BBMHi Websleuths,
I don't know about you, but I have been glued to the livestream of the Jodi Arias trial online and I've been watching the prosecutor Juan Martinez grill Jodi Arias all morning. I admit that he is a breath of fresh air and a shot of energy after the lethargic pace of defense attorney and possible teddy bear Kirk Nurmi. But still, I have some issues with Martinez' approach.
Btw, the best live stream I have seen so far is Wild About Trial. They have the documents, a live reporter in the courtroom tweeting, and all the background info for reference while you watch. http://wildabouttrial.com/videos/jodi-arias-live-stream/
I am a criminal defense attorney in California, which of course doesn't make my opinions correct but it does provide some exposure to different styles of prosecutors. I generally think Martinez is doing a great job of presenting Jodi's inconsistent testimony and developing the persona of Jodi as a jealous ex-lover.
However, I have two primary critiques about his cross-examination thus far. One is stylistic and one is tactical:
First, he has a very abrasive tone and tends to come off as too aggressive and almost violent. He looks sometimes like a junkyard dog about to be let off the chain. It can be effective to be forceful and put Jodi on the defensive, but with his level of intensity he risks losing the jury. The defense only needs to get one juror to avoid a conviction, and the more Martinez viciously attacks her the more sympathy a juror may have for Jodi. He can ask the same questions without always having his fangs out.
Second, he is jumping around way too much in his questioning. In my opinion he should be methodically going through all of Jodi's lies and inconsistent statements. Instead he is skipping around from one time to the next so that it's difficult for the jury to follow along. Jurors may be understanding that Jodi wasn't telling the truth, but Martinez is making it difficult for them to put those lies within the context of the narrative.
This is only day 1 of the cross-examination, and I am really interested to see what happens next.
How does everyone else feel about the testimony so far?
Nah. Jodi thinks she's the smartest person in the room. She's a fast thinker, has an answer for EVERYthing. She's sort of good at throwing things back at JM, "correcting" him on B.S.
That's one of her hallmark characteristics: pointing out when people are wrong or misspeak or whatever. Juan's going to have to break out the wooden spoon!
I'm sure this smug, defiant attitude is exactly why her parents wound up tossing her around when she was young. Can you imagine being Jodi's parent? Uggh
OT---did you happen to read that kelly and johnny bonds (who wrote 'the cop who wouldn't quit' about the markham duff-smith case) are doing a new reality show where they try to solve cold cases? david wolfe is developing it with them.
the thought of kelly siegler going for jodi's jugular makes me smile, so thanks!
HELP! I am having difficulty finding information - new to WS, sorry- I desperately need to see the photos with time stamps that are beside the photos or at least legible, and in time order if at all possible.
I know someone asked about this but I can't find the answer!
Tks anyone.....
The new thread for after lunch is now open. You can begin moving over there at your leisure.
jodi Arias TAKES THE STAND FOR 9TH DAY #47 *may contain graphic and adult content* - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community
Hi Websleuths,
I don't know about you, but I have been glued to the livestream of the Jodi Arias trial online and I've been watching the prosecutor Juan Martinez grill Jodi Arias all morning. I admit that he is a breath of fresh air and a shot of energy after the lethargic pace of defense attorney and possible teddy bear Kirk Nurmi. But still, I have some issues with Martinez' approach.
Btw, the best live stream I have seen so far is Wild About Trial. They have the documents, a live reporter in the courtroom tweeting, and all the background info for reference while you watch. http://wildabouttrial.com/videos/jodi-arias-live-stream/
I am a criminal defense attorney in California, which of course doesn't make my opinions correct but it does provide some exposure to different styles of prosecutors. I generally think Martinez is doing a great job of presenting Jodi's inconsistent testimony and developing the persona of Jodi as a jealous ex-lover.
However, I have two primary critiques about his cross-examination thus far. One is stylistic and one is tactical:
First, he has a very abrasive tone and tends to come off as too aggressive and almost violent. He looks sometimes like a junkyard dog about to be let off the chain. It can be effective to be forceful and put Jodi on the defensive, but with his level of intensity he risks losing the jury. The defense only needs to get one juror to avoid a conviction, and the more Martinez viciously attacks her the more sympathy a juror may have for Jodi. He can ask the same questions without always having his fangs out.
Second, he is jumping around way too much in his questioning. In my opinion he should be methodically going through all of Jodi's lies and inconsistent statements. Instead he is skipping around from one time to the next so that it's difficult for the jury to follow along. Jurors may be understanding that Jodi wasn't telling the truth, but Martinez is making it difficult for them to put those lies within the context of the narrative.
This is only day 1 of the cross-examination, and I am really interested to see what happens next.
How does everyone else feel about the testimony so far?
!!!!!
I had not heard of this but just let out a little squeal. Do you have any more information on the show? Or... I could just google it myself. Can't wait to see that one!
Hi Websleuths,
I don't know about you, but I have been glued to the livestream of the Jodi Arias trial online and I've been watching the prosecutor Juan Martinez grill Jodi Arias all morning. I admit that he is a breath of fresh air and a shot of energy after the lethargic pace of defense attorney and possible teddy bear Kirk Nurmi. But still, I have some issues with Martinez' approach.
Btw, the best live stream I have seen so far is Wild About Trial. They have the documents, a live reporter in the courtroom tweeting, and all the background info for reference while you watch. http://wildabouttrial.com/videos/jodi-arias-live-stream/
I am a criminal defense attorney in California, which of course doesn't make my opinions correct but it does provide some exposure to different styles of prosecutors. I generally think Martinez is doing a great job of presenting Jodi's inconsistent testimony and developing the persona of Jodi as a jealous ex-lover.
However, I have two primary critiques about his cross-examination thus far. One is stylistic and one is tactical:
First, he has a very abrasive tone and tends to come off as too aggressive and almost violent. He looks sometimes like a junkyard dog about to be let off the chain. It can be effective to be forceful and put Jodi on the defensive, but with his level of intensity he risks losing the jury. The defense only needs to get one juror to avoid a conviction, and the more Martinez viciously attacks her the more sympathy a juror may have for Jodi. He can ask the same questions without always having his fangs out.
Second, he is jumping around way too much in his questioning. In my opinion he should be methodically going through all of Jodi's lies and inconsistent statements. Instead he is skipping around from one time to the next so that it's difficult for the jury to follow along. Jurors may be understanding that Jodi wasn't telling the truth, but Martinez is making it difficult for them to put those lies within the context of the narrative.
This is only day 1 of the cross-examination, and I am really interested to see what happens next.
How does everyone else feel about the testimony so far?
Hi Websleuths,
I don't know about you, but I have been glued to the livestream of the Jodi Arias trial online and I've been watching the prosecutor Juan Martinez grill Jodi Arias all morning. I admit that he is a breath of fresh air and a shot of energy after the lethargic pace of defense attorney and possible teddy bear Kirk Nurmi. But still, I have some issues with Martinez' approach.
Btw, the best live stream I have seen so far is Wild About Trial. They have the documents, a live reporter in the courtroom tweeting, and all the background info for reference while you watch. http://wildabouttrial.com/videos/jodi-arias-live-stream/
I am a criminal defense attorney in California, which of course doesn't make my opinions correct but it does provide some exposure to different styles of prosecutors. I generally think Martinez is doing a great job of presenting Jodi's inconsistent testimony and developing the persona of Jodi as a jealous ex-lover.
However, I have two primary critiques about his cross-examination thus far. One is stylistic and one is tactical:
First, he has a very abrasive tone and tends to come off as too aggressive and almost violent. He looks sometimes like a junkyard dog about to be let off the chain. It can be effective to be forceful and put Jodi on the defensive, but with his level of intensity he risks losing the jury. The defense only needs to get one juror to avoid a conviction, and the more Martinez viciously attacks her the more sympathy a juror may have for Jodi. He can ask the same questions without always having his fangs out.
Second, he is jumping around way too much in his questioning. In my opinion he should be methodically going through all of Jodi's lies and inconsistent statements. Instead he is skipping around from one time to the next so that it's difficult for the jury to follow along. Jurors may be understanding that Jodi wasn't telling the truth, but Martinez is making it difficult for them to put those lies within the context of the narrative.
This is only day 1 of the cross-examination, and I am really interested to see what happens next.
How does everyone else feel about the testimony so far?
Hi Websleuths,
I don't know about you, but I have been glued to the livestream of the Jodi Arias trial online and I've been watching the prosecutor Juan Martinez grill Jodi Arias all morning. I admit that he is a breath of fresh air and a shot of energy after the lethargic pace of defense attorney and possible teddy bear Kirk Nurmi. But still, I have some issues with Martinez' approach.
Btw, the best live stream I have seen so far is Wild About Trial. They have the documents, a live reporter in the courtroom tweeting, and all the background info for reference while you watch. http://wildabouttrial.com/videos/jodi-arias-live-stream/
I am a criminal defense attorney in California, which of course doesn't make my opinions correct but it does provide some exposure to different styles of prosecutors. I generally think Martinez is doing a great job of presenting Jodi's inconsistent testimony and developing the persona of Jodi as a jealous ex-lover.
However, I have two primary critiques about his cross-examination thus far. One is stylistic and one is tactical:
First, he has a very abrasive tone and tends to come off as too aggressive and almost violent. He looks sometimes like a junkyard dog about to be let off the chain. It can be effective to be forceful and put Jodi on the defensive, but with his level of intensity he risks losing the jury. The defense only needs to get one juror to avoid a conviction, and the more Martinez viciously attacks her the more sympathy a juror may have for Jodi. He can ask the same questions without always having his fangs out.
Second, he is jumping around way too much in his questioning. In my opinion he should be methodically going through all of Jodi's lies and inconsistent statements. Instead he is skipping around from one time to the next so that it's difficult for the jury to follow along. Jurors may be understanding that Jodi wasn't telling the truth, but Martinez is making it difficult for them to put those lies within the context of the narrative.
This is only day 1 of the cross-examination, and I am really interested to see what happens next.
How does everyone else feel about the testimony so far?
Half an hour before court today a dear friend called and kept talking. A minute before I pretended that my phone was dying and got off the phone. (Yes I lied. No half-truths or I don't knows ;0) I put the phone down and suddenly Juan was on fire with the dumb sister question. 0 to 180 in 2 seconds! Go Juan!
i think Juan is getting frustrated; i hope he gets it a little bit under control. her little questions like what date was that? what issue? after he just stated the date or what the issue was---
Hi Websleuths,
I don't know about you, but I have been glued to the livestream of the Jodi Arias trial online and I've been watching the prosecutor Juan Martinez grill Jodi Arias all morning. I admit that he is a breath of fresh air and a shot of energy after the lethargic pace of defense attorney and possible teddy bear Kirk Nurmi. But still, I have some issues with Martinez' approach.
Btw, the best live stream I have seen so far is Wild About Trial. They have the documents, a live reporter in the courtroom tweeting, and all the background info for reference while you watch. http://wildabouttrial.com/videos/jodi-arias-live-stream/
I am a criminal defense attorney in California, which of course doesn't make my opinions correct but it does provide some exposure to different styles of prosecutors. I generally think Martinez is doing a great job of presenting Jodi's inconsistent testimony and developing the persona of Jodi as a jealous ex-lover.
However, I have two primary critiques about his cross-examination thus far. One is stylistic and one is tactical:
First, he has a very abrasive tone and tends to come off as too aggressive and almost violent. He looks sometimes like a junkyard dog about to be let off the chain. It can be effective to be forceful and put Jodi on the defensive, but with his level of intensity he risks losing the jury. The defense only needs to get one juror to avoid a conviction, and the more Martinez viciously attacks her the more sympathy a juror may have for Jodi. He can ask the same questions without always having his fangs out.
Second, he is jumping around way too much in his questioning. In my opinion he should be methodically going through all of Jodi's lies and inconsistent statements. Instead he is skipping around from one time to the next so that it's difficult for the jury to follow along. Jurors may be understanding that Jodi wasn't telling the truth, but Martinez is making it difficult for them to put those lies within the context of the narrative.
This is only day 1 of the cross-examination, and I am really interested to see what happens next.
How does everyone else feel about the testimony so far?