Are you saying that it is your opinion that JA did not plan and carry out the murder of TA?
No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying given the way the evidence has been presented to date, it could be construed that way by someone else.
IMO
Are you saying that it is your opinion that JA did not plan and carry out the murder of TA?
No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying given the way the evidence has been presented to date, it could be construed that way by someone else.
IMO
It would help a lot if JM would introduce more evidence of the jealousy motive.
And, there's a lot of it that the Jury hasn't seen,yet, including testimony of his friends.
IMO
I have posted the entire exchange many times in my previous posts and was not attempting to take his quote out of context. There is a difference between "incapacitating" and "immediately incapacitating."
Question for you experts - How do we know for a fact that Travis even knew he was being photographed in the shower? What kind of lens/camera was being used? By the angle of the photos, was there a place where JA could have taken SOME of these photos without being noticed? I don't have a layout of the bathroom but I sure am not buying that Travis was reviewing photos with JA while he was in the shower.
Someone tried to kill me with a knife. I did not go crazy with fear and terror. It was clear that I had one thing to do and that was to grip his wrists, the knife was a big type kitchen knife, and with all my might held his wrists and push them away. It was like an arm wrestle where both arms are frozen in place. I never succeeded in pushing him totally off but I did keep the knife off my face. Looking up at the knife, it could be aimed at my eyes, any part of my face or neck; it would cause harm anywhere it made contact. I was lying across the bed and he came at me. I dont remember how or why we were not even having an argument; we were talking and I wasnt watching him, that part was fast, he straddled me, with the knife gripped in his hand.
Fear and terror, like someone mentioned earlier, would get me dead or maimed. My response was to grab his wrists and push back as the knife was coming close to my face. I weigh 120 lbs and he weighed 180. The other thing that is burned in my memory is his drool. When he was straddled over me with the knife aimed at me and I was holding his arms at bay, his drool soaked my jeans, and then as he leaned down it was streaming out of his mouth all over me. We were face to face. I was astounded as the drool poured from his mouth and I realized this was some sort of psychotic break on his part and a physiological response to his craziness was, he was drooling. The drool and using my greatest strength holding his wrist did not elicit terror or fear, just a clarity of how to try to prevent the knife from making contact. I was soaked, my face, my shirt, and my pants, at least it wasnt blood. I was OK and when he stopped trying to stab me the drool stopped (clear, not foamy or anything). Disgusting to think about and remember. Maybe one of our medical pros might know something about this drool. The person was a lawyer I was dating and this episode came on suddenly and never happened again, I ended the relationship.
I guess this experience speaks to me that the brain overcomes height and weight when put in the right circumstances; it is more than height and weight that makes a successful killer. I would say what saved me was that I got a grip on his wrist, was that from my quick reflexes? If you dont get the wrist, you get the knife; try grabbing someones flailing arms by the wrist no matter the size difference between you both. Every time you miss its a defensive wound or strike by biiiiiiig knife.
A premeditated murder does not mean that the mentality of the killer is that of an experienced professional assassin. I am sure the chaos of a psychotic is paramount in the act and attack of a violent murder. A premeditated murder planned through hatred and anger as motivators probably is not in control and therefore cannot control the scene.
A person premeditating a murder to resolve their feelings of hatred and jealousy thinks differently than a hit-man that has the goal of simply killing a person. This can affect the outcome of evidence and scene.
I didn't watch the entire trial but watched a bit of Detective Flores interrogating the murderer and when he told her that she turned her cell phone off before entering AZ and when she got it back on miraculously after she accomplished her mission was VERY telling. He said there was a mountainous region that would have blocked her cell phone when she claimed to have it. PREMEDITATION. Was that ever mentioned during this trial? TIA
For me, I assume that when showering behind glass, there is steam and water all over the glass, so you cannot get clear pictures. I see no soap suds which indicates he wasn't even taking a "real" shower, but was in the shower to pose.
![]()
Good thinking. These pics do make you understand that yes, this must have only been a "posing session".For me, I assume that when showering behind glass, there is steam and water all over the glass, so you cannot get clear pictures. I see no soap suds which indicates he wasn't even taking a "real" shower, but was in the shower to pose.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Interesting......At times I had wondered if she may have had an accomplice. What did you make of this, and what were they theorizing about it?I don't think there is a place she could have photographed him without being seen. The closet door is perpendicular to the shower, so not there. And the hallway door is across from the shower, so he would have seen her if he turned his head in that direction, which he did.
By the way, Nancy Grace had a segment last night supposedly showing two people reflected in his right eye. It was kind of spooky.
IMO
It's not just giving us a "window" to come to our own conclusions, as if those conclusions are randomly pulled out of thin air. Frankly, the knife first theory is ONLY bolstered by the ME's ultimate conclusion and the bullet casing on top of dried blood.
The gun first theory is bolstered by everything else - her premeditated plan, the eerie second story she gave, the way his body was positioned when found, the trajectory, his ability to stay alive for a few moments, the ME's initial statements, gun shot wound experts who disagree with the ME's final conclusion, the ME's contradictions while on the stand, the ME's statement allowing for a possibility that she shot him first, the probability that a woman who had a gun would use a knife against a larger man first, instead of the gun, the probability of a .25 caliber jamming after a first shot, etc., etc.
I'm just using logic here. :angel:
I think this may have been posted already, but I found this quote from the book "Gunshot Wounds" to be particularly interesting:
"Just as in the case of gunshot wounds of the heart or major blood vessels, individuals can perform tasks or even survive gunshot wounds of the brain, especially if the injury involves only the frontal lobes. Numerous individuals have survived perforating gunshot wounds of the frontal lobes though there may be associated personality changes and/or blindness . . ."
"In one case, an elderly individual shot himself in the temple with a .32-caliber revolver. The bullet perforated both cerebral hemispheres injuring the tips of the caudate lobes. Following this, he was conscious for at least two hours during which time he spoke to his wife, a visiting nurse, and EMS personnel."
There is a reason why ME was reluctant to say that the small-caliber bullet that perforated TA's frontal lobe was necessarily immediately incapacitating.
Additionally, there is this report called "Penetrating gunshots to the head and lack of immediate incapacitation. II. Review of case report." It would be interesting to know whether TA's gunshot wound falls under the category of the types of gunshot wounds that were found not to be immediately incapacitating.
Interesting......At times I had wondered if she may have had an accomplice. What did you make of this, and what were they theorizing about it?
@wasnt_me:
So supposing this was a posing session and not a real shower:
TA was trying to extricate himself from JA (he had told Mimi he was not "temple worthy" which showed he must have discussed this with church elders and was "on probation" (?) - so why would he allow pictures which could be used to blackmail him at this point? (altho I guess it was his camera)
Just trying to figure out the logic of it all....
Nancy Grace just presented it. They showed that front face picture of him looking horrified in the shower. They had arrows to the [his] right eye. I had to look at it for a bit to see what they were talking about. If you looked directly at his pupil, it did kind of look like you could see two people standing side by side with a space in between them. Spooky.
When it's blown up on the screen, it's easier to see.
The person who found this was mentioned by name but was not a guest. So she just threw that out there at the end of a segment.
I, too, have always had a gut feel that she brought along one of the boyfriends to help. But, as far as I know there is no evidence of that. Were there any unidentified footprints? Or any strange bruises on his body as if he were restrained?
IMO
Yep. Where's the soap?
Hands crossing the chest is what i do when the water is cold and hasn't warmed up yet. The bathroom is on the second floor and would take awhile for hot water to reach shower head. Was Travis in the enclosure prematurely? Was there a rush?
We have no clue how long he was in the shower. When I first step into the shower, I let water run over me. No one puts soap to a dry body, right?![]()