Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
After the verdict can the prosecutor's office release information that was precluded during the trial? I assume there must be some information about the background of that scathing text sent to JA which I believe set the murder in motion? If it was in the form of text messages or emails that had been deleted but recovered forensically can that ever be made public? Or the proof that the peso letters were forged?

TIA for all your work during this endless saga. We all appreciate it.
 
Will there be written jury instructions, or just oral instructions they must remember?
 
He couldn't bring it up during his case in chief, because it's totally irrelevant to the issue of whether or not Jodi is guilty of first-degree murder.

He could bring it up in rebuttal, because at that point Jodi had raised the issue of PTSD to explain her "fog," so he could say, no, you don't have PTSD, those symptoms are explained by your BPD.

I'm a little confused, and have been since all the ruckus about whether or if JA has a personality disorder. A personality disorder doesn't mean a person is not responsible for their actions. AFAIK, PTSD doesn't render someone not legally responsible for their actions either.

So isn't it "still" irrelevant to the issue of whether or not Jodi is guilty of first degree murder? Why is there so much emphasis on this at this late point in the trial, with dueling experts at the 11th hour? It is just an attempt at distraction? A hail mary pass? What am I missing?

TIA.
 
If a witness' stories have changed from what he told LE to what he is saying on the stand, and he had said flat out he would lie on the stand for someone, and the prosecutor told the DT that if they called him as a witness he would go after him for perjury, is this a legitimate basis for appeal? TIA.

You mean if the DT decided not to call him as a witness because he would get prosecuted for perjury? No, that would not be grounds for appeal, as long as the threat was not unreasonable. (And the issue would have to be brought up with the trial court judge first, by the way.)
 
After the verdict can the prosecutor's office release information that was precluded during the trial? I assume there must be some information about the background of that scathing text sent to JA which I believe set the murder in motion? If it was in the form of text messages or emails that had been deleted but recovered forensically can that ever be made public? Or the proof that the peso letters were forged?

TIA for all your work during this endless saga. We all appreciate it.

I think only Jodi could tell us the background of the text. I think if whatever Jodi did to set Travis off had been in writing, we would have seen it.

I don't believe the hearing on the pedo letters has ever been sealed. $20 per day for the video, if you want to order it. :) I doubt there was "proof" that they were forged, if you mean absolute proof. My suspicion is that there was expert testimony on both sides, but then Jodi's attorneys found out something that convinced THEM that the letters were forged, and that's why they refused to put on the evidence she wanted them to present. So Jodi acted as her own counsel for a few days, and when her attorneys took over again, the first thing they did is to drop the pedo letter issue.

To answer your main question, I don't know if much has been held back, but after the trial it should be a lot easier to get the information released.
 
I'm a little confused, and have been since all the ruckus about whether or if JA has a personality disorder. A personality disorder doesn't mean a person is not responsible for their actions. AFAIK, PTSD doesn't render someone not legally responsible for their actions either.

So isn't it "still" irrelevant to the issue of whether or not Jodi is guilty of first degree murder? Why is there so much emphasis on this at this late point in the trial, with dueling experts at the 11th hour? It is just an attempt at distraction? A hail mary pass? What am I missing?

TIA.

Yes, the PTSD is irrelevant to whether or not Jodi is guilty. However, it is relevant to whether or not she's faking the "fog." Bipolar disorder is relevant only as an alternative explanation for what Samuels saw as PTSD symptoms. It is not relevant to whether or not Jodi is guilty.
 
Yes, the PTSD is irrelevant to whether or not Jodi is guilty. However, it is relevant to whether or not she's faking the "fog." Bipolar disorder is relevant only as an alternative explanation for what Samuels saw as PTSD symptoms. It is not relevant to whether or not Jodi is guilty.

Yes but does she have it--thats the key and is there a psychological model versus a legal model for the finding of PTSD? Because from a psychological model she does not have it.

While everyone experiences PTSD differently, there are three main types of symptoms: (Why Jodi doesn't have PTSD)
1. Re-experiencing the traumatic event
2. Avoiding reminders of the trauma
3. Increased anxiety and emotional arousal
Symptoms of PTSD: Re-experiencing the traumatic event
• Intrusive, upsetting memories of the event (no)
• Flashbacks (acting or feeling like the event is happening again) (no)
• Nightmares (either of the event or of other frightening things) (Once a week)
• Feelings of intense distress when reminded of the trauma (no)
• Intense physical reactions to reminders of the event (e.g. pounding heart, rapid breathing, nausea, muscle tension, sweating) (no)
Symptoms of PTSD: Avoidance and numbing
• Avoiding activities, places, thoughts, or feelings that remind you of the trauma (NO)
• Inability to remember important aspects of the trauma (Only those that hurt her)
• Loss of interest in activities and life in general (No)
• Feeling detached from others and emotionally numb (No)
• Sense of a limited future (you don’t expect to live a normal life span, get married, have a career) (No)
Symptoms of PTSD: Increased anxiety and emotional arousal
• Difficulty falling or staying asleep (No)
• Irritability or outbursts of anger-----------Does have anger.
• Difficulty concentrating (No)
• Hypervigilance (on constant “red alert”) (No)
• Feeling jumpy and easily startled (No)

--------------------------------------------

Let me add this as well:

PTSD FOG ALERT: Jodi was---
1. ALERT enough to realize Travis was vulnerable, naked, taking shower.
2. ALERT enough to grab knife.
3. ALERT enough to run all the way around to closet to get a gun.
4. ALERT enough to stab him 29-times and NOT get injured herself except for some cuts on hands.
5. ALERT enough to make a devastating deep cut of near decapitation.
6. ALERT enough to remember gun going off, and Travis chasing her, (An impossibility and OBVIOUS lie because she shot in the head and wound was post-mortem).
7. ALERT enough to say she, “did not feel fear” at the time, and then tried to back- peddle.
8. ALERT enough to “Risk going after a gun she thought was unloaded.”
9. ALERT enough to drag him back to the shower and wash off evidence.
10. ALERT enough to grab some towels and clean some things up.
11. ALERT enough to delete the Pic’s. (Takes 4-clicks per per pick to delete, and 5-actual steps for every pic deletion, and several pic’s were deleted).
12. ALERT enough to change sheets, and put camera and bedding in washer).
13. ALERT enough not to leave any blood downstairs to draw suspicion of his roommates.
14. ALERT enough to take gun and knife with her.
15. ALERT enough to get rid of gun, knife, and floor mats of rental care.
16. ALERT enough to keep plate turned upside down as she left Travis’s.
17. ALERT enough to NOT call the police to help Travis.
18. ALERT enough not to tell anyone in Utah what happened.
19. ALERT enough to give excuses/lies to Mr. Burns on why she would be late.
20. ALERT enough to lie and leaves messages on Travis’s phone to cover up. (Why would she call three-days if she remembered by Hoover Dam she did something bad to Travis).
21. ALERT enough that to realize that she had blood on her hands and something bad happened, but told them in Utah she cut her hands bartending.
22. ALERT enough to put gauze on those cuts.
23. ALERT enough to know that everything favored her and nothing was against her in terms of her memory and this trial.
 
Two questions. They didn't finish tonight with testimony until about 840 pm and I didn't see any noticeable breaks for a meal for either the jury or the defendant. Could that be grounds for appeal?

The typo or oversight in Dr Horn's autopsy report....can that be grounds for an appeal if interpreted as not a true typo but a tailoring of his testimony to favor the prosecution?

TIA
 
Can there be objections during the closing statements? (I think that is what they are called)

Can JA make a closing statement?

Thank you again.
 
question for the attorneys:

have you ever seen a case where the judge allowed a PSYCHOLOGIST to rebut the testimony of a PHYSICIAN like this? no medical school, no MD, no autopsies-----just dealt with MAYBE 3 cases where people survived a GSW to the head.

ever seen that?
 
Normally during closing arguments opposing attorneys do not make objections, correct?

What are the odds that we will see this DT do just that anyway, and given this judge's grest deference to the defense, that she will allow the DT to interfere with JM's closing?
 
Yes, the PTSD is irrelevant to whether or not Jodi is guilty. However, it is relevant to whether or not she's faking the "fog." Bipolar disorder is relevant only as an alternative explanation for what Samuels saw as PTSD symptoms. It is not relevant to whether or not Jodi is guilty.[/QUOTE]

Thank you so much for all of your answers AZlawyer. I was wondering if the jury will be given instructions regarding the bolded portion in the above statement. Or, perhaps JM will make sure they understand this when he gives his closing?
 
Can one of the attorneys clarify the requirement for premeditation? Does that finding need to be unanimous ? The juror instructions seemed to indicate they can find M1 unanimously but not have to be unanimous on PM ???
 
I don't recall hearing a line in the jury instructions along the lines of "If you are convinced a witness was untruthful about one thing, you can believe they were untruthful about everything". Is there something like that (in the proper sort of legalese of course) normally included in AZ? The feed was really "jumpy" the past two days so perhaps I missed it. Thanks.
 
Dear WS LegalEagles.. you guys are super. I have a question (I am NOSEY).. in closing yesterday, JM mention ALV MANY times.. openly called her a liar, really excoriated her... was that possibly a "concession" from the in chambers discussion that included ALV.. where we were all speculating??
 
Dear WS LegalEagles.. you guys are super. I have a question (I am NOSEY).. in closing yesterday, JM mention ALV MANY times.. openly called her a liar, really excoriated her... was that possibly a "concession" from the in chambers discussion that included ALV.. where we were all speculating??

No, definitely not. I think you will see Nurmi/Willmot defend her testimony.
 
I don't recall hearing a line in the jury instructions along the lines of "If you are convinced a witness was untruthful about one thing, you can believe they were untruthful about everything". Is there something like that (in the proper sort of legalese of course) normally included in AZ? The feed was really "jumpy" the past two days so perhaps I missed it. Thanks.

Yes, it is Standard Instruction #18 in the document linked here:

http://www.azbar.org/media/58832/2-standard_criminal_revised_2012.pdf
 
Can one of the attorneys clarify the requirement for premeditation? Does that finding need to be unanimous ? The juror instructions seemed to indicate they can find M1 unanimously but not have to be unanimous on PM ???

Some jurors could vote for premeditation and some could vote for felony murder--it's all Murder 1.
 
Yes, the PTSD is irrelevant to whether or not Jodi is guilty. However, it is relevant to whether or not she's faking the "fog." Bipolar disorder is relevant only as an alternative explanation for what Samuels saw as PTSD symptoms. It is not relevant to whether or not Jodi is guilty.[/QUOTE]

Thank you so much for all of your answers AZlawyer. I was wondering if the jury will be given instructions regarding the bolded portion in the above statement. Or, perhaps JM will make sure they understand this when he gives his closing?

I haven't had a chance to hear his closing, but my suspicion is that he will wait to see what the defense says about PTSD/BPD and will clear it up in rebuttal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
133
Guests online
1,591
Total visitors
1,724

Forum statistics

Threads
606,243
Messages
18,200,969
Members
233,788
Latest member
PrancingJeeves
Back
Top