Madeleine74
Knower of Things
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2011
- Messages
- 11,556
- Reaction score
- 20,081
Juan will be able to skewer her BEFORE any D.V. witness takes the stand. He'll grill her on every.single.lie. It will be EPIC!
After yesterday, I would believe it.
Even without the prosecution's objections, Nurmi seems to sense the jurors' growing impatience at having to sit through irrelevant historical details which serve only to feed JA's ego.
http://i545.photobucket.com/albums/hh396/Rfeynman/Emus/SEALMU_zpsb1675ef1.jpg
Jean Causauraus thinks "it took guts" for JA to go to Matt's other girl's (Bianca) house.
Really?
I call that creepy stalking.
Especially along with checking his camera.
On top of a history of checking another boyfriend's email history.
With a future in stalking and e-stalking.
Purely out of interest, how would that possibly justify the crime she committed? Of course a lot of things can build up if (assuming she's telling the truth) she's been through the same type of relationships over and over again, but still that does not justify that literal overkill.
Besides, as someone pointed out somewhere above, in her relationship with Travis, he was cheating with her, not on her.
I get how this is a possible tactic of theirs, I just don't understand how they might possibly think this could convince a jury that her actions were justified as self-defence.
I love how she tries so hard to come off like she's perfect, she's trying to be the perfect child every parent would want to have....except the pesky little detail of slaughtering a man....
Lets see...
she's responsible
Tidy
Doesn't smoke
Doesn't drink
Doesn't swear
Saves money
Meek
Soft spoken
Blah....
Bobby? Boy, are you in the dark ages. We are on Darryl now and he's a filthy smoker that drinks too much. Let it go about Bobby. He might have gotten away alive, but please... Don't get her started on Bobby again please. :floorlaugh:
Purely out of interest, how would that possibly justify the crime she committed? Of course a lot of things can build up if (assuming she's telling the truth) she's been through the same type of relationships over and over again, but still that does not justify that literal overkill.
Besides, as someone pointed out somewhere above, in her relationship with Travis, he was cheating with her, not on her.
I get how this is a possible tactic of theirs, I just don't understand how they might possibly think this could convince a jury that her actions were justified as self-defence.
Linda--I respectfully disagree - look here:
The beginnings of sexual addiction are usually rooted up in adolescence or childhood. It is found that 60% of sexual addicts were abused by someone in their childhood (Book, 1997,pp 52). The child may have grown up in a hostile, chaotic or neglectful home.....
http://allpsych.com/journal/sexaddiction.html
Child abuse is a major contributor to sexual addiction in adults. Research has shown that a very high correlation exists between childhood abuse and sexual addiction in adulthood. 97% of sex addicts have been emotionally abused as a child, 83% have been sexually abused and 71% have been physically abused.
http://www.sw-mins.org/The Cause of Sexual Addiction.html
Jean Causauraus thinks "it took guts" for JA to go to Matt's other girl's (Bianca) house.
Really?
I call that creepy stalking.
Especially along with checking his camera.
On top of a history of checking another boyfriend's email history.
With a future in stalking and e-stalking.
Oh my! The forensic psychologist whose face doesn't move is on IS again. Her voice is beyond irritating. JMO.
It's all they got :floorlaugh: I'm sure Travis was the most brutal to her. Triggering her violent reaction. Which of course she has blocked out and wont remember one dang detail. I think she shoulda went for the "I was raised a feral desert rat" Defense :floorlaugh:
Wonder if Jodi will do one of those chair stretches for the jusry at this afternoon's riveting testimony?
Oh my! The forensic psychologist whose face doesn't move is on IS again. Her voice is beyond irritating. JMO.