premeditation

[Applejack]

I disagree. I think the State has FAILED to prove the "reflecting" part of premeditation. If you are in the grip of a blind frenzy, you are not REFLECTING on the consequences of your action. A frenzy, by definition, means you are in a manic state and not capable of reflection.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Premeditation occured long before she left for her trip. That she "allowed for a possible way for Travis to not be murdered by her" (lol) does not mean she had not formed an intent. She planned to cover her tracks and was PREPARED to murder him at LEAST if "she deemed it necessary." Can we prove she took the time at any point to "reflect" on that intent? You could NEVER prove that in ANY case. But she had AMPLE opportunity to do so and was clearly using very precise and "logical" mental functions to try to get away with it.

As well, the cover up, alibi, and all the actions she took after the "frenzy," were decisions she made. If it was truly as you describe, she could have called the cops, even anonymously, and possibly saved his life, no?

Sooooo premed by law has been proven. Again, the standard you are using is the Casey Anthony Standard where you can never prove 1st Degree because there's "always the possibility an invisible purple unicorn did it!" I guess everyone can just murder whoever they want and claim it was done in a frenzy despite planning to get away with it well in advance and say "you can't prove I ever reflected on it!" and call it a day.

 

[wasnt_me]

How are those facts relevant to this case? No one was ever charged for the robery, and they're common, therefore it's reasonable to believe that it's all a coincidence and Jodi's new story (which totally isn't being told to save her own butt now) is true and Travis did own a secret gun that only she knew about, and everything else she said did actually happen? And she disposed of the gun but not the knife, even though the gun was Travis' too? Sorry but this is the Casey Anthony definition of "reasonable doubt." Circumstantial evidence IS evidence. When viewed all together it paints a clear picture.

But even putting the murder weapons aside, premeditation has been proven.

How are those facts, would be my question.

1. Jodi was tied to the scene of the robbery because she lived there.
2. It's an opinion of how common a .25 gun is, and it's one that has to be applied per geographical location.
3. another opinion. Many people who have killed in self defense have told the police everything. I had a criminal lawyer recently tell me that he might have been in court a dozen times in a year, but he had 400 cases. Most plead out, which to me means they confessed to something in a short period of time rather than leading everyone down a rabbit hole for years upon years.

 

[wasnt_me]

Here's where the State has failed, for me, Applejack. They have simply not proven this killing was NOT the result of a blind frenzied rage. A frenzy means the person is NOT taking time to reflect on their actions. That's the essence of a frenzy ... you are out of your mind.

So, as frustrating as this may sound, it doesn't matter about the gas cans, the burglary of the gun, etc, because the possibility was left open that Jodi would NOT kill Travis (if he agreed to take her to Mexico.) So there was only a possibility of intent, not actual intent. I think something happened in that house that drove her to kill impulsively and brutally.

The key to premeditation is that there is a period of time, regardless of how small, for the killer to reflect on the very acts that result in a killing. I dont see how this has been proven. So many of you simply state that the very brutality of the crime proves premeditation. This is simply not true, from how I read the Arizona homicide statutes.

Please don't yell at me, and insult me, because I have an unpopular opinion. I am following this trial closely and I don't like Jodi Arias either. Who could? But, I like to think that I am fair and impartial and can follow the letter of the law. Reasonable people can subjectively, and in good faith, interpret things differently, right? I think the best charge that the State has the ability to prove is 2nd degree murder. I'm not sure enough provocation has been shown to get voluntary manslaughter. But, I'm still listening, to all the evidence, with an OPEN mind. Thanks!

She had a period of reflection when she switched weapons.

She had a period of reflection somewhere between stab one and twenty-seven.

She had a period of reflection right before she slashed his throat.

Are these not period of reflection times, "no matter how small?"

Being in a frenzy doesn't give you the right to overkill someone three times. I'm the type of person that when I even bump into someone on accident, I back, apologize and look at them to make sure they were not injured or didn't trip or bump into anything else. That is a LOT of reflection just for bumping into someone.

Could she not have taken the same reflection while raising a knife again and again and again and again and again and again and again? A person knows what they are doing to another being with a knife and it doesn't take 27 slashes to figure out, "oops....what am I doing?"

 

[cosmos]

In addition to the charge of premeditated murder, she has also been charged with felony murder. During a hearing when the jury was not present, Martinez justified the felony charge by saying she became an uninvited intruder in Travis' home after the first stab wound. Premeditation is not required to prove a felony took place, and death resulting from a felony is punished the same as premeditated murder.

My understanding is that any member of the jury who might dismiss the stolen gun, or anything else, as evidence of premeditation has the option to accept felony as an alternative.

 

[zebraland]

Thank you for this post!

I couldn't put this into words but the premeditation is just so blatantly obvious to me. If he didn't changed his mind he was done. I firmly believe she not only wanted him to think she was gone so she could surprise him while he was at his most vulnerable, (naked, soaking wet and cornered) but she also wanted him to SEE that gun and/or knife pointed right at him. She took great pleasure in that terrified look on his face, IMO.

Also, you see that pic & the next where he is down before the camera falls and takes ceiling pic. So how is it HE lunged at HER because she dropped the thing?

I get the feeling there is a reason she's remaining on that stand so long. The more feedback the defense is getting from the general public the more they go back in time and up the "abuse" stories for the jury. IMO, the entire direct testimony is premeditative. Otherwise all these new instances of TA's " yelling" and "back handing" her in the car (etc etc) would have already been told last week while they so thoroughly went through the timeline of their relationship.

Hoping this makes sense!

Conventional wisdoms says that the more a jury "knows" the defendant, the harder it is to give him or her the death penalty. In this case, because she's lied so obviously and often right to these jurors faces, the more time she spends on the stand, the more reason she gives them to give her the DP.

As for premeditation, use of two weapons and the overkill seem enough to prove it even without all of the planning ("Theft" of grandpa's gun, hair color, rental car color, lies about where she was going, gas cans, cell phone "dying", license plates, arrival time...)

 

[zebraland]

*Of course with a defendant like this, her stories would change based on which defense they were using, but I wonder if we would've gotten a closer version to the truth if they had gone with a crime of passion.

I thought the same thing. And agree, Jodi being Jodi was not likely to allow a crime of passion defense. She's got to blame somebody else for every bad choice she's made in her life including the worst of the worst.

I do feel bad for her lawyers, what a nightmare client.

 

[zebraland]

I agree! The sex tape was definitely a set up ~ There's a few times that she says "what was that?" making him repeat things he said just to make sure she got it on tape... You can bet she brought that tape with her on June 4th. Poor guy. So sad.

Something is not right with the sex pictures that day too... I don't think they had sex that day. I think she took the pictures of her 'ugly butt' with his camera without him knowing to use them against him too. I'm still thinking about that?? Anyone think this too? I hope there's more said about those pictures that day.

I think the sex tape was a set up too - certainly don't buy her story that they mutually agreed to record for later use. The thing I don't get about that is her orgasms - who would include that if the idea was blackmail. I guess the simple answer is Jodi Arias.

 

[sellse]

Responding to Applejack:

I think Travis was dead after his throat was cut, from ear to ear. So, no his life (sadly) could not have been saved. I have never subscribed to an "invisible purple unicorn" theory. I believe, even now, that something happened in that house that triggered the MANIC brutal slaughter. I do NOT believe that Jodi, smart as she is, would wait until 20 minutes before a roommate was due to return home and THEN engage in a knife battle with a man 75 lbs heavier than her. I do not believe Jodi would take the chance that a roommate could return home early and walk in on Jodi in the very act of killing Travis. You don't think it was a noisy event? You don't think a roommate wouldn't have heard something? You don't think someone would see Jodi placing knives in dishwashers and cameras in washing machines? No, I believe the actual act of killing Travis was a frenzied manic act and that is consistent with 2nd degree murder.

 

[sellse]

She had a period of reflection when she switched weapons.

She had a period of reflection somewhere between stab one and twenty-seven.

She had a period of reflection right before she slashed his throat.

Are these not period of reflection times, "no matter how small?"

Being in a frenzy doesn't give you the right to overkill someone three times. I'm the type of person that when I even bump into someone on accident, I back, apologize and look at them to make sure they were not injured or didn't trip or bump into anything else. That is a LOT of reflection just for bumping into someone.

Could she not have taken the same reflection while raising a knife again and again and again and again and again and again and again? A person knows what they are doing to another being with a knife and it doesn't take 27 slashes to figure out, "oops....what am I doing?"

It is not the OPPORTUNITY to reflect that is key to determining whether premeditation is proven. Rather, it is the ability to reflect. Here, I think that Jodi was in the grip of a manic frenzy, incapable of reflection.

Sorry for being disagreeable, but this is just how I see it. I can see that some of you vehemently don't see things the way I do.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

It is not the OPPORTUNITY to reflect that is key to determining whether premeditation is proven. Rather, it is the ability to reflect. Here, I think that Jodi was in the grip of a manic frenzy, incapable of reflection.

Sorry for being disagreeable, but this is just how I see it. I can see that some of you vehemently don't see things the way I do.

Why did bring a gun and knife with her? Was it because they would come in handy just in case she happened to go into a "manic frenzy" through no fault of her own?

 

[Sherazhad]

Why did bring a gun and knife with her? Was it because they would come in handy just in case she happened to go into a "manic frenzy" through no fault of her own?

I agree, Jodi bringing the weapon with her is key to proving premeditation. It's been proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Jodi brought the gun- same calibre as the 1 allegedly stolen from her grandparents. The time frame given by the photo stamps & the immaculately undisturbed closet prove Jodi did not get that gun from there. Also it stretches belief that Travis wouldn't have any bullets. Jodi testified that Travis told her the gun wasn't loaded so why would she use it to threaten him with? Travis didn't even buy a camera without advice, why would he buy a gun & not ask advice? Also why would Jodi dispose of the gun? -The answer is because she knew it would be traced back to her. There would be no need to dispose of Travis' gun. All the evidernce is pointing towards premeditation & in my view it is far beyond reasonable doubt

 

[cecybeans]

I think the sex tape was a set up too - certainly don't buy her story that they mutually agreed to record for later use. The thing I don't get about that is her orgasms - who would include that if the idea was blackmail. I guess the simple answer is Jodi Arias.

When she recorded them she may have simply been thinking of mailing them to any number of women TA might have been dating or would date in the future. Particularly if she could convince them this was happening simultaneously to them seeing TA. If that were the case, she would certainly enjoy making some other woman have to listen to her enjoy herself with him. I don't think she was the kind of person who would blackmail him - she didn't just make threats she went through with them.

 

[walkdmc]

Just when I think I know a lot about this case, I read something like the point being made below and it just blows me away.

There would be no need to dispose of Travis' gun.

 

[cosmos]

My theory on the phone sex is that she was planning to send Travis into a rage at some point by letting him find out it was recorded. Because she had done so many things on so many previous occasions to make him angry, as if she were pushing him closer and closer to the breaking point each time. As to whether or not she actually did that before killing him, I cannot speculate further. But to me there is something very calculated on her part about that phone sex.

 

[wasnt_me]

It is not the OPPORTUNITY to reflect that is key to determining whether premeditation is proven. Rather, it is the ability to reflect. Here, I think that Jodi was in the grip of a manic frenzy, incapable of reflection.

Sorry for being disagreeable, but this is just how I see it. I can see that some of you vehemently don't see things the way I do.

I don't think it's about me seeing things the way you do or about me at all.

I don't recall the law of AZ discussing manic frenzy as an excuse for it not to be premeditated, nor do I recall them discussing the ability to reflect. But I think if you have the ability to stab someone 27 times, then you have the ability to reflect.

I believe you have the ability to reflect while you're switching weapons as well. Switching weapons plays a large role in premeditation. Once she did that, it was clear intent to kill Travis.

 

[wasnt_me]

Responding to Applejack:

I think Travis was dead after his throat was cut, from ear to ear. So, no his life (sadly) could not have been saved. I have never subscribed to an "invisible purple unicorn" theory. I believe, even now, that something happened in that house that triggered the MANIC brutal slaughter. I do NOT believe that Jodi, smart as she is, would wait until 20 minutes before a roommate was due to return home and THEN engage in a knife battle with a man 75 lbs heavier than her. I do not believe Jodi would take the chance that a roommate could return home early and walk in on Jodi in the very act of killing Travis. You don't think it was a noisy event? You don't think a roommate wouldn't have heard something? You don't think someone would see Jodi placing knives in dishwashers and cameras in washing machines? No, I believe the actual act of killing Travis was a frenzied manic act and that is consistent with 2nd degree murder.

But how can she possibly know the roommates' schedules that Wednesday to begin with? How long was Zach living there? A week, I think? Did she EVEN KNOW Zach was even a roommate she had to consider? (This is half questioning because I think this about Zach, but I'm unsure.)

Obviously no one saw Jodi doing anything that day, not arriving, not staying, not leaving, no dishwashing (if that story is even true) and camera washing, and that's because she'd carefully planned her trip, where she'd park to be unseen, and she stayed out of sight during the roommate's unexpected arrival home. For all we know, she could have still been in Travis' bedroom when the roommate returned home between 6-630pm. Jodi has said countless times that she knows how to be in that house undetected.

If she's frenzied and manic, how does she pull it together in her fog enough to clean herself up, clean up some of the crime scene, not get blood ANYWHERE else on any other carpet or flooring in the house, and leave without anyone seeing or hearing anything?

The fact that the crime went down as it did negates the questions asked because it appears that it did happen and without her being seen.

 

[wasnt_me]

When she recorded them she may have simply been thinking of mailing them to any number of women TA might have been dating or would date in the future. Particularly if she could convince them this was happening simultaneously to them seeing TA. If that were the case, she would certainly enjoy making some other woman have to listen to her enjoy herself with him. I don't think she was the kind of person who would blackmail him - she didn't just make threats she went through with them.

If this was her plan, I do not see why she'd choose to kill him over just humiliating him with the release of the tapes.

 

[JRS_JD2L]

In addition to the charge of premeditated murder, she has also been charged with felony murder. During a hearing when the jury was not present, Martinez justified the felony charge by saying she became an uninvited intruder in Travis' home after the first stab wound. Premeditation is not required to prove a felony took place, and death resulting from a felony is punished the same as premeditated murder.

My understanding is that any member of the jury who might dismiss the stolen gun, or anything else, as evidence of premeditation has the option to accept felony as an alternative.

That's correct. The jury must be unanimous on 1st degree, but does not have to agree on whether it was premeditated or felony murder.

 

[indycornstalk]

Premeditation can take just a second of time, the TIME it took her to locate the knife was enough time for premeditation. She had to take TIME to look for that knife, knowing what she intended to do with that knife when she found it. This alone coupled with the gas cans, not telling anyone she was going to AZ, shutting off the phone etc. There is AMPLE evidence for Premeditation.

 

[Joy]

Responding to Applejack:

I think Travis was dead after his throat was cut, from ear to ear. So, no his life (sadly) could not have been saved. I have never subscribed to an "invisible purple unicorn" theory. I believe, even now, that something happened in that house that triggered the MANIC brutal slaughter. I do NOT believe that Jodi, smart as she is, would wait until 20 minutes before a roommate was due to return home and THEN engage in a knife battle with a man 75 lbs heavier than her. I do not believe Jodi would take the chance that a roommate could return home early and walk in on Jodi in the very act of killing Travis. You don't think it was a noisy event? You don't think a roommate wouldn't have heard something? You don't think someone would see Jodi placing knives in dishwashers and cameras in washing machines? No, I believe the actual act of killing Travis was a frenzied manic act and that is consistent with 2nd degree murder.

I wonder if the reason Jodi would "risk" being caught by Travis's roommate is that she had pre-planned on shooting him also if he showed up during her "frenzy"?