closing argument poll: how did the prosecution do?

[Karmady]

Are you serious? I don't know what your profession is but I don't think any prosecutor in the world would possibly say something like that about the victim. Keep in mind that prosecutor is the last voice of the victim.

Here's one. I'm sure there are others that weren't prominent enough on that particular point to make it to page one or two of a google search.

Tabari Robinson may not have been a likeable person, but he didn’t deserve to die by being shot 19 times at close range by an assailant who was wielding a weapon designed to be used in a war, a prosecutor told jurors today.
http://www.fugitive.com/2009/08/05/...nson-was-unlikeable-but-didnt-deserve-to-die/

And the prosecutor is the voice of the State, not the victim. He or she is charged with obtaining justice for BOTH of them. Juan does not represent Travis or his family.

 

[sammie]

So I'm one of those people who didnt get all that involved with the case. I did find Jody smug but I found Martinez very difficult to listen to. He was beyond overly aggressive and in my opinion made too many personal attacks. I only watched the trial off and on when I was bored. I caught one day of testimony where Travis is getting off on her sounding like a 12 year old girl having an orgasm. The Spider-Man underwear paired with his fantasies of raping her. His highly absuive texts and calls ..well I stopped giving a damn. I really think she may have prevented him from caring out these fantasies on children and women. I'm one of those jurors that wouldn't have given her the death penalty. Juan Martinez made a couple of very huge blunders. The first was trying to convince the jury that Cameron Diaz had to do with the underwear thing. He should have left that alone. He unknowingly brought that subject back up in a disastrous way, nobody believed that. Then when he said that Jody took advantage of a Mormon guy I gasped. He should have said look "Travis was a descipable person but he didnt deserve to die like this"

I'll refrain from saying what I'd like to say since you admit you're not that into the case. We'll chalk it up to lack of knowledge of the case.

 

[Angelina Frost]

Hmm. This post is still here. Interesting.

I only watched the trial off and on when I was bored.

Very telling in terms of the validity of the post.

I caught one day of testimony where Travis is getting off on her sounding like a 12 year old girl having an orgasm.

Nope, didn't happen that way. After faking an orgasm in deliberate baby talk, TA said that she "sounded" like one. He was not getting off. There is a difference. Nice try though.

The Spider-Man underwear paired with his fantasies of raping her.

Same as above. The Spiderman underwear were never produced in court, either directly or via picture. As for a rape fantasy, it never happened. He never said, "I have fantasies of raping you." That is not in the correct context of how he used the phrase. Again, points for trying.

His highly absuive texts and calls ..well I stopped giving a damn.

Point out which calls you heard that were highly abusive. None. The only call you heard was a sex recording, done without his knowledge. On the recording, you hear her not just as a willing participant, but an instigator as well.

As for the texts, interesting that we only saw his and not hers. Not a chance there wasn't adequate provocation from someone who could easily end up stabbing him 29 times, nearly cutting off his head and putting a bullet into his skull? Erm...not likely.

I really think she may have prevented him from caring out these fantasies on children and women.

No words for this. Unfounded, disgusting and more appropriate for the JAII site. Try the hypothesis there, they'll love it.

He should have said look "Travis was a descipable person but he didnt deserve to die like this"

Same as above. No words for something so outrageously one-sided. How convenient to forget all of the things people said about him, who actually knew him. Very telling to pass judgement without having an ounce of facts. Well done.

 

[Sedona722]

I voted 5 stars. Juan was brilliant and he brought it home. He gave the pertinent details he needed the jury to hear. His second closing was very moving. He reiterated the fact that Travis was naked and defenseless and was slaughtered!! That just brought me to tears.

 

[MistyM]

So I'm one of those people who didnt get all that involved with the case. I did find Jody smug but I found Martinez very difficult to listen to. He was beyond overly aggressive and in my opinion made too many personal attacks. I only watched the trial off and on when I was bored. I caught one day of testimony where Travis is getting off on her sounding like a 12 year old girl having an orgasm. The Spider-Man underwear paired with his fantasies of raping her. His highly absuive texts and calls ..well I stopped giving a damn. I really think she may have prevented him from caring out these fantasies on children and women. I'm one of those jurors that wouldn't have given her the death penalty. Juan Martinez made a couple of very huge blunders. The first was trying to convince the jury that Cameron Diaz had to do with the underwear thing. He should have left that alone. He unknowingly brought that subject back up in a disastrous way, nobody believed that. Then when he said that Jody took advantage of a Mormon guy I gasped. He should have said look "Travis was a descipable person but he didnt deserve to die like this"

my brother stayed home from work the day of closing and just decided to watch it. he only saw nurmi's closing argument. he called me and said 'that poor jodi, she totally innocent, that guy she killed was a total freak'. i can understand if you get snippets of things you might have an opinion that travis was a bad person. but you really have to understand the other side of the story, that jodi is a compulsive liar and cannot be trusted with anything she says.

the defense got quite the 'goldmine' when she recorded that phone call. if you take it out of context it does sound suspicious. remember though, this is talk, i'm sure he's not the first guy nor the last who has or will say goofball things like that. i don't think this makes him despicable. a few things he said might be rather improper, it does not define him if you look at the big picture.

i suspect the comments and angry emails make up less than 1% of their 8 zillion email/txt communications.

here are a couple things i would like to tell you about this case.

-jodi tried to get letters in that she claimed were written by travis admitting to his pedo tendencies, these were deemed to be forgeries, and were made around the time she sent out magazines with messages to someone whom she needed to talk to so they could 'get their stories straight'.

-janeen demarte said the amount of txts that were written by travis that were insulting to jodi were 'a handful' out of i think 80,000+ exchanges between them.

-the day she claimed he got her the spiderman underwear (that there is NO proof of), she did not mention it in any conversation thanking him, or complaining about it, or anything. suffice to say it probably didn't happen. and that's not even a 'law of attraction' event that she would want to 'not talk about' or record.

if you would like, you can view every day in court on youtube, you can also view the interviews jodi gave the media shortly after the murder. i watched 'picture perfect' a couple of years ago and i actually thought she was innocent. she charmed me and seemed so honest, when this trial started i was on her side. i was really duped, because everything she said on that programme she later admitted was all a lie. and that's pretty damn scary if she can cry, lie, act so innocent and it seemed absolutely believable.

i'd also suggest checking out her interrogation videos. again another example of her fantastic ability to lie calmly and think quickly to come up with excuses.

and one more thing, check out the court papers where she asks for a plea deal for second degree, and the threat of dragging travis and other people through the mud if she has to go to court... very telling.

**eta - about juan, yes he can come across super aggressive and mean, but there is a method to his madness, he has a great ability to piss people off and bring out their true colors. he jumps around and is rather rude, but he mixes a liar up in their lies and he proved jodi was no innocent traumatized victim. he proved she was cold, calculating, manipulative, lying and unemotional about everything that happened. if she stood up to him, how could she have been the type that would be abused... women who have been through what she claimed would have been quite upset and timid on the stand, remembering how horrible it felt to be beaten, how awful that day of the murder was, and would have gotten their story straight. the first time. not the third time. she was strong and defiant.

 

[Tiger09]

If she were really a victim, then why the need for the drastic makeover? Coloring your hair isn't that big of a deal, but when you drop the comment to a detective that "his neighbors knew me as a blonde" that's a little telling. It's all reminiscent, ironically, of a few literary classics. Jodi Arias tells her mother to read more books, but has Jodi? Since a few are ironically her undoing? Edgar Allen Poe's the Tell- Tale Heart- she calls Det Flores unsolicited on June 10,2008 to see what he knows, also says the comment about Travis's neighbors knowing her as a blonde, the email post- Murder, as well as the voicemail. The post murder voicemail which mentions Shakespear's Othello, a story of love, obsession, murder, and betrayal, and racism. Some speculate that Jodi was making herself look more "Caucasian" and hated her more ethnic roots, with the blonde dye job and breast augmentation and baby voice. She killed Travis when he would not be hers in the end. The voicemail was a final twist. In the Wikipedia entry for 1000 places to see before you die- remember "that" book? Robert Louis Stephenson's house, author of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Interesting and ironic, no? So no, I don't think she is a victim at all- I think she's crafty and egotistical- like any other killer that gets caught.

 

[lisalei321]

*****
​

↑↑↑↑↑ I agree!

Sent from my LG Spirit using Tapatalk 2

 

[Kel2000]

Just a few additional comments about what has been said about JM and his closing. I actually appreciated that he took the approach with her that he did. From the looks of things, JA has been "playing the victim" and successfully eliciting sympathy with her lies since she could talk I imagine. His demeanor was fairly consistent throughout the trial and his approach with Jodi was 'I'm not going to buy your BS and I have your number'. While he may have come across as caustic and derisive at times with her, it elicited a response of arrogance and petulance which was to JA's detriment in a huge way. No way after watching her cross could anyone believe she was a "battered woman" with low self-esteem who would put up with any of the alleged abuse she claimed to endure with nary a mention to anyone outside of her ironclad ally MM.

I also liked how JM connected the dots to poke holes in some of JA's "reasonable" explanations. There were times when I'd be be lulled into her lies and want to give her the benefit of the doubt because some of what she was saying did sound somewhat reasonable - gas cans so as not to get stranded in the desert...kids messing with a license plate (ok, this one is pretty weak)...driving from Yreka to Redding to get a cheaper price on a rental car...turning off the cell phone to save the battery....There's always a tiny kernel of believability to potentially suck you in, but JM was really good about reminding you of how proposterous it was taken all together in one big picture.

 

[Simp]

my brother stayed home from work the day of closing and just decided to watch it. he only saw nurmi's closing argument. he called me and said 'that poor jodi, she totally innocent, that guy she killed was a total freak'. i can understand if you get snippets of things you might have an opinion that travis was a bad person. but you really have to understand the other side of the story, that jodi is a compulsive liar and cannot be trusted with anything she says.

the defense got quite the 'goldmine' when she recorded that phone call. if you take it out of context it does sound suspicious. remember though, this is talk, i'm sure he's not the first guy nor the last who has or will say goofball things like that. i don't think this makes him despicable. a few things he said might be rather improper, it does not define him if you look at the big picture.

i suspect the comments and angry emails make up less than 1% of their 8 zillion email/txt communications.

here are a couple things i would like to tell you about this case.

-jodi tried to get letters in that she claimed were written by travis admitting to his pedo tendencies, these were deemed to be forgeries, and were made around the time she sent out magazines with messages to someone whom she needed to talk to so they could 'get their stories straight'.

-janeen demarte said the amount of txts that were written by travis that were insulting to jodi were 'a handful' out of i think 80,000+ exchanges between them.

-the day she claimed he got her the spiderman underwear (that there is NO proof of), she did not mention it in any conversation thanking him, or complaining about it, or anything. suffice to say it probably didn't happen. and that's not even a 'law of attraction' event that she would want to 'not talk about' or record.

if you would like, you can view every day in court on youtube, you can also view the interviews jodi gave the media shortly after the murder. i watched 'picture perfect' a couple of years ago and i actually thought she was innocent. she charmed me and seemed so honest, when this trial started i was on her side. i was really duped, because everything she said on that programme she later admitted was all a lie. and that's pretty damn scary if she can cry, lie, act so innocent and it seemed absolutely believable.

i'd also suggest checking out her interrogation videos. again another example of her fantastic ability to lie calmly and think quickly to come up with excuses.

and one more thing, check out the court papers where she asks for a plea deal for second degree, and the threat of dragging travis and other people through the mud if she has to go to court... very telling.

**eta - about juan, yes he can come across super aggressive and mean, but there is a method to his madness, he has a great ability to piss people off and bring out their true colors. he jumps around and is rather rude, but he mixes a liar up in their lies and he proved jodi was no innocent traumatized victim. he proved she was cold, calculating, manipulative, lying and unemotional about everything that happened. if she stood up to him, how could she have been the type that would be abused... women who have been through what she claimed would have been quite upset and timid on the stand, remembering how horrible it felt to be beaten, how awful that day of the murder was, and would have gotten their story straight. the first time. not the third time. she was strong and defiant.

Brilliant post!!!! One of the best I have ever read. Thank you for your polite, accurate and educated post.

 

[IBsleuthin]

Brilliant post!!!! One of the best I have ever read. Thank you for your polite, accurate and educated post.

(Your profile photo is the best one I've ever seen and I am ABSOLUTELY getting one of those bracelets!!)

Have a great day!
:seeya:

 

[uklady]

I'll try.... and to be brief as possible.

A large majority of the people on this forum started the trial having already decided a guilty as charged verdict. So for those people, Martinez closing spoke to their convictions.

The Jury did not go into the case the same way - nor should they.

Just prior to the close - the jury were given specific instructions on how to decide the case (based on facts and evidence and witness testimony).

From that perspective - here are the very weak points I saw in Martinez close:

1. The Forensic facts of this case are beyond strong, beyond compelling AGAINST self defense. ... AND

2. The human factors are different (they usually are). While you have to do some pretty amazing acrobatics to stretch in a "self defence" theory - they will compel some to sympathize with, even identify with the defendant. ...SO

3. Martinez spent too much of the close focused on character assassination and mocking the defendant for what some might see as normal circumstance.

Ex:
How many women fell in love in their teens or were willing to toss their future away on some boy they believed in - only to find it wasn't going to work, or he was bad news or unfaithful? It's young heartbreak and teens can be really stupid about that sort of thing.

The Jury are largely in their 40's - so we can also assume that most of them have children in their late teens and early 20's (I have 3 teens at home).

If there is even one woman who went through something similar or a parent with a teen who went through something similar - the worst thing to do is to slam that type of behavior and mock Jodi for having that happen to her.

It's immaterial to the case.

4. Rather than going over the evidence - just the evidence - piecing it together - showing how it simply could not be self defense, and presenting ALL the circumstances that support pre-meditation, Martinez weaved a story that sounded more like venomous personal hatred for the defendant.

5. All it takes is for one juror to personally related to one of the human factors. (ie: "that" just happened to MY daughter, or, I once lost MY phone cord under the seat, ...etc). That juror will then be more likely to relate to the defendant, be personally affronted by Martinez - and it's a hung jury.


Mr Martinez may come across to some as a hero, passionate about justice - but to others he comes across as rigidly judgmental and lacking self-control.

There is every possibility that the jury will contain people representing both opinions on him.

I think he failed, completely, to present a balance close and to focus the jury on the facts.

If the Anthony Prosecution team had this case - I suspect it would have ended in March with a guilty verdict.

I came into the case just before JA taking the stand and had not really made any decision on what I thought. I didn't like JM at first but as time passed I got used to his style. My opinion was formed by the evidence given and closely watching and listening to JA. As she continued to lie under oath and her whole demeanour became apparent , coupled with the violence of his killing it was easier to decide. JM was a star and I think he did a great job. I personally think there is a lot more that either was not allowed to be brought up in court or people are not saying which would seal her fate completely. JM showed his passion for getting justice for the family and some people may have seen that as aggression or lack of self control but if I had lost someone in the way Travis was taken I know what sort of prosecutor I would want on my side. :moo:

 

[IBsleuthin]

Here's some thoughts:

1). 'SOMETIMES' when you really want someone to get away from you and they simply are not getting the idea, 'sometimes' people use really nasty words to try to drive them off. The people who use these words might LOOK like they are aggressive but in reality they don't want to use physical force so they use verbal force. Taken out of context, these horrible sounding words can really look awful. They are, in fact a defense mechanism to try to get the 'three @#$% wonder' away from you.

2). Since the VICTIM here, Travis Alexander is not around to speak for himself because he was SLAUGHTERED, we will never know if in fact his gift of Spiderman underwear was actually JA REQUEST. SHE may have requested these and Travis was just trying to please HER.

3). Since the VICTIM here, Travis Alexander is not around to speak for himself, we will never know if in fact JA expressed an interest in pretending SHE WAS a 12 year old girl, with all her baby talk and pigtails, perhaps it was really HER fantasy to be that way and NOT Travis and he was just going along with it to please HER.

4). JA is a known liar.

5). JA is a known liar.

6). Ja is a KNOWN LIAR.

This whole thing makes me sick and I can hardly wait until the verdict is read tomorrow. My only wish is that they could have started building a gallows for her so she could SWING tomorrow instead of sucking more money out of the state of Arizona.

 

[mommy2]

Juan couldn't have done any better. 5 stars!

 

[Callisto]

Here's some thoughts:

1). 'SOMETIMES' when you really want someone to get away from you and they simply are not getting the idea, 'sometimes' people use really nasty words to try to drive them off. The people who use these words might LOOK like they are aggressive but in reality they don't want to use physical force so they use verbal force. Taken out of context, these horrible sounding words can really look awful. They are, in fact a defense mechanism to try to get the 'three @#$% wonder' away from you.

2). Since the VICTIM here, Travis Alexander is not around to speak for himself because he was SLAUGHTERED, we will never know if in fact his gift of Spiderman underwear was actually JA REQUEST. SHE may have requested these and Travis was just trying to please HER.

3). Since the VICTIM here, Travis Alexander is not around to speak for himself, we will never know if in fact JA expressed an interest in pretending SHE WAS a 12 year old girl, with all her baby talk and pigtails, perhaps it was really HER fantasy to be that way and NOT Travis and he was just going along with it to please HER.

4). JA is a known liar.

5). JA is a known liar.

6). Ja is a KNOWN LIAR.

This whole thing makes me sick and I can hardly wait until the verdict is read tomorrow. My only wish is that they could have started building a gallows for her so she could SWING tomorrow instead of sucking more money out of the state of Arizona.

BBM: I completely agree with this, as I have experienced it. An ex-boyfriend of 4 years whom, after breaking up with me, found out I had began dating other people went crazy. He harassed and stalked me, sending 20+ messages in a row to me (an hour or 2 of complete psycho talk a day, at least) and forced me to change my phone number multiple times (because he kept snooping in his family's phones to find my new number because I kept it contact with them to let them know what he was doing). I deleted email accounts, blocked his email addresses (and he would just keep making new ones, over and over) When that wouldn't work and I was scared, I would occasionally try to appease him and think if I just have a platonic, superficial conversation via email with him he will stop making threats to himself or stop with the complete vile things he would say to me. It never worked for longer than a few days and then he would cross a line I set and I said things via email after repeated harassment that would be deemed very "abusive" without my context and explanation. Also, in his messages to me he said I ruined his life and one specific threat he made was he was going to shoot himself in my vehicle and leave drugs on his body so when I find him I can numb the pain of knowing how much I hurt another person. If attorneys read that I am sure they would have a FIELD DAY making completely false conclusions from that, like I was a drug user or that I did something to hurt him. Particularly if paired, without his responses or the history of his harassment, the expletives and "character assassination" I attempted to try and get him to leave me alone, a very skewed conclusion could be made in that situation. In reality, I never used drugs (HE DID, he was a prescription drug addict and lied to me for 4 years) and he broke up with me, the only thing I did was move on and date another guy a few weeks after. I know the ex-boyfriend has something seriously wrong, and he has a lot of similarities with JA. Inability to handle rejection, very hollow, dead eyes, external blame (zero personal responsibility), few friends, liar, projector, etc. I hate the idea of taking conversations out of context because there is no way to tell one way or another what the truth is. In this trial's case, trusting the context the murderer gives us an even less accurate picture of what really went on

:moo::moo:

 

[ScottishCarole]

Five star without a doubt!!!

It was spine tingling watching him.....................he was amazing!!!

Have rewatched it on YT :blushing:

Very powerful closing.

 

[LinasK]

Here's some thoughts:

1). 'SOMETIMES' when you really want someone to get away from you and they simply are not getting the idea, 'sometimes' people use really nasty words to try to drive them off. The people who use these words might LOOK like they are aggressive but in reality they don't want to use physical force so they use verbal force. Taken out of context, these horrible sounding words can really look awful. They are, in fact a defense mechanism to try to get the 'three @#$% wonder' away from you.

2). Since the VICTIM here, Travis Alexander is not around to speak for himself because he was SLAUGHTERED, we will never know if in fact his gift of Spiderman underwear was actually JA REQUEST. SHE may have requested these and Travis was just trying to please HER.

3). Since the VICTIM here, Travis Alexander is not around to speak for himself, we will never know if in fact JA expressed an interest in pretending SHE WAS a 12 year old girl, with all her baby talk and pigtails, perhaps it was really HER fantasy to be that way and NOT Travis and he was just going along with it to please HER.

4). JA is a known liar.

5). JA is a known liar.

6). Ja is a KNOWN LIAR.

This whole thing makes me sick and I can hardly wait until the verdict is read tomorrow. My only wish is that they could have started building a gallows for her so she could SWING tomorrow instead of sucking more money out of the state of Arizona.

On this, I agree with you. I don't think his text was particularly mean in light of what she did to provoke him- stalking him and hacking into his accounts. I think she deserved what he said about her, and she was a sociopath. It was his way of getting her out of his life for good. Most people would take a hint from that kind of text that they are not wanted.

 

[Deebest49]

BBM: I completely agree with this, as I have experienced it. An ex-boyfriend of 4 years whom, after breaking up with me, found out I had began dating other people went crazy. He harassed and stalked me, sending 20+ messages in a row to me (an hour or 2 of complete psycho talk a day, at least) and forced me to change my phone number multiple times (because he kept snooping in his family's phones to find my new number because I kept it contact with them to let them know what he was doing). I deleted email accounts, blocked his email addresses (and he would just keep making new ones, over and over) When that wouldn't work and I was scared, I would occasionally try to appease him and think if I just have a platonic, superficial conversation via email with him he will stop making threats to himself or stop with the complete vile things he would say to me. It never worked for longer than a few days and then he would cross a line I set and I said things via email after repeated harassment that would be deemed very "abusive" without my context and explanation. Also, in his messages to me he said I ruined his life and one specific threat he made was he was going to shoot himself in my vehicle and leave drugs on his body so when I find him I can numb the pain of knowing how much I hurt another person. If attorneys read that I am sure they would have a FIELD DAY making completely false conclusions from that, like I was a drug user or that I did something to hurt him. Particularly if paired, without his responses or the history of his harassment, the expletives and "character assassination" I attempted to try and get him to leave me alone, a very skewed conclusion could be made in that situation. In reality, I never used drugs (HE DID, he was a prescription drug addict and lied to me for 4 years) and he broke up with me, the only thing I did was move on and date another guy a few weeks after. I know the ex-boyfriend has something seriously wrong, and he has a lot of similarities with JA. Inability to handle rejection, very hollow, dead eyes, external blame (zero personal responsibility), few friends, liar, projector, etc. I hate the idea of taking conversations out of context because there is no way to tell one way or another what the truth is. In this trial's case, trusting the context the murderer gives us an even less accurate picture of what really went on

:moo::moo:

First of all, I am so sorry that you had to go through this.But also so glad that you got out of it alive and well....... God Bless you!!!

As for your post, I completely agree with you. Just knowing, and seeing just how quickly Jodi can lie to fit the circumstances she is in was enough for me to discount every word of her testimony. Along with the fact that there was not 1 single witness to testify to first hand evidence of Travis ever abusing anyone, or anything. I went into following this trial with no previous knowledge of the crime. To be honest, I was shocked at the lack of any evidence to support Jodi's tales of abuse and Pedophilia. All through the trial, I was waiting for some evidence, anything to support the accusations Jodi made. By the end of her 18 days on the stand, I strongly was leading to guilty of second degree. But, the defense team it's self pushed me to Murder 1. Closing statements sealed my vote. Defense had nothing but Jodi's word, and it was so unbelievable I could not come to any other verdict than GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY. Jaun Martinez did all that he needed to do in my opinion.

 

[Katie-L]

I do want to thank everyone for sharing your POV's on the close. It's good to get an overall by looking at different perspectives.

 

[KeyboardCat]

I believe the closing was incredibly strong. I love how he mentioned that she is still attacking him, to this very day.

IMO she stabs him and his family everytime she lies about him. When she accused him of hitting her, when she called him a pedophile, when she said he was controlling and a user, she's stabbing him. Everytime her lawyer's or witness said those words, she is stabbing him, shooting him, and slitting his throat all over again, and to his family as well.

To me this is why she needs the death penalty.

 

[elementary]

There is always something more that could have been said. But, IMO, more than enough was said. It doesn't get any better than this!