Jodi Arias; the sequence of events

[wasnt_me]

Nope. The second bleeding shot was the last photo. Here is the sequence:

http://m922.photobucket.com/albumvi.../shower_travis_murder_pics_xtralarge.jpg.html

I know the sequence, thanks. I thought the person I was responding to was referring to the last picture in the shower, not the last picture entirely.

 

[wasnt_me]

This is one thing the psychological expert said today:


"The attempts to clean up the crime scene appear to be rather frenzied, disorganized. You would predict if someone had planned this terrible deed, that plans would have included cleaning up the crime scene in order to get away and reduce the risk of apprehension."


This is one comment he made about how a disorganized and messy crime scene looks impulsive instead of premeditated.

You're talking about Samuel? I cannot lend credence to anything he says.

 

[LambChop]

This is one thing the psychological expert said today:


"The attempts to clean up the crime scene appear to be rather frenzied, disorganized. You would predict if someone had planned this terrible deed, that plans would have included cleaning up the crime scene in order to get away and reduce the risk of apprehension."


This is one comment he made about how a disorganized and messy crime scene looks impulsive instead of premeditated.

I'm not sure how he would justify that since she was not a career killer. She said herself this was her first. So how do you plan to kill someone if you have never tried before. Gun or knife she took advantage of surprise while he was in the shower, we can see that in the pictures. Premeditated takes seconds such as the seconds she took to decide to cut his throat. He was not a danger to her at that time. She had two forms of exit from the bathroom, one from the hallway and one from the closet.

I loved when Samuels said why would she scream no one was home. How did Jodi know that???? She would have no clue if she sticks to her story because if she did not know she was going to kill him she would have never checked to see if someone was home. They were in the privacy of his bedroom. At 5:30 at night either one of his roommates could have been there. One was home between 3 and 4. jmo

 

[molly333]

You're talking about Samuel? I cannot lend credence to anything he says.

Samuels, yes. Well, he's a little past his prime, maybe, but he was right about that and some other things he said. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

But, I didn't need Samuels to tell me that. I already knew it. And, so will some members of the Jury.

He's simply reminding them.

IMO

 

[molly333]

I'm not sure how he would justify that since she was not a career killer. She said herself this was her first. So how do you plan to kill someone if you have never tried before. Gun or knife she took advantage of surprise while he was in the shower, we can see that in the pictures. Premeditated takes seconds such as the seconds she took to decide to cut his throat. He was not a danger to her at that time. She had two forms of exit from the bathroom, one from the hallway and one from the closet.

I loved when Samuels said why would she scream no one was home. How did Jodi know that???? She would have no clue if she sticks to her story because if she did not know she was going to kill him she would have never checked to see if someone was home. They were in the privacy of his bedroom. At 5:30 at night either one of his roommates could have been there. One was home between 3 and 4. jmo

If you are going to plan something, you plan it out to work to your advantage. You don't just flip coins, --I'll take a gun and knife and flip a coin when the time comes. You don't depend on luck--maybe i'll get lucky and hit the SVC with the first blow. You don't plan to leave DNA, handprints, your own blood, and a camera with your picture in it. You don't plan to have to flood the bathroom to move a body so you can wash your blood off him in the shower.

That crime scene is a mess. She did not plan that.

Unless she planned to shoot him in the shower and the gun jammed.

IMO

 

[wasnt_me]

The key is that she planned a horrible deed. Commission is another matter all together. Planning her deed doesn't mean she understood the extent of said horrible deed, that she was able to keep to her plan if Travis fought her back, that she was able to contain the mess while Travis fought her back, that other things didn't happen during the day or during the commission that altered her original plans, such as the roommates being there, Travis fighting back, Travis "not dying" as she kept going on about in the interrogation.

She planned to commit an act against a living, thinking creature. His reaction to her plans made that crime scene messier than she could handle.

Say Jodi had planned to murder Travis with poison. She brought the poison to the house. Say he saw her poisoning the food and reacted, and so she grabbed a knife from the butcher block or her purse and stabbed him. Is the murder no longer premeditated?

 

[wasnt_me]

If you are going to plan something, you plan it out to work to your advantage. You don't just flip coins, --I'll take a gun and knife and flip a coin when the time comes. You don't depend on luck--maybe i'll get lucky and hit the SVC with the first blow. You don't plan to leave DNA, handprints, your own blood, and a camera with your picture in it. You don't plan to have to flood the bathroom to move a body so you can wash your blood off him in the shower.

That crime scene is a mess. She did not plan that.

Unless she planned to shoot him in the shower and the gun jammed.

IMO

Where did the knife come from and why is it in the bathroom?

I really implore you to think outside of what you'd do, because Jodi isn't a rational logical person.

 

[Captain86]

Captain, again thank you for another detailed and thoughtful response.

Actually, the reason I was pounding on lack of any direct evidence that Travis' brain was injured, as well as lack of any reference to brain injury in Horn's report, was not because I necessarily believe that Travis' brain was untouched by the bullet, but rather to draw attention to the lack of specifics around this point and Horn's lack of detail in his autopsy.

In fact, I do think it likely that the bullet penetrated Travis' right frontal lobe. Indeed, waaaay back in posts #258 and #269 (page 11 of this thread, my very first posts on Websleuths btw!), I argued the scenario in detail, as well as pulled some expert references to support the notion that Travis could very well have defended himself after sustaining a gunshot wound to a frontal lobe. I invite readers to go back to post #269 for more on gunshot wounds to the frontal lobes.

Now, the issue I continue to have is all this faith being heaped on select parts of Horn's testimony and autopsy report. I think we can all agree that his autopsy report did nothing to directly address whether Travis' brain had been penetrated by the bullet (and thus support his being incapacitated, a key point). As you've done above, the thoughtful reader has to go through gymnastics and arm-waving to support even this basic notion. There is also little to directly support a knife-first scenario. Indeed, I would suggest there is contradictory information which weakens the pillar that every gunfirster inevitably points to: lack of hemorrhaging in the brain cavity.

I return to Horn's autopsy report in describing Travis' lungs and the severe stab to the chest:

The lungs weigh 340 grams left and 280 grams right. The upper and lower airways are patent and of normal caliber. The pleural surfaces are smooth and glistening. The parenchyma is autolyzed dark re-purple, exuding moderate amount of blood and intermixed frothy decompositional fluid. There are no areas of induration, consolidation, hemorrhage, or gross scarring. The pulmonary are patent and of normal caliber.

and

A 1 1/2 inch oblique stab wound of the paramidline right chest, with penetration/perforation of the costochondral junction near the sternum at the level of the 3rd and 4th right ribs; the wound extends to a max depth of 3 1/2 inches with penetration of the superior vena cava near the base of the heart, with a small amount of surrounding hemorrhagic in the mediastinal soft tissues and the pericardial sac of the heart.

Doesn't sound like much blood in the lungs or chest cavity. We imagine a stab wound penetrating the vena cava and the right lung would have resulted in a large amount of blood. We would expect Travis' right lung would have had a substantial amount of blood.

Now, as danzin16 kindly pointed out, Horn was questioned about this on the stand (post 1390):

I guess you missed the part of the ME's testimony that said it was possible the lungs were punctured and he couldn't tell because of decomp. I guess you missed the part about how it was possible the knife stabs could have entered so deeply they entered the body cavities but decomp made it difficult to tell.

Based on Horn's testimony, five days of decomposition of Travis' body had a major impact on the level of detail and certainty Horn could ascertain around the wounds and the extent of hemorrhaging. However, everyone knows that this stab wound to the body's largest vein must have caused extensive hemorrhaging. And every knifefirster knows that Travis must have been coughing up blood at the sink.

Now, let's return to every knifefirster's favorite passage from Horn's report:

The wound track perforates the anterior frontal skull near the superior orbital bone and the traverses the right anterior fossa, without gross evidence of significant intracranial hemorrhage or apparent cerebral injury (although examination of the brain tissue is somewhat limited by the decomposed nature of the remains).

So in this famous line, Horn, to his credit, offers a caveat to the reader and to the court: here are my observations (one of which we already agree is inaccurate: lack of cerebral injury!), but understand that the area is extensively decomposed, limiting the certainty of my observations. This is the one time Horn feels compelled to comment on the extent of decomposition in his report. I would say we should probably take Horn at his word: the area was decomposed making it difficult to make an accurate assessment.

Now knifefirsters may parse this further in support of their theory, but the fact of the matter is that Horn himself is cautioning us not to put too much weight on these observations. Given the fact that Horn testifies similarly with respect to the chest injury, and given that the extent of hemorrhaging from the chest wound can't be accurately reported due to extent of decomposition, is it reasonable that we now pick out this one piece of Horn's report, the one piece that Horn himself cautions us about, as the key piece of support for a knife-first scenario?

I would suggest that this evidence, while consistent with a knife-first scenario, is insufficient to rule out a gun-first scenario.

In other words, if Horn were asked in court "Is is possible that the decomposition of the area made it difficult to ascertain with certainty whether Travis was alive when he was shot?"

How do we think Horn would answer?

Dave

I'll try this one more time. When he says that there is a small amount of blood in the Paracardial Sac, he is saying it was nicked with the knife and
there was a little bleeding. Then when referring to the lungs he writes: exuding moderate amount of blood and intermixed frothy decompositional fluid. This again indicates that while the lung did not suffer a significant puncture, there is new bleeding inside the lungs from a wound to the lungs. The next line that you quote: "There are no areas of induration, consolidation, hemorrhage, or gross scarring". These terms are all used when the lungs are being examined for disease processes such as Black Lung, the COPD family of diseases, Cystic Fibrosis, Asbestosis, and such lung injuries. I know you and your ilk won't accept this explanation, but I feel compelled to try to help you understand. You can look those four words up for yourself and see what they all relate to, if you want to, but whatever. If you look up hemorrhage of the lung by itself you will get information that supports your narrow view, but if you look the four terms up together you will actually get a better idea of what that line is actually saying, and it isn't what you are trying to make it say. The blood in the lungs from a disease process looks different than freshly spilled blood. Similar to signs of hemorrhage in the stomach gives the appearance of coffee grounds when it is vomited out.

After death, blood seeks the lowest point. I could not find it right now and I am not real concerned about finding it. But anyway, he did comment on the discoloration in gluteal and upper posterior thigh regions due to the blood settling there. Similar to what you see in the hands and feet, that blackish color. Anything in the torso (a realatively open area) area would settle to the Gluteal area that was in the bottom of the shower. Once he was placed in the shower, the blood started draining downward due to gravity. The same thing would have happened in the head, as his head was turned to the right and he was slumped that way. We can see it in the hands and feet, also.

I don't disagree that he could have written a more detailed report. But, the information is there, and it is not what you think it is or what you are trying to twist it to be. I can easily see why someone would read the report and think it says one thing, but be way of base with that assumption. In many places it seems his brain is going faster than his fingers and type, and he leaves out details that should be there and would make the report easier to read and understand.

 

[Captain86]

OK. Maybe I didn't state that clearly. Juan proved that she chose to attack him with the knife first. He proved this through the testimony of the ME who says she attacked him with the knife first. Does that make my position clearer?

She didn't use the gun for the murder if she shot him after he was dead.

So first Juan proves she premeditated murder with a gun, and then he proves she carried out the murder with a knife which cancels out the premeditation with a gun.

IMO

Premeditation is Premeditation. He showed she went there with the intent to kill Travis, and Travis ended up dead at her hands. That is premeditated murder. The fact that she used a different weapon (that she also brought to the crime scene0 other than the gun, that she also used during the murder, does not matter. She wanted to kill Travis and she did. She traveled to his house with that intent. The fact that she also brought a knife and used that knife shows just how planned the murder was. It doesn't make the murder any less pre-planned.

Premediated murder is more about your state of mind and thought process than how you accomplish your goal. She could have taken no weapon with her and it still be premeditated murder. Her taking the gun and him ending up dead really made the case of premeditated murder much easier to prove. But really, it is the gas cans, the phone, attempts to remove evidence of her being in the house, and multiple other things she did before and after that will seal the deal, not what weapon she killed him with.

 

[molly333]

Another hung Jury on HLN After Dark!

Question: Did she bring the knife?

Jury: 7 yes to 5 no

:banghead:

 

[gitana1]

Ok. We can treat them as two seperate issues. I'm willing to concede she could overpower him with a knife. I just think she would have had to get really lucky to do so.

Didn't you have the duct tape theory? I think you were also wondering how she could be so successful with a knife, right?

The fact that she would chose a knife over a gun is what looks impulsive to me. And, the messy crime scene confirms it. It's not like she stabbed him in his sleep or tied him up and then stabbed him. That was a fight, as shown by the crime scene. And, a fight looks impulsive. I'm not saying it is, but it looks it.

IMO

I understand your point of view and agree with a lot of what you are saying. I'm a gun firster myself.

But hon, this was no knife fight. Jodi had only offensive wounds consistent with the knife slipping as she stabbed Travis. Travis was the only one with defensive wounds.

Whatever she did first, jodi incapacitated Travis immediately. The most he could do was maybe stumble a bit, fall to the ground and crawl a few feet down the hall, and possibly feebly attempt to grab at the knife.

This was no fight. It was slaughter.

Where did the knife come from and why is it in the bathroom?

I really implore you to think outside of what you'd do, because Jodi isn't a rational logical person.

If she shot him first, and the gun jammed, as in the ninja story, and Travis screamed and then went to his knees holding his head with one hand, moaning for help, jodi had a few seconds to run somewhere and grab a knife. Even downstairs. I ran a stopwatch and timed myself running a distance similar to what I think Jodi could have run going to the kitchen and back. 31 seconds. Leaving 15-20 seconds to stab him to death. It's cutting it pretty close but it's possible.

If you are going to plan something, you plan it out to work to your advantage. You don't just flip coins, --I'll take a gun and knife and flip a coin when the time comes. You don't depend on luck--maybe i'll get lucky and hit the SVC with the first blow. You don't plan to leave DNA, handprints, your own blood, and a camera with your picture in it. You don't plan to have to flood the bathroom to move a body so you can wash your blood off him in the shower.

That crime scene is a mess. She did not plan that.

Unless she planned to shoot him in the shower and the gun jammed.

IMO

I think that's exactly what happened. The gun jammed. But she could have also brought a knife in case she felt the gun may prove too loud, thinking she would try to use the gun first but would use the knife if, for whatever reason, she couldn't.

I mean, it may be easier to create a false premise for having easy access to a knife in the bathroom or bedroom - something that Travis would not question too much, like she was cutting a package or fruit or a pill in half. But it is clear he would be alarmed by the sudden appearance of a gun.

So while I do believe the gun was used first, just as she first said, there are many possible reasons why she may have premeditated using the gun first, but resorted to a knife when the moment came. And it's possible that after that she just panicked and decided to use that gun at the end to make sure he was dead.

Sadly, we know it took at least a minute for Travis to die. It was not instantaneous.

 

[Gypsy Road]

I am unsure of the sequence of events. I lean toward him being shot first, and then something happening with the gun (it jamming or not having more than one bullet) and then she panicked, but had to finish him off so she stabbed him to death.

Do we even know what kind of knife he was stabbed with? That knife is a mystery. Did she bring it? Was it already there? Could it have been scissors from his office that he was stabbed with?

 

[mrsu]

Still after all this time I think she may have gone planning to do it but didn't know if she could or would go through with it. I can see why to plan to bring a gun, but why knife too if you already had a gun.

I could see how she would after one stab it would become all about adrenaline and rage until she ended up wondering what **** did I just do? Then comes the freak out mode.

 

[Katie-L]

Here's what I think happened (based on the photos)

Warning: I believe this was Manslaughter

1) Jodi was photographing Travis in the Shower, dropped the camera or did something that made him really angry (or perhaps he did something that made her really angry).

2) Jodi reacted and grabbed the knife that was in the bathroom (used to cut the tie-ups).

3) She began to stab him, they struggled (the defensive wounds come in here), the knife slipped.

4) She ran for the bedroom with a very angry-looking (but likely in-shock) Travis chasing after her (the massive amount of blood in the hallway happens here).

5) She grabbed the gun and pointed it at him (and I believe it was in place, not brought by Jodi - there are too many .25 calibre guns in Arizona to force the "stolen" theory).

6) He ran back to the bathroom to escape - and to retrieve the knife (again trailing large amounts of blood).

7) She chased him with the gun (leaving a hand print on the blood in the wall).

8) They faced off in the bathroom - with a rapid sequence of events - her wresting the knife, continuing to stab him while he reached for the gun.

9) After multiple stab wounds his strength depleted. He was unable to either reach or maintain a grip on the gun (he was wet and bloody after all).

10) She slit his throat, but he continued to move, so she grabbed the gun and shot him.

The camera's final shot was on an angle. I think that one of the photos went off as a result of the struggle - and the last one went off when Jodi (for whatever reason) picked up the camera as Travis was in the shower.

...but that, of course, is the way it looks to me (and conceeding that without more info - we'll likely never know what happened).

I do believe that she doesn't remember everything that happened, but that she's not being totally honest about how it started.

 

[Applejack]

This is one thing the psychological expert said today:


"The attempts to clean up the crime scene appear to be rather frenzied, disorganized. You would predict if someone had planned this terrible deed, that plans would have included cleaning up the crime scene in order to get away and reduce the risk of apprehension."


This is one comment he made about how a disorganized and messy crime scene looks impulsive instead of premeditated.

Unless of course she was in a rush to get out before the room mates got back, and to carry on with her road trip (alibi), and felt she had cleaned up sufficiently to disconnect her from the crime and explain away anything else as her having "lived there for weeks" as she did in interrogation...

 

[molly333]

Unless of course she was in a rush to get out before the room mates got back, and to carry on with her road trip (alibi), and felt she had cleaned up sufficiently to disconnect her from the crime and explain away anything else as her having "lived there for weeks" as she did in interrogation...

I think everything you say is true. But, I don't think she intended to have such a messy crime scene. And, not because she's never killed anyone before, but because she didn't intend to use a knife.

The crime scene tells you something happened that was very unplanned. You can either construe that as murder one plans gone wrong or as an impulsive killing which is not murder one.

IMO

 

[Gypsy Road]

I think it was definitely premeditated. Too many things point to pre-med in my humble opinion. I am also convinced that the gun used was the same gun stolen from her grandparents house.

I also don't think she gave much thought to what she would do post murder. I think that's why the crime scene clean up was frenzied. She made mistakes (like a lot of killers do) - leaving a bloody hand print on the wall, and a bloodied stray hair, and I think she intended to take the camera with her, but it got tangled up with the sheets when she put them washing machine and she left without it. Without that bloody hand print, stray hair and camera - she may have very well gotten away with the murder since nobody knew she was even in Arizona as she left no credit card tracks or cell phone pings to put her there.

 

[Applejack]

Another hung Jury on HLN After Dark!

Question: Did she bring the knife?

Jury: 7 yes to 5 no

:banghead:

Who cares? They haven't heard everything the actual jury has, it's an entertainment show, amd it's not relevant to premeditation.

 

[Applejack]

I think everything you say is true. But, I don't think she intended to have such a messy crime scene. And, not because she's never killed anyone before, but because she didn't intend to use a knife.

The crime scene tells you something happened that was very unplanned. You can either construe that as murder one plans gone wrong or as an impulsive killing which is not murder one.

IMO

She didn't have to intend to kill him with a knife specifically for it to be premeditated. The crime scene tells you something happened that was very violent and messy, and that PERHAPS didnt go quite as JODI planned; but she did not need to know exactly how Travis would react and where precisely he'd be able to crawl to etc etc for it to be premeditated.

 

[molly333]

Here's what I think happened (based on the photos)

Warning: I believe this was Manslaughter

This is why I think Juan has to tighten up his case.

If I could ask you a few questions:

Why do you think it was a spontaneous fight instead of premeditated?

What factors make you think it 'just happened.'

Can you think of anything that would prove premeditation to you?

Why do you think she stabbed him so many times, including in the back?