Zeno49
[brought over from previous thread]
While it might be true that JM is intentionally proceeding with a desultory cross exam for purposes of confusing and trapping JA, it seems like a disjointed approach to the jury. We can assume or at least hope that JM will take time to summarize and bring together the evidence to insure the jury is comprehending the line of questioning.
I have no doubt that JM is going to tie it all together for the jury. And I have a lot of faith in this jury. From what we have heard, they are not buying what JA is trying to sell them. So they know exactly why JM is jumping around and trying to throw her off. After those 8 tedious days of her boring testimony, I am sure they are happy that he is so kinetic and exciting in comparison.
I will argue that JA was never remotely rattled by any of the cross examination on Thursday. JA was in complete control of her answers including all of her sarcastic rejoinders. JA has mastery of all the states evidence arrayed against her.
She may not have looked rattled, but she was at times. She made a few mistakes. And JM has those in his back pocket for later.
But most important to the jury is the demeanor she proudly arrogantly showed. Her sarcasm and her controlling behavior demolishes her previous defense that she was just a meek, helpless victim who couldn’t stand up for herself.
She knew the jail magazines were going to be presented and she will have an answer for the cryptic messages found written in them.
There is no good/reasonable explanation. This magazine stuff is very damaging. He just barely got into it.
Also, she was rattled when she was being questioned about the writing. She BLEW IT when she said they were page numbers. How did she know that? D’OH. :slaphead:
JA’s selected memory is strategic and carefully planned. For example, JM line of questioning regarding sequence of events on January 22, 2008:
JA carefully avoided pegging the time when she started her work and the time she left work. She carefully stated that she went to work in the morning and arrived at TA house in the afternoon. She carefully stated she did not remember any call placed to TA that morning where an arrangement to help TA with boxes would have been coordinated. JA undoubtedly knew about the sequence of text messages and TA cell phone calls.
She did NOT allow herself to trapped in a lie about the pedophilia discovery. She will claim that she arrived at TA house well before the documented texts and calls started in LATE afternoon.
She did carefully avoid pegging the time when she started work, but the text he showed says she started at 10:30. And her lack of memory, concerning the time of such a hugely upsetting event is laughable. Sure, she was stubborn and avoided answering, but that will not make her believable.
And her ridiculous assertion, that he needed HER to come by to move boxes of decorations is silly. He had two male roommates. And why would they discuss it weeks earlier? That was so bogus on her part and he made her look like a liar, once again.
And those texts show clearly that she did not go over that afternoon and cacth him doing that act. There was not enough time for all of that to happen and for her to go home, vomit, and cry and cry for hours. And if she DID, then why would she text him about switching cars?
JM points out NO ENTRY was made in JA private journal respecting the TA physical abuse or his pedophilia. She clearly implied in her rejoinders on the stand that she would NEVER have written about this “dirty little secret” in a journal, in cell phone text messages or telephone conversation with her Father. Her clear implication is that no evidence of journal reference to abuse or pedophilia is NOT probative and does NOT hurt her case at all.
Sure, that is HER implication. But will the jury agree. He made her read from her journal, where she discusses lots of dirty little secrets about their kinky sexual escapades. And it is not just that she never mentioned it. It was that she said NOTHING NOTEWORTHY HAS HAPPENED. I don’t think she can wiggle out of that one.
The “broken left ring finger” incident/”lie” Jan 2008 will be completely rehabilitated when Nurmi conducts his defense cross exam. JA would never have divulged the TA secret – including getting medical attention, discussing problem with another trusted “friend” or writing about it. The photo JM produced revealed JA left hand and fingers that were ALL slightly flexed. JA could easily argue that JM’s photo was shot at an angle that did NOT reveal her ring finger injury.
I disagree. She did not have to tell a doctor that he bf kicked her. There are zillions of excuses for a broken finger. That excuse will never fly, imo.
JA did NOT in any way shape or form “slip up”during cross exam. She did NOT concede any inconsistencies. In fact JM opening salvo regarding reference to JA calling her sister “dumb” was ineffective confusing and a very poor choice respecting “how to open the cross”. The point fell flat like a lead balloon, and was forgotten within minutes of the prolonged testimony.
Yes, she did. And JM will be bringing those slip ups back to us each day. And the sister things was strategic, and was not actually about the sister. I already discussed it in other posts, but it has to do with a sneak attack that some attorneys do. Start with something unimportant and unexpected, get your hostile witness upset and angry, then jump into the real issues. And that is what he did.
His job is like that of a deep sea fisherman with a swordfish on the line. You cannot just reel it in. You hook the fish, but then you have to allow it to dive, jump in the air, veer side to side, and all one can do is tire them out. That is exactly what JM did, imo. He hung on and watched her do her verbal gymnastics and her deflecting and her obfuscating and he just kept at her.
All in all JA shows composure and brimming self-confidence.
Ha. EXACTLY.
She wore a smirk throughout her time on the stand which sent a signal to JM that NOT only is she NOT afraid of him but indeed she is actually smarter than JM. Her tone and demeanor on the stand Thursday was if to declare contemptuously:
“BRING IT ON, LITTLE JUAN””
And that was her mistake. She SHOULD have cried and shaken like a Chihuahua. Then she might have looked like she told the truth in the earlier testimony. But she puffed out her chest and her chin, and challenged JM to a duel. She might mistakenly believe she is winning. But she lost already just for showing her true aggressive, competitive nature. JMO
Problem is - none of it's true! Except the m/o session with Ryan Burns. That I do believe... in large part because someone other than JA (Burns himself) testified to it. 
