long weekend break: discuss the latest here #102

[kscornfed]

Omg, I can't believe they would not have done some type of forensic testing on that ammo. Surely they did.

This may sound silly, but I wonder if there has been any searches for this weapon. If they know the route she was driving, well... I know it would be like searching for a needle in a haystack, but would it be impossible say if metal detectors were used ?

i don't think you can prove the ammo is the same----anyone can walk in and buy a box of bullets for a .25. they'd be the same as hers.

as for the gun, i'm sure they did look for it. but since she's a liar, they don't even know for sure where she was when she got rid of it. i wouldn't be surprised if she gave it to matt to dispose of. and i would think if she could prove that gun wasn't her grandfather's, she would have told her DT where it was long ago.

 

[Truth Detector]

Cite?

Okay, because this is starting to annoy me, I won't be subtle anymore:

Unless we are talking about a firearm in the shrunken down sub in Fantastic Voyage, There's no such thing as .25 mm ammo.

You can have .25 caliber ammo. You can have 25 mm ammo, but conflating caliber and metric (ie, apples and oranges for measuring the size of a bullet) as .25 mm is simply ridiculous on the face of it.

Do you have any idea how small .25mm (25% of 1 millimeter) is?

So when I say it's prima facie wrong that ".25 mm ammo" was found, I'm not guessing.

True, but some of us got over being personally annoyed about these errors and confusions -- not always conflations -- long ago.

It doesn't help when search engines return 25 mm ammo results for searchers who input argument strings of ".25 mm ammo".

I hear JM, KN, JW, RS, and other court participants express them infrequently. We've even heard JA correct JM, and him thank her for it. Occasionally she is wrong as well.

I think I began letting go of these types of quantification/measurement errors the 30th or 40th time I saw a billboard advertising children's ice cream cone specials for .15 cents, or handwritten ".50 Cents Off" sale signs in various discount retail stores...

Moreover, when you take it too far in this forum, don't be surprised when your comment is mod snipped or deleted, as one of mine was once when I exchanged with a member who insisted that JA was the victim in this case. :banghead:

 

[Mykeru]

I've been going to almost every place online that I could get info about 25 caliber guns.
I, too, am one of those who know nothing about guns...except when I was holding my ex husbands 38 with the barrel pointed at me, I was looking for the "safety"....I couldn't figure it out, so I just turned it around, and shot a hole thru the floor. I went downstairs and it had ripped thru the insulation and it looked like a chicken had been dancing around the living room. We were having problems then, and he wasn't home when it happened, thank GOD I didn't "shoot my eye out"...people would have thought I had tried to commit suicide.

You realize from that point on the rest of your life is bonus time? By the way, Did you ever find the safety on that revolver?

But, I digress. Basically, people have been saying the same...a 25 is little more than a cap gun. A "gut gun", they called it....it would go thru skin. That it REALLY wouldn't penetrate THRU the skull unless pointed at it and not too far away...unless you were an expert, pretty close OR just lucky.
Again, IMO, goes along the line of the shot coming last....IMO, most likely before she put Travis in the shower.

I will repeat: Just because the .25 caliber (developed in 1905) is an inferior round, mostly due to the power of the shell and not the caliber of the bullet itself, doesn't mean it's a joke.

[video=youtube;idE1hpeydO8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idE1hpeydO8[/video]

There's no such thing a bullet that won't kill you. Especially when it it is acting on something soft and squishy in a confined space like brains in a skull.
Even the rubber kind can kill someone if they are hit in the chest or the head from the right distance. John Eric Hexum, an actor, was killed by a blank round that drove a plug of his own skull into his brain.

 

[LolaBaby3]

It's not a coincidence. You're likely to see very similar traits in most if not all psychopaths.

The way they gain access to victims is by morphing into whatever seems perfect for the person they're targeting. If the target is religious, the psychopath becomes the most pious; if the target is family oriented with kids, the psychopath becomes all about play dates and parenting manuals; if the target loves dogs, the psychopath will procure the perfect breed, attend every training class they can locate, and know every dog park in town. (With Bundy, because he wasn't able to read his victims in the mere moments he knew them before abducting them he instead assumed a vulnerable role preying on his victim's compassion.)

They all treat relationships in the same manner. Every relationship they meet their target and idealize all their target's best traits...instead of being smart, you're a genius; instead of pretty, you're gorgeous; instead of compassionate, you're Mother Theresa. Then they realize you aren't as perfect as they thought, because in reality no human being ever could be, and they start to devalue all the things that they believed made you so awesome. Lastly, if you're lucky, they discard you like yesterday's trash.

In my experience if you have the audacity to leave them instead you're opening yourself up for a scenario of nightmarish proportions. Psychopaths don't often willingly let their targets go unless they've secured a new victim. They'll sink to almost any depth, even years later, in an attempt to punish their initial target. Rejection is the ultimate sin in their world. It must be avenged.

JMO

Fantastic post! Thank you!

 

[AZWatcher]

Happy Sunday! Haven't stopped in since Friday so I may have missed this but Head Line Nonsense was all squirrely about some "new" info regarding the Cancun trip and how JA was supposed to go? Can anyone fill me in?

 

[ElleElle]

A couple of days ago I posted the only thing Doc Samuels got right was Jodi had low self esteem.

The reasons I believe are: she had been cheated on, called many names (*advertiser censored*, 3-hole wonder, evil, sociopath). The "rubber band" effect - men puling away once a woman gets too attached or needy.

Over time, this makes one feel inadequate and want to please the one that calls them these names, but yet can say they are the most beautiful woman in the world- it's confusing for them, The texts dictate this also. I re-read them all and Jodi appears apologetic all the times Travis got upset.

The narcissistic, person is full of rage and eventually snaps, hence the "fight or flight".

Jodi chose to "fight" and this probably was not controlled by as it is a biological response.

I am not defending her actions, just sayin' .

I've been there also. :twocents:

 

[katiedid2]

As Chris was testifying! Ja was glaring at him. Than she looks behind her! And what do we see Jodi's mom giggling with her sister.

 

[Schuby]

Makes me wonder why some cases captiviate our attention to the degree it almost becomes OCD. I'm hoping to gain a better understanding of the legal process and trial protocol. Who knows, might spur me on to finally go to paralegal school. I hope your husband recovered from his illness, but it sounds like he had a wonderful caretaker. How intriguing that you actually knew someone that was so closely involved in the O.J. Simpson trial.

I've been thinking about why this case is so captivating when, boiled down to its essence, it really is a routine case of domestic homicide. Here is what I have come up with:
Both victim and perpetrator were very attractive, people always take more interest when this is the case.
The brutality, especially at the hands of a woman.
It's a DP trial.
Jodi's media tour from jail didn't hurt either.
The photos, the sex photos, the shower photos, the accidental photos, when has there ever been a case of a victim's last minutes alive, with their murderer, preserved on film?
Finally, and this may seem out of left field, the travel aspect has something to do with it. Someone flipping out and driving 15 minutes to a have a showdown with their ex isn't really headline news. But to make this long distance trip, one so meticulously planned, it's so diabolical.

I'd be interested to hear ant additions other WS'ers may have to. This list.

 

[popsicle]

Anyone recall the defense expert who was replaced by Samuels and left the case due to illness?

I don't remember the name but I seem to remember she left because of pregnancy.

 

[AZWatcher]

I've been thinking about why this case is so captivating when, boiled down to its essence, it really is a routine case of domestic homicide. Here is what I have come up with:
Both victim and perpetrator were very attractive, people always take more interest when this is the case.
The brutality, especially at the hands of a woman.
It's a DP trial.
Jodi's media tour from jail didn't hurt either.
The photos, the sex photos, the shower photos, the accidental photos, when has there ever been a case of a victim's last minutes alive, with their murderer, preserved on film?
Finally, and this may seem out of left field, the travel aspect has something to do with it. Someone flipping out and driving 15 minutes to a have a showdown with their ex isn't really headline news. But to make this long distance trip, one so meticulously planned, it's so diabolical.

I'd be interested to hear ant additions other WS'ers may have to. This list.

Good morning Schuby, You absolutely nailed it. Only thing I would add is the taboo of LDS premarital sex.

 

[Matty29]

I've been thinking about this for some time now and I want to express it because it saddens me so.
I am very disturbed by the ease with which JA speaks of Travis, how she brought his personality, his words, his feelings into her testimony. She has taken him-every bit of him-for herself. It goes beyond the killing. She is the last to have him. The saying goes "if I can't have him, nobody will". And that is what she has accomplished.
There is nothing that anyone can do to make her stop saying his name. That makes me crazy. Hearing his name come from her foul mouth makes me ill.
Implying that he would care what she says or does is unbelievable. Knowing that she takes pleasure in owning him and keeping him alive while continuing to kill him is unconscionable.
This trial and this ridiculous defense has allowed this to happen. I don't know how defense attorneys sleep at night when they know that their defendant is guilty as charged and they're trying to set her free. THAT is not justice.

So sad. Bless you Alexander family. :rose:

Agreed. Every time I hear JA say his name, she has this thrilled look on her face that she is still connected to him and it makes me sick and sad for his family. I think she took the stand just to be able to say his name, over and over again, she is that obsessed with him, even in death.

JA found a way to keep herself connected to TA forever by murdering him thus having to say "Travis," over and over again in 'explaining' why she did it (there is no explanation, I agree 100% she was a stalker who killed him due to jealousy and if I can't have him no one can). It's repulsive she will get to have 'that' because she murdered him and thus is connected to him and his name because of it. I feel awful for TA's family that JA will have this macabre connection with "Travis's name" for eternity because of what she did.

As much of a thrill as JA gets from saying Travis's name, his family feels disgust hearing her say it. The look on the sister's faces when JA speaks of their brother is very telling, you know they will be there watching her die if she gets the needle or the chair.

 

[Clue Finder 55]

Arizona Laws that qualify a murder for the death penalty

I would like to say that I have copied Parts of an article and I’m posting it so people might understand how and why a prosecution would try and convict a person charged with a first degree murder which qualifies for death penalty such as with the Jodi Arias trial. I believe one or more of these factors listed below qualify a person for the death penalty and that one or more of these acts were committed in this murder. This is my opinion only and I believe the prosecution on this case will prove this

Especially “Cruel"; (The victim-oriented factor)

To find that a victim suffered mental anguish or physical pain, the Court must find beyond a reasonable doubt that (1) the victim was conscious during at least some portion of the crime and that (2) the defendant knew or should have known that the victim would suffer

As to physical pain, the victim does not need to be conscious for “each and every wound” inflicted for cruelty to apply. Sansing, 206 Ariz. at 235, 77 P.3d at 33 (quoting State v. Lopez (I), 163 Ariz. 18, 115, 786 P.2d 959, 966 (1990)). Physical pain may be found where a conscious victim physically suffered for at least a short period of time. State v. Schackart, 190 Ariz.

Gratuitous Violence

The gratuitous violence factor focuses on the intent of the killer as evidenced by his actions. State v. Bocharski, 218 Ariz. 476, 189 P.3d 403 (2008). The fact finder must consider the killer’s intentional actions to determine whether he acted with the necessary vile state of mind. The state must make two showings. The state must first show that the defendant
did, in fact, use violence beyond that necessary to kill. The state must also show that the defendant continued to inflict violence after he knew or should have known that a fatal action had occurred. Id.
The showing of using violence beyond that necessary to kill often involves a “barrage of violence.” State v. Ceja, 115 Ariz. 413, 417, 565 P.2d 1274, 1278 (1977). See Bocharski, 218 Ariz. at 494 ¶ 86, 189 P.3d at 421 (twenty-four knife injuries to head and face, including eight stab wounds that penetrated deep into face and neck, unnecessary to cause death); State v. Detrich, 188 Ariz. 57, 932 P.2d 1328 (1997) (three stab wounds were fatal and thirty-seven others were excessive, constituting gratuitous violence);


I may have not interpreted some of these factors correctly so you can look up Arizona Laws yourself and see what you think

 

[Schuby]

Good morning Schuby, You absolutely nailed it. Only thing I would add is the taboo of LDS premarital sex.

Oh, yes, good one.

 

[LambChop]

I believe you.



How many times do I have to correct before I can start to admonish? Give me something to live for.




For which the only proof of this is an obvious error of some talking head on CNN.




Yes, please, because when I asked the only thing people gave as proof is Jean Casarez on CNN claiming something that cannot possibly be the case and is is an obvious brain fart by her in the middle of a discussion.



I can be concerned for the both of us then.



Great. Can you easily find it for us then?




Okay, but since I wasn't the one talking about silly stuff like .25 mm bullets, why do I have to look it up? I'm not the one making an assertion about non-existent (in the sense that there's no such thing on earth) .25mm bullets being found.



That's based on a couple things:

1. The caliber of the ammo previously cited as ".25 mm" is impossible.
2. When asked for a police report to back up the claim .25 caliber ammo was found, .25 mm ammo, 25mm ammo or whopping huge spitballs I get "citation? We don't need no stinking citation"
3. As Arias bought a Hi-Point 9mm pistol that was found in her rental car apparently procured by her mother (the rental car, not the gun, because straw purchases are illegal in CA, and everywhere, basically) and 9mm ammo was found in her suitcase, it seems more likely the ammo was 9mm rather than ".25mm". That .25 caliber ammo was found because Jean Casarez said .25mm ammo was found kind of needs more proof than that.




"When I see it I will believe it". You mind if I steal that phrase and apply it to the .25 caliber ammo (or Lilliputian .25mm ammo) in the police report that you refuse to cite even though it's so easy to find? You know, just for fun.



I can't admonish you, but you can be condescending to me. Noted. I am also totally chagrined by your insight that I have done no research about this, or anything else, ever. I feel totally pwned.




Reported erroneously as ".25mm ammo"



Can you link me to the YouTube video of Jean Casarez's courtroom testimony where she talked about the ".25mm ammo"?



So you are repeated errors repeated by people watching people make errors on TV. I apologize for ever doubting you.

You stated the ammo from the 9mm was found in the parent's home. The police report stated 9mm was found in the car and the ammo from the gun that was stolen was found in the mother's home. That is what is reported. A search warrant was issued on the parent's home. The 9mm ammo was part of the court record as JM asked questions directed to Jodi in court. Your original post was about the ammo found in the parents home not about people posting the incorrect size of the ammo. I appreciate all the research you did on pointing out the difference in the size of the ammo which I'm sure required some time. Ammo is ammo to me and the only concern for me was addressing the fact that Jodi had ammo in the trunk of her car which was for the 9mm gun, not the ammo for the gun Travis was shot with. That would mean the parents had that ammo which even we could figure out if it were never reported. In the trunk of Jodi's rental the day she was arrested was a box of books that contained two knives and ammo for the 9mm gun. The gun was later found in the engine compartment of the rental car. Jodi was caught while she was packing her car to leave by LE who then served a search warrant on her home. A search warrant was also issued for the parents home. Jodi's mother, at no time, was able to get the gun, the knives or the ammo out of Jodi's car.

If you have proof it was otherwise then please post away. I'd love to see it. Trust me. If there was an error of posting about this it would have been caught by some of the best WS's here. And I agree with you about the media and that is one reason I do not watch them. They always seem to get it wrong. Also, I do have a life and I do not always read every single post here so if you pointed this ammo info before I just did not read it and was using someone else's post to jump off from. You see, size just does not matter to me other than what was found in the parents home and how it relates to the crime. jmo

 

[katiedid2]

I was thinking of the sex video we've all been privy too!
Jodi tells Travis that he made her feel like a total princess! Something like that! She was wanting Travis to say she was.

 

[Truth Detector]

So you are repeated [sic] errors repeated by people watching people make errors on TV. I apologize for ever doubting you.

Snipped by yours truly.

Is the quote an example of a pedantic error, or a pedant erring?

"While imperfect myself, I insist that others be." ~ Anonymous

 

[atthelake]

Jodi Arias Essays... A GREAT read!

DOES JODI ARIAS HAVE LOW SELF-ESTEEM?
http://kristinarandle.com/blog/jodi-arias-essays/

Fabulous read! Thanks so much! :seeya:

 

[3trees]

Yesterday I got in a back-and-forth with somebody over Jodi, in her interrogation being with Det. Flores, asking to see some photos. Everybody kept calling them crime scene photos. I pointed out that what she wanted to see were the "inadvertent" photos taken at the time of the murder, not the photos taken by LE after Travis was found. I didn't really get anywhere. I'm convinced that people do hear you, but it's just not registering as far as typing -- like typing "here" when you mean "hear."

Actually both are true. Flores tells her about the sexual, shower and the ones taken inadvertently and she says "can I see the pictures" they then talk about the twenty five auto used and his multiple stab wounds. Flores says to her "if you want I could show you pictures of him, do you want to see them". She then says "part of me does and part of me doesn't. Then she says the famous morbid curiosity line. So she wanted to what the camera inadvertently took and what LE took.

 

[Schuby]

Good morning Schuby, You absolutely nailed it. Only thing I would add is the taboo of LDS premarital sex.

Another note on this, the defense kicked the interest in this case up 1000% the second they started talking about "*advertiser censored* star" and "three whole wonder"

 

[AZWatcher]

Oh, yes, good one.

On the heels of the whole Warren Jeff deal, at least here in AZ, there seems to be quite a bit of intrigue and mystery surrounding the Mormon Church and its belief system.