jodi arias TAKES THE STAND FOR 13TH DAY #63 *may contain graphic and adult content*

[Curious Me]

I asked this in the legal thread. They have access to the exhibits - the other stuff, not necessarily.

Do the jurors get to see close ups of Jodi's face as we do watching online? Do you think they caught her smile while crying?

 

[legalmania]

I'm thinking the jury has access to video of the trial and close ups of Jodi's face that they can view again. Is that correct? It's too much to ask that they remember every single thing otherwise. Do they watch parts of the trial again?

I know in Fl. they can ask for certain things to be played back. I really think it's time for Martinez to rap it up and hopefully Nurmi doesn't drag his redirect on for another few days. I think the jury has had enough.

 

[Ammonitida]

I predict a mistrial or acquittal. Juan botched the case on cross for the most part.

1. He didn't establish a credible motive. No focus whatsoever on the May 26th text exchange (where he was very mean to her) and no attempt to link it to the May 28th "burglary". He seems to think that cancun crap is enough. It isn't.

2. No attempt to refute her claim that Travis guilted her into seeing him. Juan could have pointed out the flurry of phone calls she made to him on June 3rd to undermine her lies.

3. Never properly pointed out the inconsistency of her sexual talk and fantasies and her claims of being raped during the relationship. She claims she was anally raped in 2007. When describing this she pretended to act like she was raped, by pausing, crying, etc. Yet, just a little while later she's exploring her sexual fantasies with him, requesting facials and wanting to frak him like a "horny little school girl". Juan should have pointed out how far-fetched it was for a rape victim to continue to engage in mutual, enjoyable, kinky sexual relationship with her rapist. This would have crushed her whole "sexual abuse" crap. I don't feel that Juan made this point clearly enough.

4. He had her cornered on the rope issue. She bungled by admitting that she had no reason for throwing the rope away. Juan could have pointed out that "reason". The rope was imaginary -- conjured up to explain the knife's close proximity to the crime scene -- and her lie about throwing it in the dumpster was made up to explain why no rope was recovered.

5. The gun!!! He had her here too. All he had to ask was;

Juan: Isn't it true that the reason you disposed of the gun was because it didn't belong to Travis but to your grandparent and you knew that leaving it at the scene would have further implicated you?

There are other things, but these stick out the most.

 

[Lissa]

At least on JVM they called her out on the smile behind the hands!
Hope Juan can use that to ask the jury if this woman is remorseful or acting.......and ask them to think back if any tears they saw were for TRAVIS or for herself.
(Won't happen, I know - but I am a dreamer!)

I missed the smile! Anyone have a screenshot?

 

[TigerBalm]

If so, why didn't she shoot him when she walked in?

Because she wanted him to suffer, therefore she waited for his roommates to leave the next day.
Then she proceeded to stab him in the chest penetrating the superior vena cava near the base of the heart.
Followed by several more stabs wounds, including but not limited to 9 stab wounds to his back, 2 two inch stab wounds to his scalp.
Slitting his throat from ear to ear then dragging him back to the bathroom area, where she shot him in the right forehead and finally putting him into the shower.

 

[Hope4More]

Yes, on the pic orientation.

She described a 'double bounce' of the camera in that area. .

Caught that too.... Chalked it up as just one more of her near infinite nonsensical details.

 

[LotusPawprint]

Oh I know about grandparent's gun... just have to put ALL the pieces together as this is one heck of a puzzle.

Yes!!! Exactly!!!! And we have to use all the pieces of THIS puzzle!!! Not pieces of other puzzles!!!! Like "crime of passion" is not a puzzle piece of this puzzle. The defense is not offering it as an option. That's not the story they're telling. That's not just my opinion, that's what's actually going on in the courtroom.

 

[GetSmart]

Premeditation takes it out of the realm of crime of passion . I believe a crime of passion has to take place as the result of a sudden impulse or rage.
All that planning she did was cold and calculated.

I think she really think she thought she could persuade him to take her ... thinking she had the magic stuff ... her last ditch effort. Maybe like in those movies where the ex ties up the other and pleads their case makes them listen to them ect ...

 

[Schuby]

I agree - but I think Cancun was more significant than just 'going to Cancun'. Somehow, imv, it was a turning point - an end point after which she knew she would no longer be a part of Travis' life on any level... I don't know how, but I believe that somehow this was made abundantly clear.

She knew that losing Travis meant losing everything else:
The friends, the Mormon facade (and I mean NO disrespect to LDS folk, I just believe JA used her 'faith' falsely), making connections/staying with people with nicer houses... all of it... everything was connected to Travis, none of it was anything she 'brought' to the relationship (when there was one).

I think she expected to get her way that day... whatever that meant, and Travis wouldn't budge. That was unacceptable and just the idea made her so livid that she planned ahead just in case).

Either that or Travis had already turned the corner and she knew she was going to kill him no matter what - the sex being either just a sick 'so there!' on her part... to show him how much in control SHE was - in everything - ugh. She makes me ill.

My guess (and it is only a guess) is that part of her rage was that he didn't consider her seriously as marriage material precisely because of her sexual permissiveness with him. Her thinking being, "I've catered to you every whim sexually to get you and now that is the cross you hang me on, who do you think you are?"

 

[lil_buddy]

Do the jurors get to see close ups of Jodi's face as we do watching online? Do you think they caught her smile while crying?

this is all i know:

The jurors can look over the exhibits during deliberations, yes. All exhibits admitted will be in the room with them, unless it is something that requires special care or handling, and then they can ask to see it.

They will not be given video or a transcript unless they specifically ask, and probably not even then if either of the lawyers objects. But that's up to the judge.

 

[kscornfed]

I dont think Cancun was the catalist.

At the end of May and around the time she stoled the gun Travis told her he would not be able to come to see her afterall. Iirc it was the second time he had stalled and postponed it. She knew he was rejecting her and trying to distance himself from her for good.

I do not believe anything that JA says including that he knew and asked her to come.

By then he was writing about gold diggers and a possibility of marrying an axe murderer. He was referring to Jodi IMO.

imo

About him not going to see her----did we see texts or emails about that? I'm old and I probably forgot!

 

[Gnatcatcher]

No way I can keep up with a 6,000 post day. Or whatever it is. I'm just starting now. But wanted to say ... when does Jean C sleep? That woman is my inspiration, the picture of class and strength.

 

[Pink Panther]

I dont think Cancun was the catalist.

At the end of May and around the time she stoled the gun Travis told her he would not be able to come to see her afterall. Iirc it was the second time he had stalled and postponed it. She knew he was rejecting her and trying to distance himself from her for good.

I do not believe anything that JA says including that he knew and asked her to come.

By then he was writing about gold diggers and a possibility of marrying an axe murderer. He was referring to Jodi IMO.

imo

I think she did something terrible to TA...Like threaten to expose the sex tape as well as more snooping, drama, possibly stealing - something that just did him in and, I think he threatened to expose her for what she was. He probably told her to go ahead and expose him and he would expose her. Her appearance/"reputation" is all she has (nothing else matters).

I think THAT (along with his overt rejection including Cancun) is what toppled her over the edge.

moo

 

[minor4th]

Not standing up for JA at all, because her story is self-serving and doesn't ring true, but my PTSD did involve amnesia of the worst parts of the incident for a few years. I did remember bits and pieces of the whole thing, but it wasn't at all like JA said. I was drugged, so clearly that makes a difference, too.

The two worst parts of the night I didn't rememer until after years of flashbacks that made no sense. I would lose it and not know why I was losing it. For example, one thing that set me off was seeing my psychopath's face late at night after the incident (we were roommates; she set up the rape and said something to me right before it). I couldn't take her face and had freakouts in my room alone or with my boyfriend. I thought I was going crazy.

I really could not remember what I remembered later (the two big things). My mind wouldn't let me until I was ready. It sounds silly, but it was like the last episode of MASH if anyone remembers Hawkeye's story.

So anyway, yes to amnesia, sometimes (imho, lol). No to JA's idiotic, self-serving version of it.

I can somewhat relate to this - years ago, I walked in on a friend who had attempted suicide by cutting her wrists in the bathtub. I got her out of the tub, wrapped t-shirts around her wrists, and called the ambulance. I did not immediately forget the incident or go into a "fog", but after I recovered from the shock of it, I completely forgot the entire incident -- until years later when something reminded me of it.

 

[Kensie]

I am furious right now. Just watched NG and the other half said he would let her go.
WTF!! I am also out of wine and cookies.

 

[katiedid2]

Do the jurors get to see close ups of Jodi's face as we do watching online? Do you think they caught her smile while crying?

Are there no screen shots of it!

 

[TigerBalm]

The silver fox is on Dr. Drew right now.

 

[indycornstalk]

I dont think Cancun was the catalist.

At the end of May and around the time she stoled the gun Travis told her he would not be able to come to see her afterall. Iirc it was the second time he had stalled and postponed it. She knew he was rejecting her and trying to distance himself from her for good.

I do not believe anything that JA says including that he knew and asked her to come.

By then he was writing about gold diggers and a possibility of marrying an axe murderer. He was referring to Jodi IMO.

imo

I too agree that the Cancun trip WAS in fact the catalyst. If you remember, Arias was SO arrogant and brash that she actually had the NERVE to be at Travis;s house "Cleaning" when he was out on a date with Mimi Hall. She then used the excuse of "Falling Asleep" to remain at his house when he came home from the date. While she acted like it was OK, her remaining there when he got home speaks volumes. She "Fell Asleep" so she could prove she could hang around even after he was dating other women. Then she leaves town, Travis is talking about Cancun, NEVER ONCE asking her to go, NEVER telling her who he was taking, because in trial she even is STILL speculating who he was taking, remember the "Babysitter", then she goes into wondering about Mimi Hall at the funeral memorial. That trip was more than she could bare, him NOT asking her to go, him going with another woman. She couldn't handle it, that trip is what pushed her to kill him, if she couldn't have him NO ONE else could either.

 

[Candy_Pickletoes]

I'm thinking the jury has access to video of the trial and close ups of Jodi's face that they can view again. Is that correct? It's too much to ask that they remember every single thing otherwise. Do they watch parts of the trial again?

Does anyone have this smile behind the hands cued on video?

As I understand it, they cannot use the video in any aspect of the trial, even the attorneys can't bring video into the court to show, I think that was part of the stipulation of allowing the cameras. I could be wrong though.

 

[Zuri]

I predict a mistrial or acquittal. Juan botched the case on cross for the most part.

1. He didn't establish a credible motive. No focus whatsoever on the May 26th text exchange (where he was very mean to her) and no attempt to link it to the May 28th "burglary". He seems to think that cancun crap is enough. It isn't.

2. No attempt to refute her claim that Travis guilted her into seeing him. Juan could have pointed out the flurry of phone calls she made to him on June 3rd to undermine her lies.

3. Never properly pointed out the inconsistency of her sexual talk and fantasies and her claims of being raped during the relationship. She claims she was anally raped in 2007. When describing this she pretended to act like she was raped, by pausing, crying, etc. Yet, just a little while later she's exploring her sexual fantasies with him, requesting facials and wanting to frak him like a "horny little school girl". Juan should have pointed out how far-fetched it was for a rape victim to continue to engage in mutual, enjoyable, kinky sexual relationship with her rapist. This would have crushed her whole "sexual abuse" crap. I don't feel that Juan made this point clearly enough.

4. He had her cornered on the rope issue. She bungled by admitting that she had no reason for throwing the rope away. Juan could have pointed out that "reason". The rope was imaginary -- conjured up to explain the knife's close proximity to the crime scene -- and her lie about throwing it in the dumpster was made up to explain why no rope was recovered.

5. The gun!!! He had her here too. All he had to ask was;

Juan: Isn't it true that the reason you disposed of the gun was because it didn't belong to Travis but to your grandparent and you knew that leaving it at the scene would have further implicated you?

There are other things, but these stick out the most.

I respectfully disagree. The inferences are there and conclusions are drawn.