Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

[minor4th]

Can the Bishop be called to testify of what Travis told him if the family gives permission?

I'm not sure if the privilege would survive Travis's death and if so whether the family could waive it.It would be hearsay anyway.

 

[kscornfed]

now that jodi has said she thinks she put the knife in the dishwasher and that it was TA's, and in any case did not take it with her, will JM call one of the crime scene people to establish whether the knives in TA's home were tested? i don't remember them saying they tested knives in his house after the murder. if so, i missed it.

but isn't this important to establish that the knife used in the murder wasn't in the house and wasn't one of his knives?

 

[wishinuall]

The defense wants to keep them from being shown because it makes the brutality of the killing very real and tends to reveal the absence of self defense on Jodi's part.

Yes the jury will have all of the photos with them in deliberations.

First I have to thank you all for the time & effort to check in on this thread & to answer our seemingly endless, sometimes a bit silly, questions! :gthanks: I was curious about these photos as well, but to be clear, will they have all of them, or only the ones the prosecution was allowed to show them already? (GRR, :furious: sticky keys!!) I'm wondering if all of them were in evidence but DT was objecting to pulling them out again? Also, the 'new' testimony JM is objecting to; is it indeed new? Is this expert witness actually attempting to add a new diagnosis and/or attempting to testify outside of his field? Just the very little I've been able to understand about how they want him to testify, then watching the clips of JA's "foggy" memory over again, sseems she has made VERY certain to tell her bs story to FIT this so called PTST, 'reactive' stuff, and/or his diagnosis to fit her defense? Hmm, I'm not even sure what my exact question is, so good luck trying to respond!:waitasec: Actually, I'm just anxious to see this addressed by our own legal eagles here, versus the often slanted opinions on you-know-where!! Thanks again, and again, and...

 

[Liebchenmutti]

Who was the judge irritated with this morning about the discussion of the DT expert witness' Power Point not taking place in limine before trial? Was she scolding Juan about that? THX

 

[khaki]

I have never been through the Hoover Dam checkpoint but I wonder what type of checkpoint it is/was? Did that checkpoint have any photos? I would think Jodi's upside down license plate would have been noticed there, even without photos.

 

[kaki]

sorry.. wrong thread

 

[Xavier]

The defense wants to keep them from being shown because it makes the brutality of the killing very real and tends to reveal the absence of self defense on Jodi's part.

Yes the jury will have all of the photos with them in deliberations.

a good defense attorney only wants to put the client in best possible impression to the jury

 

[gcharlie]

Dr. Samuels is testifying that JA was suicidal as part of his diagnosis of PTSD. Would he be considered a mandated reporter and shouldn't this have been brought to the attention of the correctional facility?

 

[fuzzybutter]

Since the defense expert is saying that Arias meets the symptoms for PTSD according to the DSM, can the state's experts say that she meets the symptoms for sociopathy or anti-social personality?

 

[gitana1]

Dr. Samuels is testifying that JA was suicidal as part of his diagnosis of PTSD. Would he be considered a mandated reporter and shouldn't this have been brought to the attention of the correctional facility?

Mandatory reporting has to do with child abuse, not adult behaviors. To my knowledge, a psychiatrist/psychologist cannot breach the confidentiality of the patient without their permission except to hospitalize them if absolutely clinically necessary to prevent serious harm to them or to others. Just talking about suicidal thoughts is not enough.

Since the defense expert is saying that Arias meets the symptoms for PTSD according to the DSM, can the state's experts say that she meets the symptoms for sociopathy or anti-social personality?

If that's what they concluded. And since arias was examined by defense experts, state experts likely had to have been given the opportunity to examine her as well.

I wish I had the state witness list to know who will be testifying on their behalf. ETA: I just looked and there are several lists, many supplements.

 

[clarabloomer]

His conversations with Jodi about church issues would be protected by privilege. Besides Jodi lied to the bishop so his testimony wouldn't be helpful.

Could he affirm whether she actually spoke to him at all? And when this took place? I can't imagine what her purpose would be for a meeting after TA's murder.

 

[Sophieandme]

Can Juan bring up the expert's sanction from New Jersey in his cross of this expert?

 

[kscornfed]

Could he affirm whether she actually spoke to him at all? And when this took place? I can't imagine what her purpose would be for a meeting after TA's murder.

we know she called him at 3 in the morning. she wanted to find out what he knew. same reason she called det. flores.

 

[zoozoo]

Can JM ask how many times Samuels has been hired by Nurmi for defense work on cases involving sexual issues? It seems like psychological issues re: sex is Samuels specialty (based on his website and educational background) and defending cases with sex issues is Nurmi's specialty. The jury could infer that Samuels was hired for work on sex aspects of the case and is now testifying beyond his expertise into the area of memory issues and thus give less weight to his opinions re: memory.

 

[SCSam]

Another "what if" question... IF the jury requested to visit the crime scene, and the current owners agreed, could the judge allow this??

I can see some might want to view actual distances mentioned by JA in the bedroom/bathroom: the tipability (sic) of the shelving, the height of the shelf where she got the gun (never happened).

 

[minor4th]

Could he affirm whether she actually spoke to him at all? And when this took place? I can't imagine what her purpose would be for a meeting after TA's murder.

Even that might be privileged, but I don't really see how that would help the prosecution unless they know for sure that Jodi did not speak to the bishop and just made that up -- dont know how they could possibly know that though.

 

[minor4th]

Another "what if" question... IF the jury requested to visit the crime scene, and the current owners agreed, could the judge allow this??

I can see some might want to view actual distances mentioned by JA in the bedroom/bathroom: the tipability (sic) of the shelving, the height of the shelf where she got the gun (never happened).

I don't know if that would be a proper jury request or not since the actual crime scene location is not in evidence. I really don't think so -- it's not like witnesses to whom they can ask questions. It would be the parties' obligation to bring that evidence forward if they want it to be considered as evidence. But I am not the expert on Arizona procedures, so there might be something that would allow it.

Do you know of other cases where the jury was allowed to take a field trip to a crime scene or location away from the courthouse for evidentiary purposes?

 

[minor4th]

Can JM ask how many times Samuels has been hired by Nurmi for defense work on cases involving sexual issues? It seems like psychological issues re: sex is Samuels specialty (based on his website and educational background) and defending cases with sex issues is Nurmi's specialty. The jury could infer that Samuels was hired for work on sex aspects of the case and is now testifying beyond his expertise into the area of memory issues and thus give less weight to his opinions re: memory.

Yes, he can ask how many times Samuels has been retained by Nurmi for defense cases. I was wondering about the extent of his previous experience with Nurmi as well.

 

[minor4th]

Can Juan bring up the expert's sanction from New Jersey in his cross of this expert?

I believe so, for impeachment purposes.

 

[minor4th]

Who was the judge irritated with this morning about the discussion of the DT expert witness' Power Point not taking place in limine before trial? Was she scolding Juan about that? THX

At first I thought the judge was directing that remark at Juan, but having listened to the testimony and the mini hearing about it, it seems to me that Juan was caught by surprise when the defense tried to sneak in inadmissible expert opinions at the last minute. So I'm really not sure.

I think her ruling about it was correct though - there needs to be a full Daubert hearing to determine whether the expert should be allowed to testify about these new matters. This is something that would normally take place pre-trial, and that may be why the judge was irritated in general - these types of issues should not be arising mid-trial. My guess is that he will not be allowed to testify about the premeditation/crime of passion issue.