering that also because I got an e-mail from Amazon that said I won't get the book until Feb. 26th. They have extended It again from the first time I pre-ordered.
 
Hope,

Inspiring post. You should send this to L. Nurmi, I too believe he let the forest overshadow his view of the trees. I do think he is struggling with his conscience... and he should.
 
Hope,

Inspiring post. You should send this to L. Nurmi, I too believe he let the forest overshadow his view of the trees. I do think he is struggling with his conscience... and he should.


Maybe I will send it to him, though like others, I believe he reads here. If I do it will be because- very much to my own surprise- I genuinely feel compassion for him. The killer has already caused more than enough harm.
 
Maybe I will send it to him, though like others, I believe he reads here. If I do it will be because- very much to my own surprise- I genuinely feel compassion for him. The killer has already caused more than enough harm.



Good. Sometimes it takes a good smack upside the head to make someone see what is so evident to others, your post is that smack!!! I feel compassion for him as well, but until he rids himself of everything #281129, he is not going to heal. Hopefully deep down within his heart he will come to realize just how dangerous and vile she was for him. I realize he had to defend her, but NOT at the expense of dragging the true victim, *Travis* through endless miles of sludge. I wish L. Nurmi all the best in life and truly hope he beats cancer. Stress isn't doing him any good.
 
I too wish Nurmi a full and speedy recovery. "Complete remission" is a possibility, as far as his actual cancer is concerned. The spiritual/psychological "cancer" Jodi Arias has brought into his life, however, will probably be with him forever, one way or another.

Because our legal system "guarantees" (with varying degrees of success) the rights of the accused, even when the accused is a monster, there are no doubt many lawyers who are struggling with the after-effects of cancerous clients. Hopefully they are able to support one another.
 
I too wish Nurmi a full and speedy recovery. "Complete remission" is a possibility, as far as his actual cancer is concerned. The spiritual/psychological "cancer" Jodi Arias has brought into his life, however, will probably be with him forever, one way or another.

Because our legal system "guarantees" (with varying degrees of success) the rights of the accused, even when the accused is a monster, there are no doubt many lawyers who are struggling with the after-effects of cancerous clients. Hopefully they are able to support one another.



What a good post, and yes, Ms. Arias was a true cancer. She is, was, and always will be PATHETIC.
 
Trapped with Ms. Arias

Section 9

What Did I Have on My Hands


L will discuss:

in Chap. 46 - assessment on "what I had ...from a evidentiary standpoint"

in Chap. 47- what he "believed (as opposed to what I believe now)" happened on June 4, 2008

in Chap. 48- he shares belief " 'What I believed the State would argue' "
================================================== ====

Chapter 46

So What Now?


L had "a ton of evidence....like handling 5 death penalty cases at once"

L states that most DP cases have 6 file boxes- the murderer's case- 30 boxes, hours of videos, audios

L gives "general idea of the reality that I saw before me in the fall of 2012":

-"...rather than being a 'former girlfriend' of Mr. Alexander.....Ms. Arias was still involved in a relationship with Mr. Alexander. At the time the two likely would have labeled thsis relationship a friendship...they sure acted like a couple....were having a sexual relationship..traveled together, use each other's cars...would talk or communicate in some fashion if not every day then darn close to it....What label would you place on this relationship?"

"..when I say they acted as a couple...I'm not saying that this was some sort of healthy loving relationship, far from it as sometimes they treated each other horribly."
(pg. 258)

L saw relationship (in fall, 2013) as " clearly toxic"- sexual part- made it "more than a friendship" which "added to the toxicity"

L states that he thought their "connection ... was hard to put a label on....that evidence might make explaining this relationship even more difficult....the true relationship was really only something that the two of them know....could be true of any relationship, but the way I saw it, what was going on here was more than a matter of privacy..."

L states that most friends/loves ones know who you are seeing/"significant other"

"In contrast, to those in Mr. Alexander's world the two were friends at most and at the least Ms. Arias was a 'scary stalker girlfriend'. Those who thought Ms. Arias was the crazy ex-girlfriend [or just friends] thought this because of what Mr. Alexander had told them."

in 2012, L states- TA and murderer didn't tell anyone "full extent of their relationship. However, it seemed to me that at least one of them took active steps to divert attention from the true nature of their relationship" (pg. 259)

with evidence, L had to "consider"- murderer was "crazy ex-girlfriend"- wouldn't leave TA alone- by slashing tires- sending "former girlfriend Lisa a cryptic email"

but- Det. Flores (on 48 Hours interview) said no evidence did those things- "Incidentally, that remains true today"

L still states- why TA still involved with murderer "at all, let alone sexually"?

"The text messages and other electronic communications demonstrated to me that Ms. Arias was intensely loyal to " TA - she would "take his verbal grenades over and over again, yet she never let them deter her from the relationship... no matter what Mr. Alexander would say to Ms. Arias it never diminished the love she seemingly had for him....however angry Mr. Alexander may have been....it never seemed to diminish" his "desire to maintain his relationship with her....he would call ...horrible names but never acted like he wanted the relationship to end...never took steps to permanently cease contact..never sought out a restraining order...instead...continued to communicate....have sex with .."

"Thus, in my mind, he either truly cared for this woman or he was using her for sex, there are no other explanation. 'Facts are stubborn things' " (pg. 259)

L states sex tape told him they had intense sexual relationship- "forbidden" by their religion- added intensity

"Based on what I had heard on the sex tape and what I had seen in the nude pictures, this sexual relationship was something that some might consider kinky and/or wild....seemed to me there is no way that this forbidden sexual behavior was something that they truly regretted because there seemed nothing tame about their sex life. The sex tape also made me consider the fact that Mr. Alexander might have had a sexual interest in children because in this tape he compared Ms. Arias' orgasm to that of a 12 year old girl. He also talked about corking the pot of a 12 year old girl. It never made any sense to me why he would say such things if he did not have such an interest. with my experience as a sex crimes attorney and my knowledge of his background I felt that if he had such an attraction he had likely been a victim of sexual abuse as a child. Could I conclude any of this definitively? No, but the evidence pointed in that direction" (pg. 260)

on what happened on 6/4/2008- initial thoughts crime scene-in fall, 2011- any evidence obtained did not change L's mind on how TA was killed

"I still believe that the crime scene was fueled by passion that the evidence pointed to the reality that a brutal struggle took place that day that ended in one lover having killed the other" (pg. 260)

But the murderer had changed her story - "While it is true that Ms. Arias changed her story, I would challenge you to come up with a single piece of evidence that I should have viewed differently once the change occurred"

the murderer's testimony: the murderer claims-

-she stated that- traveling from southern Calif- decided to "give into" TA's "request" - to visit him in Mesa

- she arrived at house "around 4 am on the morning of June 4, 2018"

-"several minutes after her arrival, the two went to sleep and woke up in the early afternoon...[she] woke up first..took a shower...after Mr. Alexander woke up the couple had sex....took photographs of each other. After...the two hung out...went to" TA's "office sometime before 5pm to look at a CD containing pictures of their travels....the CD would not work" TA "displayed his anger by throwing the CD across his office...had sex again...[TA] took a shower."

-"As the story goes, Mr. Alexander consents to Ms. Arias taking 'tasteful ' pictures of him in the shower....[she] drops the camera...[TA] jumps out of the shower and attacks [her] by throwing her to the ground....[she] eventually breaks free...runs into his closet and grabs a gun, Mr. Alexander's gun as she tells it. [she ] points this gun at [him] who tries to tackle her 'like a linebacker'..during this interaction the gun goes off...[TA] gets shot in the face. Further struggles ensues and [she] picks up a knife and nothing is recalled by [her] until she is driving near the Grand Canyon."

"without disclosing confidential information, that was her story and she was sticking to it. Did the physical evidence change because she changed her story? No......the physical evidence at the crime scene demonstrated that there was a struggle, it did not definitely portray the motive of the killer other than the fact that Ms. Arias was determined not to stop until she had killed Mr. Alexander" (pg. 260)

L reiterates what "he was left with"- 2 people in intense relationship, who were " 'addicted' " to each other which "could have been based on sexual chemistry..on the unhealthy love they seemed to have for each other....or psychological traumas they experienced as children...still dealing with" (pg. 261)

L felt that it seemed to him that they "were definitely addicted to each other"- doesn't know why- "apart from" for the murderer "returning to Yreka, it seemed that neither of them took meaningful steps to end this addiction"

he had a client with no "prior criminal history who killed her lover....stabbed him 27 times, shot him, slit his throat and was claiming self-defense."

did he believe her? No

"..what I believed was not important in a court of law. With few exceptions the client gets to tell their own story" (pg. 262)

(continued)
 
Trapped with Ms. Arias (continued)

Chapter 47

What Did I Believe Happened on June 4, 2008


this is what L thought happened before trial began

"The theory I had then and the theory I have now are vastly different...there are only a few aspects of my thinking about what happened that day that has remained consistent from the first day that I received the file until the present day.....most prominent being what happened to" TA " ...was horrific....a fate he did not deserve....was a true tragedy. The other being that his killing was fueled by a strong passionate rage" (pg. 263)

L states that theory of events before trial- tho' he doesn't "currently believe this theory to be correct at the same time it might very well be spot on as I did not simply pull it out of thin air"

L "contemplated"
what happened "a great deal for a number of years.. preeminent question in my head from August of 2009, to the day the trial began..one of the first questions that came to mind from the first day I was assigned the case"

L states that to answer question...began with "what was the clear reality" - TA was shot in the face, stabbed 27X, had his throat slit...struggle took place....the murderer killed TA- evidence and she admitted it

not clear- Why? no motivation at crime scene- even tho' she said she "acted in self-defense"- she had "history of lying"- l didn't accept what the murderer said

L re-examined motivation when new evidence was discovered- he had to "combat any theory the State might offer and/or look for the best way to present the case to the jury"

L states that no evidence would provide motivation- again, only murderer knows and we are "left to theorize"

by late 2012 he states he had "some pretty well developed thoughts"

some of murderer's supporters believe the "ninja story" was true- L talked the murderer out of that story- some supporters believe she acted in "self- defense" and he couldn't prove that because "I am too inept of a lawyer to do so"

L states that some TA supporters "believe that I am an idiot on several levels because they think I believe Ms. Arias' self- defense story even though I never publicly said I did- supported either her story and/or what she did that day simply because I was her lawyer" (pg. 285)

L states "I can't win with either argument. Regardless of what I say, someone thinks I am an idiot. So be it. I am not too concerned with what people think of me. Instead of trying to win with one side or the other, what I can do is continue to question why there are sides to begin with"

L states again- events of 6/4/2008 were "tragic...This is not a sporting event with teams or sides, it is a tragedy...even saying this..might only add to the reason why people that chose sides see me as an idiot. The good news for me in this regard is that I have nothing to lose because I am an idiot either way....so ..makes me unafraid to offer you an unrestrained look into the theory I had back in 2012, about what happened..." (pg. 266)

"So what does this idiot think happened?"

L states can't look at what happened by "simply looking at that day in a vacuum....I believe that the days preceding...contained many events and/or facts that provided insights..."

-back in Apr., 2008, the murderer moved from Mesa back to Yreka..have to assume the murderer didn't want to kill TA then "because she didn't do it " ...they had fight day she left and she was alone with him at his house- motivation to kill him "after she moved away from Mesa and sometime before she actually killed him"

L thought that there were "three 'suspects' " for motivation:

-"Suspect #1"- convo that they had on/about May 10, 2008- recorded by murderer- later played in court as "phone sex tapes"- not valid as motivation according to L- "not sort of interaction that would motivate" the murderer to kill TA- " this 'suspect' was dismissed" by L

-"Suspect #2"- "could not be easily dismissed"- online convo May 26, 2008- "bulk" of convo was fight--TA very angry- called the murderer " '*advertiser censored*, a ''*advertiser censored*' a '3-hole wonder' " also "soulless, evil, and generally berates her character"

- the murderer "responded to these attacks in a passive and/or apologetic manner" but L thinks that this "did not absolve the 'suspect' as being the motivating force"

-evidence pointed to this- gun was stolen on May 28, 2008 where the murderer was living- grandparent's home- first step in plan would be getting gun

-police report - the murderer was on drive with her sister, Angela, when break-in happened- called them back to home- the murderer spoke to police- reported few items missing- her laptop was hidden and/or "sitting in her clothes hamper"- many to her things not taken "relatively speaking [the house] was not in too much disarray"

- few days after gun stolen- the murderer started driving south from Yreka- eventually arrives near Pasadena, Ca on 6/3/2008- here she " 'goes off the grid' " ( cell phone off and makes no credit card purchases- she is not traceable) before she drives to Mesa - happens between 9pm and 10pm night of 6/3/2008 - the murderer's "presence cannot be accounted for by objective evidence until nude photographs of her lying on Mr. Alexander's bed are taken on the afternoon of" 6/4/2008

-"Suspect #3"- something happened after the murderer arrived at TA's house- some interaction, some fight caused the murderer to go into rage "around 5:20 pm"- "suspect" because the murderer was in TA's house for "several hours " before killing him "and when she did, the killing itself was clearly fueled by anger"

L states that "based on the facts above, I am sure you can tell that neither of these 'suspects' could conclusively be eliminated as suspects nor could either be proven 'guilty' without physical evidence"

L had to consider "which 'suspect' was it" before 1st trial 2013

at time, L states that "suspect #3" was correct- that her motivation "did not arise until she arrived at his house"

-why? if the murderer left Yreka to kill TA- the motivator would be "suspect #2"- the online chat, "fueling her homicidal wrath for approximately 10 days"- was somehow " tapped for several hours while" they had sex

"...this theory did not make sense to me because this theory gave rise to many questions for which clear answers were not apparent"

-L talks about some questions - like "Why kill him over these words...this was certainly not the first time" TA called her names/attack her verbally- "Why wouldn't she simply think 'screw him' and go on with her life?"

-L states "at the time" in 2012- stealing gun from grandparent's home didn't make sense to him- could have just taken the gun without break-in (L says that what he knew about grandfather- he wouldn't have noticed)- after break-in, police would be involved- the report would have type of gun stolen- in "subsequent reports" her father had illegal firearms in his home- likely untraceable- the murderer could have gotten gun from father- he couldn't report gun stolen- illegal

-L considers the car rented at Redding Airport- to avoid detection? - he doesn't believe that- didn't make sense to him (whether premeditation happened then)

-have to give driver's license/credit card to rental agency- not covert- brother's neighbor drove the murderer to airport- created witnesses and "paper trial"

"I believe Ms. Arias when she said that Redding was simply a bigger town with better prices"

-but, L considers- why rent car at all?- why not drive own car?- his theory: she didn't want anyone to recognize her in Mesa- but "not many people in Mesa knew what type of car she drove"

-L states he thought real reason rent car- so she could "go safely"- he didn't think her car would make it to Ca and Utah- no routine maintenance on her car

- doesn't make sense to L that the murderer was "planning to kill Mr. Alexander at this time"

L speaks of next step on road trip: Monterey, CA- several things happened, but can only speak of

-the murderer visits former boyfriends- Matt and Darryl- "why create witnesses?" - why borrow gas can "that she doesn't need?"

-the murderer conducted banking transactions- created electronic trail- means she has "plenty of cash available to her if she wanted to go into Arizona covertly"- she could have bought things with cash- then no record of transactions, but she deposited cash into her accounts- leaves a trial

- the gas can bought at Walmart- Salinas, CA- L did not think this too significant in 2011- if she had plenty of cash to buy gas

"...it actually negated premeditation in my mind because (thought it made no real sense to buy it at all), as my thinking went; why would you buy a gas can if you already have two gas cans and were going on a covert mission? Not only that, she kept the receipt.....why wouldn't she throw a way the receipt?" (pg. 272)

L speaks of next step- Pasadena, CA- the murderer purchased several gallons of gas at convenience store- some with cash- some credit card- why use credit card- if she paid cash, no trace of her buying gas or how much gas- doesn't speak to L of premed

-somewhere "very close to city" [Pasadena].. she goes.. "off the grid"- cell phone off- makes no purchases- between 9pm- 10pm night of 6/3/2008

L speaks of next stop- TA's home- what happened there we "..,at least in part, rely on what" the murderer said happened

"..much of my thinking, as it relates to those events, is based on facts that stand alone. In formulating my theory, I chose to rely on facts that do not depend exclusively on Ms. Arias' word but may ultimately be consistent with the portions of her story that make sense."

-the murderer told Det. Flores she got to TA's house about 4am morning of 6/4/2008- made sense to L , given time takes to drive from Pasadena to Mesa "some computer forensics introduced at trial further supports this claim"

L states the murderer tells Det F that she and TA slept 'til "early afternoon .....after they woke up they had sex"- pics on TA's camera "objectively demonstrate that this encounter took place in the early afternoon as" the murderer "claimed"- more pics tell that "around 5:20 that evening" the murderer "the only other person in the home was taking pictures of Mr. Alexander in the shower and that within a matter of minutes his severly wounded or dead body was being drug across the bathroom floor...these are the facts" (pg. 273)

"..in my thinking, the idea that Ms. Arias wouls drive from Yreka...to Mesa..with designs on killing Mr. Alexander, finally arrive at his home and not kill him right away, made no sense to me....if she had the gun with her, she simply could have shot him...she could have killed him then and there. She could have then gotten back in her car and drove away and it would have been highly likely that no human being would have ever known she was there." (pg. 273)

L states it this "makes sense...Ryan Burns was waiting for her in Utah" - few hours after she arrived at TA's house

L states that it doesn't make sense that she had sex with TA, let him take nude pics of her- that's why he thinks that the motivation to kill TA "arose after arrived at his home aka 'Suspect #3' ... "this is my objective analysis at the time"

L states that you may "think.. I am ignoring all the signs of premeditation related to...trip...let me concede to you as I have to myself, that I could be wrong. The truth of the matter could be that Ms. Arias pulled into the driveway .....with the idea that she was going to walk in and kill him. At the same time then,those who believe that killing Mr. Alexander was Ms. Arias' plan when she pulled up to his house, would have to concede that if that was her plan she did not carry it out when she had the chance. That Ms. Arias did not initiate her plan at that point in time in which she was most likely to get away with it. To me this means that even if 'Suspect #2' is what motivated her trip to Mesa , when she got to his home, she changed her mind. If she arrived at Mr. Alexander's hone with the intention of killing him, her premeditation to do so ended when she did not do it when they were alone together in his office. This, in my mind supports my theory of the fact that something happened...that day...something set [her] off, which would ultimately turn us back to 'Suspect #3"(pg. 274)

L states that just because he thinks "Suspect #3" is correct "does not completely explain what I think happened"

What he believed "at the time":

- believed the murderer arrived at TA's house at 4pm- because of timeline "consistent with when she went 'off the grid' "

-based on computer records, TA was waiting up for the murderer

- that TA did want to have sex with the murderer when she arrived- "Why?"- because TA "always seemed interested in having sex with" the murderer- it had been "several weeks since the two had sex...he would be anxiously awaiting her arrival"

-they didn't have sex if they woke early afternoon- nude photos taken- he believed "without any physical evidence to support it" they had "second sex session"- L thought this because:

"given the sexual appetite Mr. Alexander showed towards Ms. Arias it made sense to me that he would want to have sex again before she left"

- "ultimate question" what happened after TA was in shower?

- L "believes" that when the murderer went to leave, TA made it "obvious to her that he wanted her out of the house before anyone saw her...were done having sex, so they were done hanging around....Ms. Arias felt used.....she blew her chances with Ryan Burns over this tryst and she simply had enough....she felt like this toxic relationship would haunt her for life if she didn't put a stop to it...she decided then and there, during a fir of rage. to put an end to the relationship" (pg. 275)

"How did she kill" TA?

-"once she decided to kill him she grabbed a gun... grandpa's gun? Yes...could this gun have been in Mr. Alexander's home? Yes....gun obtained elsewhere? Yes. Did it matter to me which gun it truly was? No..regardless of where the gun came from or who it belonged to, she did not grab this gun with ill intent until this point in time"

- (from forensic data)-after she grabbed gun she pointed it at TA....in response to having gun pointed at him, TA "leaps towards" the murderer to try to knock gun out of her hands ..when he did this, the murderer fired gun- shot TA in face- L considers this the "first injury"

- the murderer surprised that TA was still alive- gun jammed- the murderer went to grab knife- at same time, TA got to feet- leaned against bathroom counter- looked in mirror--then the murderer began stabbing him in his back "which gave rise to the struggle that ensued in the bathroom"- explains defensive wounds, blood splatter in bathroom

L believed "at some point in time during this struggle in the bathroom that Ms. Arias stabbed Mr. Alexander in the chest....due to the amount of blood in the hallway, after suffering this deep stab wound to the chest Mr. Alexander tried to make it down the hallway....he ultimately fell at the end of the hall where Ms. Arias slit Mr. Alexander's throat...After which time Mr. Alexander was dead and she drug his body down the hall"

"Is my thinking foolproof? No, in fact, I have another theory I will share in my final book that I believe is close to fool proof as it gets"

"....if you put aside whatever emotion you may have about the case and consider what I have said this theory makes a lot of sense" (pg. 278)
================================================== =

(continue)
 
Maybe I will send it to him, though like others, I believe he reads here. If I do it will be because- very much to my own surprise- I genuinely feel compassion for him. The killer has already caused more than enough harm.

I have felt compassion for the guy for a while. I seriously think he was seriously traumatized by his interaction with the killer. He looked to me that way in the trial, cos he dissociates.
 
Trapped with Ms. Arias (continued)

Chapter 48

What I Believed the State Would Argue


L knew State was going to claim First Degree Murder- premeditated or felony murder- that focus would be that the murderer planned to kill TA and "carried out her plan on " 6/4/2008

bigger question- what motivation- why she killed him- not how they could prove the murderer "did not act in self-defense"

"..why was I more concerned about the attribution of motive to Ms. Arias than I was her self-defense claim"- his main goal- save the murderer's life- "finding of guilt is really a secondary consideration"

L never thought that the murderer would not be convicted of First Degree Murder- didn't feel jury would accept claim of self-defense- thought the motivation "would become the prominent issue"

L states that "the why" of State's argument very important to him

"The way I saw things, whichever side better defines the 'why' this crime occurred would ultimately prevail on the issue of life versus death...I had a hard time reconciling the possible motives that they might attribute to Ms. Arias with their theory of the case" (pg. 278)

L "assumed" that State was going to argue- murderer took grandfather's gun so she could kill TA- State was "going to make a big deal" about the murderer renting car in Redding instead of Yreka- white car was "desire to be more covert"- L couldn't understand how rented car could be "covert"

-her time in Monterrey- L believed the State wouldn't "comment much on it"- except for the gas cans "nothing she did there...banking transactions, was consistent with the idea that she was on a covert mission to kill" TA

L had idea what State was going to argue on the murderer's arrival at TA's house

"..in order to prove to the court that Ms. Arias should be eligible for the death penalty the State had to prove at least one aggravating factor to the Judge.....proving these factors requires the State to give a description to the court of how the killing took place and sometimes why the killing occurred....to convince the judge that the required legal standard had been met"

L wasn't the murderer's lawyer when this hearing occurred- he read transcript

-seemed to L that State was going to argue- the murderer arrived at TA's house with intentions of killing him- that murderer hung around several hours, had sex to make TA tired, "vulnerable"- that it would be "easier for her to kill him"

-the murderer saw "opportune moment" to kill when TA in shower

- what happened next- told thru Det. Flore's testimony in court:

-he told court that he "recently" talked to Dr. Horn- "based on what Dr. Horn had told him Ms. Arias had shot Mr. Alexander first...this wound only stunned Mr. Alexander...he was able to stagger to his bathroom counter where he aspired blood onto the sink"

- the murderer "then begins inflicting the knife wounds...27 of them.....the fatal wounds being either the deep stab to Mr. Alexander's chest or the slashing of his throat...fatal wounds occurring last because of the defensive wounds....on" TA's hands (pg. 279)

-at hearing- The State never stated why the murderer did this- "...State had not been able to fit into the factual scenario that they adhered to so rigidly"

-in order to prove premeditation, before the murderer arrived at house, the murderer had a plan in place when she pulled up to TA's home

- that TA was in his shower "minutes before death"

"I assumed that this story would be the State's story going forward because Detective Flores was under oath when he relayed this version of events and because... also retold this version of events to CBS when he interviewed on '48 Hours'. However, most of all, I thought that this would be the story because it fit the evidence" (pg. 280)

L thought that there was lots of holes in State's theory- not issue with "order of wounds" tho'

- issues:

- why the murderer rented car in Redding instead of Yreka- not "covert"- rental agency in airport- with surveillance cameras (L still thinks more covert to drive own car)
-the murderer visited 2 former boyfriends- performed banking transactions in Monterey

-that the murderer had to wait 13 hours before "right moment arrived" when TA was weak, vulnerable (made no sense to L- why wait for TA to be weak?

"..the question I believed that would make a difference between..being sentenced to life or sentenced to death..Why did she do all of this? Based on the State's theory of events at some point in time Ms. Arias decided that she wanted to kill Mr. Alexander"

L never heard State make any argument that the murderer wanted to kill TA before she moved back to Yreka

-to accept State's version- after moving back to Yreka, the murderer needed to kill TA- why? because she was enraged, jealous about TA's relationship with Mimi Hall- didn't make sense to L because TA"s, Mimi's relationship existed before the murderer moved back to Yreka- L wondered how state would explain that to jury

-if State's theory was that murderer angry because of name calling online chat May 26, 2008, why didn't she kill him as soon as she got to TA's home- immediately? or when they were alone in TA's office? or before nude pics taken?

"I saw this as a huge problem for the State on two levels. One, because it necessarily shortened the time of ant premeditation that may have existed with Ms. Arias' mind to that day and that day alone. Secondly, when such a temporal restraint is placed onto Ms. Arias' motivation, the motivation for the murder becomes directly related to what transpired on that fateful day between the two of them" (pg. 281)

End of Section 9 (pg. 281)
================================================== =========

Next:

Section 10
How Was I Going to Save Ms. Arias' Life?

Chapter 49
Why Did I Fight For Ms. Arias Life?
================================================== =
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
62
Guests online
1,947
Total visitors
2,009

Forum statistics

Threads
600,392
Messages
18,108,015
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top