Jodi Arias TAKES THE STAND #37 *may contain graphic and adult content*

[shantastic]

Granted, I could be seeing something that isn't there, just making it up in my head, but this is what I see:

This is the general area:

This shows what I'm seeing:

This is the outline I see:

Again, it could be just in my head but :what:

Thanks! I'm still thinking it's just lighting, etc., but I appreciate your post.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Rule 3.3—Candor to Tribunal


(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:
(1) Make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer, unless correction would require disclosure of information that is prohibited by Rule 1.6;
(2) Counsel or assist a client to engage in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent, but a lawyer may discuss the legal consequences of any proposed course of conduct with a client and may counsel or assist a client to make a good-faith effort to determine the validity, scope, meaning, or application of the law;
(3) Fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction not disclosed by opposing counsel and known to the lawyer to be dispositive of a question at issue and directly adverse to the position of the client; or
(4) Offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false, except as provided in paragraph (b). A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that the lawyer reasonably believes is false.

(b) When the witness who intends to give evidence that the lawyer knows to be false is the lawyer’s client and is the accused in a criminal case, the lawyer shall first make a good-faith effort to dissuade the client from presenting the false evidence; if the lawyer is unable to dissuade the client, the lawyer shall seek leave of the tribunal to withdraw. If the lawyer is unable to dissuade the client or to withdraw without seriously harming the client, the lawyer may put the client on the stand to testify in a narrative fashion, but the lawyer shall not examine the client in such manner as to elicit testimony which the lawyer knows to be false, and shall not argue the probative value of the client’s testimony in closing argument.
(c) The duties stated in paragraph (a) continue to the conclusion of the proceeding.

http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/et...onduct/amended_rules/rule_three/rule03_03.cfm

 

[zoey]

But even Mimi testified that as soon as they walked into the house they noticed a smell, but thought the dog had "made a mess" or something. So the smell was throughout the house.

If I were any of the roommates who slept in that house during those 5 days, I would not be the same. Sleeping in the house with your dead roommates body just feet away for 5 days??? No sir.....I think I'd need some help after that.

Sometimes men/boys don't notice smells right away. Based upon my experience with dh

 

[KBisMe]

Regarding the sex tape - I was taken off guard by this one particular caller's comment. On last night's NG show. She was very "candid" and believable - but better yet I think she was spot on the money!!!!

Read what Amy says:
AMY: But here`s my comment. You know, I grew up, I was raised in the Mormon culture. And what I`ve been hearing today on the -- on edited sex tapes and what I`ve seen from Jodi on the stand, up until this point and what I saw today, something occurred to me. This tape, in my opinion, is Jodi`s final coup de gras, and this is why.

The law of chastity in the LDS culture is very, very important. Abstinence is very, very important. Unfortunately, human sexuality dictates something else, and that is why we have heard some of these weird things, like anal sex really isn`t sex. Sex in the water doesn`t count. There are saying in the Mormon culture that be moral, go oral, or in other words, just have oral sex.

That is the dirty secret that Jodi is unearthing here, not that he was -- that Jodi was Travis` dirty secret. What she is doing to Travis now is not just slandering him, this is part of her rage killing, in my opinion, to completely obliterate everything that people value Travis for, which was his Mormon identity and everything tied up in that.

She knows what she`s doing. She knows that this is the worst possible thing that she could do to Travis besides kill him is afterwards paint him as a deviant.

That caller stood out to me too and I couldn't agree with her more!

 

[Softail]

I still can't see it. I stared at it until I went cross-eyed and I can't see it.

I can't either. The only thing I am seeing is 's avatar on the left. :waitasec:

Otherwise I only see wet skin, with some discolored portions. I think I need to just quit looking at it.

:doh:

 

[Nosey Parker]

One thing I would like to know about JA is....we all can see she is a liar. But with the Casey case...she was an accomplished liar. Friends testified about it. It was obvious she had been lying effectively for years.

Has anybody come forward to talk about lies JA has told in the past? Whether or not she was a pathological liar? She obviously lied from the get go about this murder, but what about previously?

It doesn't appear she spoke with anyone in depth, outside of the current boyfriend. So who would know if she were lying or not, before she met Travis. There is a marked lack of character witnesses/girlfriends.

 

[zoey]

I

Unfortunately, everyone thought Casey Anthony's lawyer was also a fool.

I still do. I feel he got lucky:blushing:

 

[jevipo74]

I

I still do. I feel he got lucky:blushing:

Ditto.

 

[Stolat]

Granted, I could be seeing something that isn't there, just making it up in my head, but this is what I see:

This is the general area:

This shows what I'm seeing:

This is the outline I see:

Again, it could be just in my head but :what:

It's a good effort, but the angle is all wrong and would defy laws of physics in terms of image refraction.

If what you're suggesting is true, then in order for there to be an image where you have circled to be reflected in the shower door, then that reflection could only be made by a photographer standing on the far left- not in the far right as your circle indicates.

Think about when you try on clothes in the mirror. Do you see yourself standing directly in front of you, or do you see an image of yourself off to the right? Because I know if that happened to me, I'd freak the heck out because I would be having an out of body experience! Ha!

No, when you stand in front of the mirror, you see your reflection directly in front of you - not off to the side. A camera lense acts no differently than the human eye. It will display what it sees on film from your eye's vantage point.

The only way that could be a reflection of Jodi is if there was a 2nd person in the room standing off to the left taking the picture and captured Jodi's reflection in the right.

 

[mollyf]

Rule 3.3—Candor to Tribunal


(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:
(1) Make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer, unless correction would require disclosure of information that is prohibited by Rule 1.6;
(2) Counsel or assist a client to engage in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent, but a lawyer may discuss the legal consequences of any proposed course of conduct with a client and may counsel or assist a client to make a good-faith effort to determine the validity, scope, meaning, or application of the law;
(3) Fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction not disclosed by opposing counsel and known to the lawyer to be dispositive of a question at issue and directly adverse to the position of the client; or
(4) Offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false, except as provided in paragraph (b). A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that the lawyer reasonably believes is false.

(b) When the witness who intends to give evidence that the lawyer knows to be false is the lawyer’s client and is the accused in a criminal case, the lawyer shall first make a good-faith effort to dissuade the client from presenting the false evidence; if the lawyer is unable to dissuade the client, the lawyer shall seek leave of the tribunal to withdraw. If the lawyer is unable to dissuade the client or to withdraw without seriously harming the client, the lawyer may put the client on the stand to testify in a narrative fashion, but the lawyer shall not examine the client in such manner as to elicit testimony which the lawyer knows to be false, and shall not argue the probative value of the client’s testimony in closing argument.
(c) The duties stated in paragraph (a) continue to the conclusion of the proceeding.

http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/et...onduct/amended_rules/rule_three/rule03_03.cfm

Bolded by me.

Thanks for that. Maybe not intentional, then. He wouldn't risk that. He's definitely examining his client in a manner that elicits testimony that I think is BS since she's a known liar. I dunno. :waitasec:

 

[ttcRider]

I

I still do. I feel he got lucky:blushing:

Me too! what rotten luck.

 

[jevipo74]

Is it safe to watch In Session, or is Gus going to be on there trying to work his 15 minutes of fame?

 

[pinkie60]

the sex tape was recorded how long before the murder? i think she might have been planning to off him then. maybe when he visited her in yreka. but she couldn't get him to come and time was wasting, so she went to see him. i just sense she is sick and evil. no conscience. same caegory as dahlia deppolito

 

[paperwing]

I've heard about this voice mail. What did it say?

It was creepy-weird. She spoke extremely fast (nervously?), and it almost seemed like she was looking at notes perhaps, and she coughed rapidly and awkwardly a couple of times...

She spoke about getting in touch with someone - told Travis he could do so too, didn't matter either way. She told Travis (or rather his voice mail) that she went 100 miles out of her way, saying "Fun, fun" sarcastically, and mentioning it might not have happened if he'd been with her (I think - I'm writing all this from memory so...). She mentioned going to a Team event w/him and Crater Lake and asked him if he wanted to go see Othello with her and another friend in (Oregon?)...

If you want to hear the recording, it was played as part of the state's CIC, but I'm not sure which day... perhaps someone else can point you towards it better than I can.

I have not heard JA sound like she did on that VM at any other time. She spoke so fast and I think it may be the only time she actually sounded truly nervous. The quick little coughs were wweeiirrdd... almost tic-like.

That's the best I can do as far as a description. Someone else will probably give you a better one - or has already and I just haven't seen it.

HTH!

ETA: lvcarolinagirl posted a transcript of the VM (it's quoted in post #457 by Zeno49 (scroll down).

 

[jevipo74]

the sex tape was recorded how long before the murder? i think she might have been planning to off him then. maybe when he visited her in yreka. but she couldn't get him to come and time was wasting, so she went to see him. i just sense she is sick and evil. no conscience. same caegory as dahlia deppolito

I believe it was recorded May 10, 2008.

 

[Nosey Parker]

Rule 3.3—Candor to Tribunal


(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:
(1) Make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer, unless correction would require disclosure of information that is prohibited by Rule 1.6;
(2) Counsel or assist a client to engage in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent, but a lawyer may discuss the legal consequences of any proposed course of conduct with a client and may counsel or assist a client to make a good-faith effort to determine the validity, scope, meaning, or application of the law;
(3) Fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction not disclosed by opposing counsel and known to the lawyer to be dispositive of a question at issue and directly adverse to the position of the client; or
(4) Offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false, except as provided in paragraph (b). A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that the lawyer reasonably believes is false.

(b) When the witness who intends to give evidence that the lawyer knows to be false is the lawyer’s client and is the accused in a criminal case, the lawyer shall first make a good-faith effort to dissuade the client from presenting the false evidence; if the lawyer is unable to dissuade the client, the lawyer shall seek leave of the tribunal to withdraw. If the lawyer is unable to dissuade the client or to withdraw without seriously harming the client, the lawyer may put the client on the stand to testify in a narrative fashion, but the lawyer shall not examine the client in such manner as to elicit testimony which the lawyer knows to be false, and shall not argue the probative value of the client’s testimony in closing argument.
(c) The duties stated in paragraph (a) continue to the conclusion of the proceeding.

http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/et...onduct/amended_rules/rule_three/rule03_03.cfm

Thanks for this JJ.

Looks like Nurmi's closing argument might be hampered? Not sure if he is abiding by the not eliciting false testimony, but it certainly is a 'narrative' testimony!

 

[Zeno49]

"Hey! What's going on? It's almost midnight -- uh, anyway it's about the time you're starting to gear up. . . I know Leslie called you. So, I already talked to her so, uh -- you can call her back if you want but it's not necessary. Um . . . My phone died so I wasn't getting back to anybody. What else, um . . . I drove one hundred miles in the wrong direction -- over a hundred miles, thank you very much! So yeah. Remember New Mexico? It was a lot like that, only you weren't here to prevent me from going into the three digits, so -- fun, fun! I'll tell you all about that later. Um. Also --we were talking about -- um, when we were talking about your upcoming travels my way I was looking at the May calendar. Duh. So I'm a little confused. Um -- But Heather and I are going to see Othello on July first and we would love for you to come -- to accompany us. Um, I don't know when the Crater Lake event is though, but it's on the way, so we could do Shakespeare, Crater Lake and the coast. So . . . If you can make it. If not, we'll just do the coast and uh Crater Lake. But um, let me know -- and I will talk to you soon! Bye!"

Thanks for posting the content of this voice mail. I had not seen it before.

It is PAINFULLY OBVIOUS that JA is establishing an alibi in this voice mail. It is going to be another “whopper” –like the “I was going to commit suicide” – when JA explains what she was doing and meant by this voicemail knowing she had just savagely murdered TA some 4 -5 hours previously.
I have been guessing that JA will claim that she was SO TRAUMATIZED by her near death attack coming from the hands TA that the experience launched her into a ‘fugue state” which is characterized by forgetfulness and denial of the past. OR. . .out of the horror experienced in TA bathroom her mind “blanked out” and she then went on autopilot as if nothing at all had happened. OR despite TA murderous attack on her she still loved him and was “forced” to protect his living memory. Whatever psychological trick JA chooses as her excuse it will be a most “beautiful astonishing lie”.


Having said that the content of the voicemail is interesting.

First- her comments on driving 100 miles in the wrong direction. Here she is providing the excuse – for police consumption and alibi- of why she is still driving late in the evening of June 5. This excuse of course is preposterous. All major freeways from Pasadena CA to Mesa AZ or to Las Vegas – to St George UTAH are very well marked. If she were going the wrong direction – what direction was she headed in? Her claim is that she drove from Pasadena direct to SLC – the unaccounted period –“detour to Mesa”- explained by “falling asleep at the wheel or sleep at the side of the road”. There is only ONE major freeway from Pasadena to SLC – cutting diagonally up through Nevada and southern Utah. Had she been driving 100 miles in the wrong direction she would have been driving back to Pasadena!!! Notice she gave NO geographical details – like Barstow, Las Vegas, Mesquite, St George etc.

The New Mexico comment – this merely serves to emphasize she is driving in desert terrain. New Mexico was nowhere near where JA was traveling June 5. This added detail does her no good at all.

The dead cellphone – we all know this story is a complete CROCK but was gratuitously provided –for future police consumption and alibi – to account for her cell phone “ping” silence during her detour to Mesa. JA spent most of her life on a cellphone either blathering or texting. Driving across a long dark desert stretch in the middle of the night when completely alone and not having your cellphone located in your lap or plugged in to lighter socket –in the event of a flat tire or break down – makes NO SENSE.

Oregon trip – We know these Oregon theatrical events were mentioned in JA sex audio tapes occurring on May 10(??). I don’t know if other conversations or text exchanges had occurred between JA and TA establishing TA’s inclination to travel to Yreka and onto Crater Lake OR in July. The audio sex tapes clearly show TA was not that enthused about “cavorting about “ with JA under any circumstance EXCEPT to have sex with her. He indicated that “Mr Alexander” was going to be busy through June and July including a trip to Washington DC.

I think JA invoked the Oregon trip in the voice mail = meant for future police consumption – in order to show “distance” between JA and TA. The police would conclude that JA and TA were merely “talking long distance on the phone”.

JA did not know when TA body would be discovered. She was banking on the fact that the discovery would come long after June 5. This lack of detection would grant her more immunity from suspicion. When the TA corpse was discovered, though, the police would find it hard to peg an exact time of death. This would also be a HUGE boon for JA. The voicemail of June 5 would fit in nicely in TA phone messages waiting to be heard.

No time of death of TA, a distant innocuous voicemail, JA ‘s confirmed presence in SLC on June 6- voila’ JA is off the hook.
The Sony camera record became for JA the huge “F______ Up”. The voicemail then turns out to bite her badly.

 

[StephanieHartPI]

But even Mimi testified that as soon as they walked into the house they noticed a smell, but thought the dog had "made a mess" or something. So the smell was throughout the house.

If I were any of the roommates who slept in that house during those 5 days, I would not be the same. Sleeping in the house with your dead roommates body just feet away for 5 days??? No sir.....I think I'd need some help after that.

I vote for Mimi - female, showers, launders clothes regularly, can smell death

Roommates - guys = not so much

 

[wenwe4]

Regarding the sex tape - I was taken off guard by this one particular caller's comment. On last night's NG show. She was very "candid" and believable - but better yet I think she was spot on the money!!!!

Read what Amy says:
AMY: But here`s my comment. You know, I grew up, I was raised in the Mormon culture. And what I`ve been hearing today on the -- on edited sex tapes and what I`ve seen from Jodi on the stand, up until this point and what I saw today, something occurred to me. This tape, in my opinion, is Jodi`s final coup de gras, and this is why.

The law of chastity in the LDS culture is very, very important. Abstinence is very, very important. Unfortunately, human sexuality dictates something else, and that is why we have heard some of these weird things, like anal sex really isn`t sex. Sex in the water doesn`t count. There are saying in the Mormon culture that be moral, go oral, or in other words, just have oral sex.

That is the dirty secret that Jodi is unearthing here, not that he was -- that Jodi was Travis` dirty secret. What she is doing to Travis now is not just slandering him, this is part of her rage killing, in my opinion, to completely obliterate everything that people value Travis for, which was his Mormon identity and everything tied up in that.

She knows what she`s doing. She knows that this is the worst possible thing that she could do to Travis besides kill him is afterwards paint him as a deviant.

I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE! Furthermore, I think that if TA did go to his Bishop (or was planning to) and JA had not done so . . . . she would be exposed and possibly face excommunication. This would also preclude her from ever being TA's Mormon Wife. She murdered him before he could repent - therefore he would be doomed to never achieving his highest goal (Celestial Kingdom). The audio sex tape, the pictures, the sexting messages, the whole trial testimony is her way of hurting TA far more than just murdering him X3. His Mormon identity was the most precious thing to TA and it is the very thing he was trying to protect others from knowing that Jodi was his dirty little secret. . . . . She would no longer ever be his "secret" - she wanted to be known as his sex partner. Even the email that she wrote to him about wanting "credit" for typing and editing his book chapter . . . . she stated she wanted recognition for being his girlfriend. She ultimately wanted recognition for being his forbidden sex toy - which she knew would totally degrade his image in every aspect of his life.

 

[StephanieHartPI]

If nothing else I'd have a lack of confidence moving into the house that if I fainted in my room it would take 10 days for the guys to find me..if even that.