On what grounds was the defense asking for an acquittal? Do we have the actual document of what they filed and the judge's answer?
Do we know what the defense filed today? Why are these things not being argued in open court? I'm not used to so many sealed hearings.
Regarding the diaries that the defense recently filed a motion to compel for , the diaries that were taken from her jail cell in April.....will we ever see those? Is anything she writes in jail or draws in jail subject to being taken from her, or only if there is something illegal mentioned in them, or some suggestion of witness tampering, etc. Any diary she writes could be taken, including her would be proposal for a book?
In Arizona are the visits face to face, unlike in Florida where one party is at the jail and the other party is at a wholly other location and it is more like a Skype situation?
Can reporters request a list of what books were sent to her by ALV and Samuels, or the State request that? Does the jail keep track of what books she checks out in the jail library?
Have you ever had an expert send someone self help books when that person is having ongoing evaluations by your side and the state?
The fact that Samuels filled in, or as the jury inferred, made a summarized Jodi's answers to her test for her, is that something that one could report to any board that governs him? It just seems so blatant.
Once she is found guilty, if the family wishes files a wrongful death suit, just to prevent her from profiting off art work, etc. is this something that you would expect a lawyer may even volunteer to do for them?
Does the jury get to have all the videos they were shown, the snippets, in the deliberation room, along with all the evidence, like the autopsy photos, or each time they want to see something like that, all the lawyers, the judge and Jodi need to be called together for it to be played or photos shown to them?
If their client is found guilty, can the defense lawyers write books about this case or only if she is acquitted?
The first expert that asked to be removed from the case, do you know why? Do you know who the first lawyer that asked to be removed from the case was referring to when she said that she had a conflict of interest from representing someone who was a potential witness in the case, or does that name remained private?
Is the state allowed to argue in closing arguments that we did not hear from the one person Jodi kept mentioning she had told at the time, about the abuse, Matt McCartney, and we did not hear from Lenore Walker that Jennifer was insisting to Dr. DeMarte that no longer relies on her own criteria, etc. She was soooo adamant about that as if it were fact and Dr. DeMarte was from Mars or relying on some wrong, outdated information. The jury, not being allowed to watch TV, would not know that Leonore Walker came on Nancy Grace to say that is just silly, of course she does. So, in the juries mind...they were left with what Jennifer was implying. Can the prosecutor bring up that the defense did not call back to the stand the first defense expert, who may be well recovered from her then illness, nor did they call back to the stand either of their other two experts because even they gave up on them and concede they are wholly discredited, so they had to go out and shop for Johnny come lately? Again, it just seems so blatant that they abandon the experts they have. I have never seen a NEW expert come in. If I were on this jury I would infer the defense has lost confidence in the first ones. Why should the taxpayers have to pay for a do over with a new guy when indeed the defense has had Dr. DeMarte's full report that sets out her diagnosis for over a year? It was not a gotcha moment. She testified as they very well knew she would, they even deposed her. As a taxpayer, this makes me angry.
At this point they cannot ask for a ME of their own to testify in surrebuttal right?
Thank you in advance.
Asking for a judgment of acquittal at this stage is almost required. The defense would be accused of ineffective assistance if they didn't ask.
The motion was probably made orally rather than being filed with the clerk. I have no idea, though, why it couldn't have been handled in open court.
I doubt we will see those diaries unless they come into evidence for some reason, and we're pretty much out of time for that. I'm assuming there had to be some concern about the content, though, or they wouldn't have been seized.
I'm not sure about the visitation, but I believe it is face to face with a barrier in between.
The State already knows what books/magazines were sent by Samuels and ALV. As to Samuels, I know the title was mentioned in court. Yes, the jail also keeps track of anything she is allowed to borrow.
I don't do criminal law at the trial court level, but it strikes me as totally inappropriate for an evaluator to send books about psychological issues to the person being evaluated.
I'm not familiar with the ethical rules governing Samuels, so not sure if there's anything to report about him.
It is way too late for the Alexander family to file a wrongful death suit.
The jury can see anything that was admitted into evidence during deliberations, including photos and videos.
The defense team can write books regardless of the outcome (but not releasing attorney-client privileged information without informed consent).
I don't think any expert asked to be removed, I think they just said, hey, get another expert. As for Victoria W asking to be removed for the conflict, the name of the person previously represented by her office has not been released AFAIK.
JM could mention the failure to call certain witnesses, yes.
I think the judge should have said the defense team could call Dr. Samuels back, but could not get a new expert at this late date. Unless I'm misunderstanding something about Dr. S's credentials.
Yes, IMO it is too late for the defense to get someone to testify that the gunshot could have come first. Personally, I suspect that the reason the defense didn't get an expert on this issue is that they couldn't find an expert to say (1) the gunshot might have been first,
AND (2) Travis could still have been a threat to Jodi after the gunshot. It's the second part that is truly ridiculous.
