jodi arias TAKES THE STAND FOR 14TH DAY #69*may contain graphic and adult content*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm just curious, Karmady: What's your take on the gun? Do you think she stole it from the house she was living in? Do you think it was Travis'?

How do you define premeditation - as in how long it takes to form?

Do you know if act-of-passion is an option? It's not the defense's justification argument of self-defense, nor is it part of the State's charges. Do you know how that would work?

I missed the answer about lesser-included... do you know if it's in the legal Q thread so I can try to find it?

Thanks - and sorry for all the questions. I will be honest: I don't see eye to eye with you on some things, which I don't see as a negative - but as a learning experience (hopefully), but I am curious about your views, so if you feel like answering any of the above, I TYIA. :)

I do think she stole the gun. I don't think the prosecution has proved it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Although the idea that intent can be formed in a second is bandied about, imo, a jury isn't going to find premeditation without some planning unless they want to. I think they could find premeditation in this case, but it's an equal chance, imo. And if they base premeditation on the "formed in a second" type, they won't vote for DP. Also jmo.

I think it was a post of AZlawyer in the legal thread addressing the lesser included issue. It was today, for sure. I've always thought this was a heat of passion (2nd degree) slam dunk. And I still do. If that's an option, I think the jury might go there. And based on what I read today, it probably will be an option. As I understand it, a lesser included offense is one regardless of what is charged and regardless of what the defense asserted is. If a party requests a "lesser included" charge (or maybe even if they don't, but the judge thinks it's warranted -- azlawyer?) the court can instruct the jury on it and the jury can return a guilty verdict on that basis. I think one of Juan's most famous cases resulted in a second degree conviction even though it was charged as murder one. The defense didn't want to allow the lesser included instruction because they knew the charged case hadn't been proven and the jury would have to acquit. The judge gave the charge over the defense's objection and Juan "won."
 
Today we learn something which could be mind boggling when applied to her statements past and present.

Her true religion is the Law of Attraction. If you are not familiar with this concept, which has enjoyed flashes of popularity at various times over the last century, it is the principle behind the popular new age book "The Secret" and "Think and Grow Rich" before that, etc.

Arias is telling us over and over that this is what she really believes in. She mentions it frequently as a motive for why there's nothing negative in her journal about Travis. She says quite plainly that she was unwilling to "put out there" the negative for fear of attracting more of the same.

The Law of Attraction is quite commonly used in multi-level marketing programs to blame the "associates" who are not producing up to the standards held up in the "I attracted Fabulous Wealth" testimonials. We see Travis Alexander himself get up there in one video clip shown on Dateline and say, "This is where I started...." You can be that he goes on to say that through the application of positive thought and their trainings, every one of those in the audience can achieve what he achieved.

Later in the testimony of this trial, a comment is made about Travis accusing Arias of failing to "work the program"--another multi-level marketing buzz phrase.

So...once he started calling her a sociopath and a *advertiser censored*, how in the world was she going to rid the world of such negative thoughts about herself? Mind you, she is a True Believer in the Law of Attraction, which is nowhere found in Mormonism. Mormons believe that success comes from obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel-- paying tithing, keeping clean sexually, avoiding alcohol, tea and coffee, attendance at meetings, taking all callings (requests to volunteer for work), and avoiding association or sympathy for exMormons.

All these requirements are asked about in Temple Recommend interviews. A person may be denied a Temple Recommend for breaking any of these rules. Nowhere is mentioned the Law of Attraction.

Were Jodi Arias to be excommunicated for fornication, the earth would tremble with the negativity coming her way from all the Mormons who would have been informed of church action taken against her. Think of all those Mormons who would know she had been deprived of her membership AND THEY ARE FORBIDDEN TO ASSOCIATE WITH HER, as a condition of their own temple worthiness.

I am sorry if Mormons are offended by their practices being discussed, but this is vital to the understanding of motive. I have been a private investigator myself and you have to think like the perp thinks if you want to understand the crime.

Excommunicated Mormons are shunned even by their own families because of the temple recommend interview question. When you leave the church, even if you resign, like I did, you may suffer employment consequences if you life in Utah, Arizona, or Idaho where there are strong Mormon communities. Prepaid Legal was full of Mormons. Travis was a leader there. It is not inconceivable that his position as a role model and exemplar would be jeopardized. Can you imagine what his good buddies at PPL were going to think if they had to confess that they "associated" with Travis Alexander after his excommunication?

Exactly. He would lose not only his status as a desirable bachelor, he could also see his income take a nosedive as people who would have wanted to sign up under him chose someone else like Chris Hughes. Someone they wouldn't have to confess that they were associating with or sympathizing with.

Jodi Arias believed in the Law of Attraction before she met Travis Alexander. She never quit believing in it-- and who doesn't believe in being positive? It is another thing, though, to be an extremist and have a superstitious view of it where you believe that looking at an envelope with the right mental paradigm causes it to contain a bill or a check. There are wackos in almost any psychological system of success who carry normal principles to such an extreme they become a parody.

I think Arias believed that she attracted Travis to her because of the goodness inside her. When he began to name the darkness that he saw in her heart, he realized how she had dragged him down, down, down. He had more to lose by allowing her in his bed than we have previously been discussing. Since he had already gone to the bishop and been put on probation, he would surely be excommunicated.

He stood to lose everything based on his value system.

She also saw herself as losing everything based on her value system -- and once he told her THAT HE HAD PUT THAT NEGATIVITY out into the world, she (nutcase) concluded that to remove it--the only way to stop it--was to kill him.

That way, she could reframe the relationship in a positive way. For the good of all concerned. She made sure she gave Travis what he needed--the opportunity to pay for his sins with his own blood, so he could go to heaven-- and herself the freedom from the negativity that he was putting out about her that was destroying her future.

Thanks for the kind words I've received - I am a writer and am currently writing a book about some of these very topics. Even though my book is a novel, it's based on real events but I have to say is much less dramatic than the true crime we are all seeing revealed one little piece at a time.

Very thought provoking, thanks!
 
I'm a little confused. The DT spent an awful lot of time - in direct, and again today in redirect - on what seems to be an implication of rape without saying it outright... What confuses me, for starters:

- if they're implying rape, why aren't they making that clear?

- if they aren't implying rape, what are they implying - because they are definitley trying to imply something evil and wicked done to JA at the hands of Travis... :no:

- do they realize that JA testified - herself! - that she was a willing and enthusiastic participant in all of the sexual activity between them? I forget the exact quote, but she said something like 'Travis never did anything I didn't want/like, and always stopped if I wanted him to."
... it's in the trial transcripts, for pete's sake!
 
I'm a little confused. The DT spent an awful lot of time - in direct, and again today in redirect - on what seems to be an implication of rape without saying it outright... What confuses me, for starters:

- if they're implying rape, why aren't they making that clear?

- if they aren't implying rape, what are they implying - because they are definitley trying to imply something evil and wicked done to JA at the hands of Travis... :no:

- do they realize that JA testified - herself! - that she was a willing and enthusiastic participant in all of the sexual activity between them? I forget the exact quote, but she said something like 'Travis never did anything I didn't want/like, and always stopped if I wanted him to."
... it's in the trial transcripts, for pete's sake!

I have wondered this from the begging of her testimony. Its been obvious many times that her answer isn't what we would expect to hear (liking the sex, he never raped me), when her defense is about how mean and abusive he was. Also all the talk about how great Travis was. The only thing I can think of is.... when the experts testify, they will try to tie that into something. I have a feeling they will say that she is in denial over the abuse she 'suffered', and won't be surprised if they say that she didn't realize it was abuse until 2010, and still having issues understand the abuse. JMO
 
I wonder how much longer Nurmi plans on keeping her on the stand. It was so bad today that I actually enjoyed my dentist visit more than watching them. I just want to hear the jurors questions.
 
I am a survivor of DV. I have absolutely nothing good to say about my abuser. Of the hundreds and hundreds of other DV survivors that I have spoken with over the last 15 years, I have never once heard a single victim say what a great person their abuser was.

Abusers can be very charming in person when you first meet them. I mean how do you think all these abusive people manage to get into relationships with other in the first place? They are very good at acting. I say acting because that is exactly what they do. They act like a nice, normal person would, but it is just a cover for what they really are. They really do have like a Jekyll and Hyde personality. They can be super nice one minute and the next they are something out of your worst nightmare. They are extremely jealous and controlling.

In this case I see JA as the abuser and TA was her abused victim. He did not stalk her but she did stalk him. Stalking if very much a part of the pattern in DV or DV cycle. My abuser stalked me for two years. If I had been lucky enough to have been able to move 1000 miles away from him, I can gurantee you that there would have been nothing that he could have done to make me want to go see him, much less want to have any kind of relationship with him. The further away he is from me, the better I like it. I have absolutely no desire to ever see him again, because I was lucky to have escaped with my life the last time. Oh and as an aside I do not have a dislike/hate for all men, just him because of the things he did to me. I am still afraid of him to this day.

:therethere: Melly, I celebrate your survival along with my own. We got away alive, which should be everyone's right to leave a toxic relationship. Travis should have been allowed that right. Jodi was definitely the abuser, IMO.
 
I do think she stole the gun. I don't think the prosecution has proved it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Although the idea that intent can be formed in a second is bandied about, imo, a jury isn't going to find premeditation without some planning unless they want to. I think they could find premeditation in this case, but it's an equal chance, imo. And if they base premeditation on the "formed in a second" type, they won't vote for DP. Also jmo.

I think it was a post of AZlawyer in the legal thread addressing the lesser included issue. It was today, for sure. I've always thought this was a heat of passion (2nd degree) slam dunk. And I still do. If that's an option, I think the jury might go there. And based on what I read today, it probably will be an option. As I understand it, a lesser included offense is one regardless of what is charged and regardless of what the defense asserted is. If a party requests a "lesser included" charge (or maybe even if they don't, but the judge thinks it's warranted -- azlawyer?) the court can instruct the jury on it and the jury can return a guilty verdict on that basis. I think one of Juan's most famous cases resulted in a second degree conviction even though it was charged as murder one. The defense didn't want to allow the lesser included instruction because they knew the charged case hadn't been proven and the jury would have to acquit. The judge gave the charge over the defense's objection and Juan "won."

BBM
I agree that they haven't proven that she stole her Gpa's gun, beyond a reasonable doubt.

However I do think they have proven two other things, beyond a reasonable doubt. I think they have cast enough doubt on that .25 belonging to Travis, due to the lack of ammo,where it supposedly was, and other things. And I think they proved that she was not able to jump up there and grab a gun as she describes. So I think all of that goes together, to make a reasonable person believe, that she STOLE HER GRANDFATHERS GUN. Jmo
 
An empty shell is what these kinds are. Anthony ... same thing. They don't have any original thoughts. They simply absorb others words and writings. Lots of them employ rote memories....giving one the impression they are intelligent.
 
I wonder how much longer Nurmi plans on keeping her on the stand. It was so bad today that I actually enjoyed my dentist visit more than watching them. I just want to hear the jurors questions.
I didn't have a dentist appt but at the lunch break went and laid down on the couch for a nap. Figured if I slept longer than a hour I wouldn't miss much anyway, just the same old defense carp. It lulls me to sleep.

I would imagine the jury is about fed up with all this sex talk between Jodi and Nurmi. It's getting so so so very old. :banghead:
 
PS... I forgot to add... Jurors questions! YES! I bet they will have some good ones, and plenty of questions too as it has been weeks since they've gotten to ask any.
 
Reading that last journal entry they showed (with highlighting) I saw today blew me away. Did anyone notice what it said after the highlighted part?...Yikes!
 
I like her, too, and think she is probably a really nice person but she does bug me to no end sometimes! I've said this a thousand times and I realize people are probably sick of me saying it, but I still can not let go of the time during the Melanie McGuire trial when she kept calling Melanie "a lovely, lovely woman". My God, the woman was on trial for hacking to death her husband, putting the parts into suitcases and throwing them into the Chesapeake Bay, but there was Jean gushing over how lovely Melanie was.

off topic, i didn't watch the melanie mcguire case real close, but what i did see of it, thought there wasn't enough evidence to convict and i thought there was a chance she was innocent. i never could see how or where she could have dismembered him. iirc her first appeal was denied. much more evidence in the ja case
 
I think I will go read up on the "Law of Attraction". Wish I knew about that stuff when I was young.

I was hoping after post 825, a new page would start and the margins would go back to normal. I only
get 25 to a page but some reason, it has increased...drats. Well, I tried...
 
I think I will go read up on the "Law of Attraction". Wish I knew about that stuff when I was young.

I was hoping after post 825, a new page would start and the margins would go back to normal. I only
get 25 to a page but some reason, it has increased...drats. Well, I tried...

Ya-ah...Glad you thought of that...
 
I see some people believe that Jodi had low self-esteem. I disagree. First off, she is not a normal person. She is a psychopath. Nothing less than that. Her problem was not that she had low self-esteem. It was the opposite. She thought much too much of herself. She couldn't even accept Travis' rejection. How dare he reject her? How dare anyone reject her? A person who has low self-esteem does not get enraged with a rejection like that. Depressed maybe but not enraged. She engaged in all those sexual acts for 2 reasons. One because she did enjoy them. Another reason is that she wanted to be the perfect woman which in her mind included being a kind of nympho.

Yesterday on the stand when she talked about how Travis believed that she was beautiful inside and out she actually cried and looked like she felt sorry for herself. Like she actually believes she still IS beautiful on the inside after stabbing Travis 28 times. She feels like a victim. She feels like she was the perfect girlfriend/friend to Travis even now.

She believes she is superior to all and if set free she will have the desire to kill anyone who believes otherwise.
 
Sitting here watching PBS '60s Pop Rock & Soul (My Music)'. Geez those performers are so old. Surely they can't be because that would make me..... uh-oh. Never mind.
 
Today we learn something which could be mind boggling when applied to her statements past and present.

Her true religion is the Law of Attraction. If you are not familiar with this concept, which has enjoyed flashes of popularity at various times over the last century, it is the principle behind the popular new age book "The Secret" and "Think and Grow Rich" before that, etc.

Arias is telling us over and over that this is what she really believes in. She mentions it frequently as a motive for why there's nothing negative in her journal about Travis. She says quite plainly that she was unwilling to "put out there" the negative for fear of attracting more of the same.

The Law of Attraction is quite commonly used in multi-level marketing programs to blame the "associates" who are not producing up to the standards held up in the "I attracted Fabulous Wealth" testimonials. We see Travis Alexander himself get up there in one video clip shown on Dateline and say, "This is where I started...." You can be that he goes on to say that through the application of positive thought and their trainings, every one of those in the audience can achieve what he achieved.

Later in the testimony of this trial, a comment is made about Travis accusing Arias of failing to "work the program"--another multi-level marketing buzz phrase.

So...once he started calling her a sociopath and a *advertiser censored*, how in the world was she going to rid the world of such negative thoughts about herself? Mind you, she is a True Believer in the Law of Attraction, which is nowhere found in Mormonism. Mormons believe that success comes from obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel-- paying tithing, keeping clean sexually, avoiding alcohol, tea and coffee, attendance at meetings, taking all callings (requests to volunteer for work), and avoiding association or sympathy for exMormons.

All these requirements are asked about in Temple Recommend interviews. A person may be denied a Temple Recommend for breaking any of these rules. Nowhere is mentioned the Law of Attraction.

Were Jodi Arias to be excommunicated for fornication, the earth would tremble with the negativity coming her way from all the Mormons who would have been informed of church action taken against her. Think of all those Mormons who would know she had been deprived of her membership AND THEY ARE FORBIDDEN TO ASSOCIATE WITH HER, as a condition of their own temple worthiness.

I am sorry if Mormons are offended by their practices being discussed, but this is vital to the understanding of motive. I have been a private investigator myself and you have to think like the perp thinks if you want to understand the crime.

Excommunicated Mormons are shunned even by their own families because of the temple recommend interview question. When you leave the church, even if you resign, like I did, you may suffer employment consequences if you life in Utah, Arizona, or Idaho where there are strong Mormon communities. Prepaid Legal was full of Mormons. Travis was a leader there. It is not inconceivable that his position as a role model and exemplar would be jeopardized. Can you imagine what his good buddies at PPL were going to think if they had to confess that they "associated" with Travis Alexander after his excommunication?

Exactly. He would lose not only his status as a desirable bachelor, he could also see his income take a nosedive as people who would have wanted to sign up under him chose someone else like Chris Hughes. Someone they wouldn't have to confess that they were associating with or sympathizing with.

Jodi Arias believed in the Law of Attraction before she met Travis Alexander. She never quit believing in it-- and who doesn't believe in being positive? It is another thing, though, to be an extremist and have a superstitious view of it where you believe that looking at an envelope with the right mental paradigm causes it to contain a bill or a check. There are wackos in almost any psychological system of success who carry normal principles to such an extreme they become a parody.

I think Arias believed that she attracted Travis to her because of the goodness inside her. When he began to name the darkness that he saw in her heart, he realized how she had dragged him down, down, down. He had more to lose by allowing her in his bed than we have previously been discussing. Since he had already gone to the bishop and been put on probation, he would surely be excommunicated.

He stood to lose everything based on his value system.

She also saw herself as losing everything based on her value system -- and once he told her THAT HE HAD PUT THAT NEGATIVITY out into the world, she (nutcase) concluded that to remove it--the only way to stop it--was to kill him.

That way, she could reframe the relationship in a positive way. For the good of all concerned. She made sure she gave Travis what he needed--the opportunity to pay for his sins with his own blood, so he could go to heaven-- and herself the freedom from the negativity that he was putting out about her that was destroying her future.

Thanks for the kind words I've received - I am a writer and am currently writing a book about some of these very topics. Even though my book is a novel, it's based on real events but I have to say is much less dramatic than the true crime we are all seeing revealed one little piece at a time.

I read the "The Secret". I thought it was interesting though not enough to get caught up in as the "New bible". I understood the premise of the "The Secret" to show how successful people projected positive affect around them thus drew positive people which brought multitude of opportunities. However, these highly successful people worked!!! They were innovative hard working and creative souls. They did not sit back and think riches will "just" come to them by "just" thinking of riches. That is my understanding of the book reading it one time.

I also believe their are individuals that project tremendous negative energy onto others. I call them Emotional Vampires. They just suck the emotional energy out of you. I believe Jodi is an Emotional Vampire when she became Obsessed with Travis.

Again, JMHO
 
Sitting here watching PBS '60s Pop Rock & Soul (My Music)'. Geez those performers are so old. Surely they can't be because that would make me..... uh-oh. Never mind.

Old???? 60's Rock and Rollers around me age LOL I don't do old.. "We" are well seasoned.. (NOT OLD LOL)
 
I think that Arias left CA in June 08 knowing that she was going to murder Travis Alexander. Travis' murder would be less tragic if it were true that this was an equal relationship - and that Jodi was grief stricken having to live with taking Travis' life, not because she wanted to, but out of self preservation in a dire moment.

Arias planned Travis Alexander's murder - more importantly, she appears to have enjoyed it.

If Travis Alexander was murdered as a result of being the victim of a Crime of Passion - how is Arias' cloak and dagger trip to Travis Alexander's explained? We know that Arias was in Yreka on June 2, 2008. A Blonde Arias rents a car - Blonde Arias does not want a red car because red cars are more noticeable to police. June 2, 2008 - Arias borrows two gas cans from Darryl Brewser, goes to Wal-Mart, and to CVS (two places where she could have purchased hair color).

Arias sets up an alibi by calling Ryan Burns the night on June 3, 2008 - Arias tells Ryan Burns that she will be at his house in Utah the morning of June 4, 2008.

On June 4, 2008 - Jodi Arias stabs Travis Alexander over two dozen times, slits his throat, and shoots him in the head (with the same caliber gun that was recently stolen from her grandparents).

Arias places Travis Alexander's body in his shower, washes sheets, cleans, and put a load of towels she used to clean in the washer (starting the washer). Arias stays at Travis Alexander's house - knowing that she has murdered him - cleaning up for several hours.

At 10:30pm - five hours after Arias brutally murdered Travis Alexander in his home Arias calls Ryan Burns explaining that she got lost while driving from CA to his house in Utah. Then Arias calls Travis Alexander three times - and leaves his a voicemail.

A dark haired Arias - a blonde Arias left CA - arrives at Ryan Burns house in Utah with cuts and bandages on her fingers.

If Jodi Arias was not setting up her murder plan - why did make preparations to conceal her trip to Mesa? Why did she change the color of her hair? Why was she concerned with the color of her rental car? Why did she call Ryan Burns before leaving to Mesa - and, after leaving Mesa?

The possibility of the person Arias admits to shooting in the head - is shot with the same caliber gun stolen from Arias' grandparents is unlikely. It is more likely - and makes much more sense - that Arias stole her grandparents' gun as part of her murder plan.



Why did Jodi keep going back, calling asking for the 'abuse'? Travis never went to her. Why did she drive much more than 1000 miles out of her way to murder him after he told her he was finished with her?

The defense is just not making any sense to allow for a premeditated murder.
 
Somewhere on WS is a link to Jodi's personal blog. I don't remember seeing The Secret listed as one of her favorite books. Basically, it's set your goals and focus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
70
Guests online
192
Total visitors
262

Forum statistics

Threads
609,497
Messages
18,254,844
Members
234,664
Latest member
wrongplatform
Back
Top