Prosecutor Juan Martinez releases new book, February 2016 - #2

[tsitra01]

Willmott shocked me too with that display of spelling arrogance. So snide and immature. Also, if we caught it, the jury probably did. Professional? Definitely not.

Just wanted to let you and others know I thank you for your posts since I don't have a thank you on my I Pad ;-)

 

[salberg7]

Nurmi and Wilmott were up against a true experienced professional and their inexperience was on full view. I imagine the DT were so "done" with the case and "Ms Arias" by the end of the retrial. At least Wilmott chose to far away; Nurmi it appears needs to want to find some sort of self redemption,IMO. I realize they had a whopper of a client to deal with but why choose to impact their future career(s) for her? I am so pleased for Juan and the success of his book. I was at Barnes and Noble and saw the book was restocked on Saturday. Way to go, Juan!

 

[TrialWatcher]

Me too. I'm thrilled that Juan is so loved and respected. One thing that struck me on reading the book was the mountains of evidence. What Juan chose not to include was as skilful as what he included. There were so many distractions, traps and pitfalls to negotiate yet Martinez cut with the precision of a surgeon - shaping and directing the evidence. Well made point on Nurmi's attempt at redemption. Willmott never even tried. As for their careers - they are like bad freak one-hit-wonder pop songs. I can't see either of them being successful. Nor do they deserve to be. Juan Martinez has a career to be very proud of.

 

[Wing Ding]

Lots of typos in the book, especially the AM's and PM's, and the Sanyo vs Sony Camera. I am thinking they had so many preorders on the book they didn't proofread it well enough as they needed to release it.
I really enjoyed reading the book. Many people said that there wasn't too much new information but I think the book achieved its goal of explaining how Juan secured the "Conviction" - how he figured out the killer's psyche and used it against her. I liked how he planned his cross examination of her to be so effective that she fell into incriminating herself without knowing it. Thank heavens we had such an experienced and driven prosecutor in this case. He always kept the victim forefront and Juan's goal was to get justice for Travis, and he did.
I'm going to reread the book as I read it quickly the first time to make sure I didn't miss any details. I couldn't put it down, but it took me four days due to work, etc.

* Juan, to be sure, is as sharp as a tack. One of the "a ha... gotcha!" moments for me in the trial was when he used Arias' own words against her; telling the jury that even if they didn't believe she premeditated the murder as he theorized for them during the trial, they could still vote to convict her on 1st Degree Felony Murder because she admitted taking Travis' gun with her when she left his house after killing him. So even her bogus claim that the gun she used to shoot Travis was his own was enough for some jurors to convict her of 1st Degree Felony murder and still qualify her for the death penalty. And of course her story about the gun only came out during her testimony, so Juan applying the law as it relates to her evolving story isn't something the defense could've planned ahead for, or even craft her story for the jury another way for her. It was simply brilliant of Juan to use her own words from her own story against her in a way she (nor her defense team) never saw coming.

 

[TrialWatcher]

* (...) So even her bogus claim that the gun she used to shoot Travis was his own was enough for some jurors to convict her of 1st Degree Felony murder and still qualify her for the death penalty. And of course her story about the gun only came out during her testimony, so Juan applying the law as it relates to her evolving story isn't something the defense could've planned ahead for, or even craft her story for the jury another way for her. .

Yes that was a double dip win for Juan, especially when so many jurors found her guilty on both counts. There are so many gotcha moments. One of my favourites was towards the end. Juan waited patiently to enter the pics of her with dark hair. I thought it was never going to happen then - BOOM. Triumphant moment. Especially as she had slipped and slid around the hair issue. When Juan told the jury to believe their own eyes - superb. Not Arias' bogus claims and a hair tone colour wheel. Just the plain old truth - dark hair. Backed up by a witness from the car rental stating blonde hair on arriving to collect the car.

 

[GigiG]

Yes that was a double dip win for Juan, especially when so many jurors found her guilty on both counts. There are so many gotcha moments. One of my favourites was towards the end. Juan waited patiently to enter the pics of her with dark hair. I thought it was never going to happen then - BOOM. Triumphant moment. Especially as she had slipped and slid around the hair issue. When Juan told the jury to believe their own eyes - superb. Not Arias' bogus claims and a hair tone colour wheel. Just the plain old truth - dark hair. Backed up by a witness from the car rental stating blonde hair on arriving to collect the car.

BBM

The look on Wilmott's face when that verdict came down was priceless! You could see that she really didn't understand how they could find her guilty of BOTH.

 

[TrialWatcher]

GigiG, I'm going to find that clip and watch the disappointment on Willmott's face again!

 

[Tiger09]

Just finished my copy of Juan's book. I'm tired, so I'll post more later. It's super awesome like you all said. I loved that he basically used the defense witnesses to trap JA in her own lies. His strategy is genius. I wonder if other prosecutors had used his straight forward yes or no, staying out of the weeds approach would there be more convictions that hadn't been won? And if more prosecutors actually did the intense research he does, would there be less wrongful convictions? He didn't railroad JA. He went with evidence and facts.

Sent from my SM-T310 using Tapatalk

 

[Wing Ding]

Just finished my copy of Juan's book. I'm tired, so I'll post more later. It's super awesome like you all said. I loved that he basically used the defense witnesses to trap JA in her own lies. His strategy is genius. I wonder if other prosecutors had used his straight forward yes or no, staying out of the weeds approach would there be more convictions that hadn't been won? And if more prosecutors actually did the intense research he does, would there be less wrongful convictions? He didn't railroad JA. He went with evidence and facts.

Sent from my SM-T310 using Tapatalk

* That's right. Meanwhile the defense went far and wide to find two "experts" who would fabricate conditions (PTSD, DV) that may have aligned with Arias' ever-changing story, but simply didn't fit the evidence and the facts in the case. But what was so amazing to me was that Juan not only worked so diligently and fought so hard to prove his case, he also left no stone unturned to DISprove the defense's case. Sorry, Nurmi and Wilmott -- you win the dog food instead of the Buick!

 

[TexMex]

* That's right. Meanwhile the defense went far and wide to find two "experts" who would fabricate conditions (PTSD, DV) that may have aligned with Arias' ever-changing story, but simply didn't fit the evidence and the facts in the case. But what was so amazing to me was that Juan not only worked so diligently and fought so hard to prove his case, he also left no stone unturned to DISprove the defense's case. Sorry, Nurmi and Wilmott -- you win the dog food instead of the Buick!

It was impressive. He convicted her of first degree murder...put her in a cage for life. At the same time he acquitted Travis of domestic violence by disproving her accusations of her injuries. Then he won a pedophlia acquital for Travis by making sure her accusations of child *advertiser censored* were also made known to be nonsense.

He basically tried three cases at once and won all three.

 

[Tiger09]

I think JA was- and he states this over and over in his book- capable of changing her stories if given the time to think. Juan clearly went with the right strategy. Watching the interviews and observing her closely was very smart. He knew with a woman being accused of murdering a man, with the self defense motive, emails, chats, texts, and sexual elements that he had to show the jury who JA really was. Juan showed the jury a glimpse of the real JA that Travis saw, which worked.

Sent from my SM-T310 using Tapatalk

 

[CarolinaMoon]

After finishing Juan's book and seeing a bunch of snippets from Nurmi's, along with ONE of his publicity interviews, these two men have shown just how different they are. They were also in diametrically opposed situations.

JA was able to manipulate Nurmi from up-close and personal. She used all her powers to get him to do her bidding and he clearly suffered greatly from the emotional scars that remain. He was truly stuck. To avoid an overturn on ineffective counsel, he had to try to do things he knew made no sense to the rest of the world. He had to find "witnesses" who would do his bidding. LaViolette and Samuels are just two. It was probably a nightmare for MM and others she cleverly manipulated.

I even believe that Nurmi was as badly manipulated as Travis. When Travis tried to get away from her, she killed him. When Nurmi tried to get away from her, the court refused to let him go. He fell for the manipulation hook, line, and sinker. He is probably emotionally scarred for life.

On the other side, Juan was astute enough to see the manipulation from the time Flores first interviewed her in Yreka. JA gave him a wealth of information about her psychological make-up. He was distanced enough from her to see her in all her true colors. He was so powerfully able to counter-act her attempts to defend herself that indeed, he managed to show it very well to the jury, as we all witnessed.

And, as we witnessed in his book, Juan didn't take it all personally. He worked very hard and utilized every bit of his powerful intellect to defeat her. He "just" did his job.

While I have some problems with Nurmi and his practice, I do have some sympathy for him as he was just another man in JA's huge spider web. I simply don't want to have to read about it.

 

[TrialWatcher]

Interesting points on Juan's book from the above contributors. CarolinaMoon's detail on Nurmi caught my eye because I have swayed back on forth on him. I hate what he did in the trial. Found him hard to watch and impossible to stomach the horrendous lies about Travis. Yet I saw he couldn't stand Arias. His body language and their interaction screamed intense dislike. I have sympathy for him fighting cancer but outwith that his hypocrisy seems never-ending.

I bet Nurmi has nightmares about Arias. He has to be well up on her hate list. The nightmares are nothing to what he put Travis' family and friends through.

CarolinaMoon

"JA was able to manipulate Nurmi from up-close and personal. She used all her powers to get him to do her bidding and he clearly suffered greatly from the emotional scars that remain. He was truly stuck. To avoid an overturn on ineffective counsel, he had to try to do things he knew made no sense to the rest of the world. He had to find "witnesses" who would do his bidding. LaViolette and Samuels are just two. It was probably a nightmare for MM and others she cleverly manipulated."

The above strikes me as fair. At points, Nurmi looked like he was enjoying Juan's savaging of his monstrous client

 

[TexMex]

Interesting points on Juan's book from the above contributors. CarolinaMoon's detail on Nurmi caught my eye because I have swayed back on forth on him. I hate what he did in the trial. Found him hard to watch and impossible to stomach the horrendous lies about Travis. Yet I saw he couldn't stand Arias. His body language and their interaction screamed intense dislike. I have sympathy for him fighting cancer but outwith that his hypocrisy seems never-ending.

I bet Nurmi has nightmares about Arias. He has to be well up on her hate list. The nightmares are nothing to what he put Travis' family and friends through.

CarolinaMoon

"JA was able to manipulate Nurmi from up-close and personal. She used all her powers to get him to do her bidding and he clearly suffered greatly from the emotional scars that remain. He was truly stuck. To avoid an overturn on ineffective counsel, he had to try to do things he knew made no sense to the rest of the world. He had to find "witnesses" who would do his bidding. LaViolette and Samuels are just two. It was probably a nightmare for MM and others she cleverly manipulated."

The above strikes me as fair. At points, Nurmi looked like he was enjoying Juan's savaging of his monstrous client

Well said. I also think the fact that the death penalty was involved gave Nurmi/Willmott some sort of justification-in their minds-to do and say anything to "save" their client from death. I wonder if there was no dp if they would have allowed half of the trash Travis stuff...maybe the alleged domestic violence but not the pedophlia?
I'm not against the dp at all. I'm from Texas! We euthanized another prisoner last night and two more executions scheduled before the end of March.
But I do think the death penalty affects the way jurors are picked and trial strategies of the lawyers involved.

 

[Hope4More]

Well said. I also think the fact that the death penalty was involved gave Nurmi/Willmott some sort of justification-in their minds-to do and say anything to "save" their client from death. I wonder if there was no dp if they would have allowed half of the trash Travis stuff...maybe the alleged domestic violence but not the pedophlia?
I'm not against the dp at all. I'm from Texas! We euthanized another prisoner last night and two more executions scheduled before the end of March.
But I do think the death penalty affects the way jurors are picked and trial strategies of the lawyers involved.

I was anti-DP for my entire adult life until the FCA trial, and pro-DP through the first trial. I've reverted back to being anti-DP, but for different reasons than I held before.

I've no doubt at all anymore that having the DP on the table warps every aspect of a criminal trial. DP cases seem to be defended by DTs who believe the ends justify the means--anything goes, because the life of their client is at stake. Prosecutors are the mortal enemy because they are trying to get the DT's client killed. Judges bend over so far backwards to accommodate the due process rights of DP-eligible defendants that they fall off their thrones. Jurors are put in the agonizing position of deciding life or death, a process that most report haunts them for years afterwards. Post-conviction judicial review for DP cases is extraordinarily lengthy, which inflicts significant additional pain on the victim's loved ones, especially when the review is used by anti-DP appellate judges to advance their own agenda.

And, all for what? Shawna Forde is on death row at Lumley, but she's been moved to the same cell block housing the . Forde seems actually to have more leeway in what BS she's allowed to send out for others to post on SM. What difference are we talking about here? That Forde doesn't eat with other inmates? That she doesn't have contact visits? That she'll never have to share her cell?

IMO the cost (not $$) of the DP greatly outweighs whatever satisfaction it provides the rest of us that "justice" has been fully served. I think it's pretty telling that even many (if not all?) of TA's family would have settled for a LWOP with DP restrictions, had such an option been available. I second their choice.

 

[TexMex]

I was anti-DP for my entire adult life until the FCA trial, and pro-DP through the first trial. I've reverted back to being anti-DP, but for different reasons than I held before.

I've no doubt at all anymore that having the DP on the table warps every aspect of a criminal trial. DP cases seem to be defended by DTs who believe the ends justify the means--anything goes, because the life of their client is at stake. Prosecutors are the mortal enemy because they are trying to get the DT's client killed. Judges bend over so far backwards to accommodate the due process rights of DP-eligible defendants that they fall off their thrones. Jurors are put in the agonizing position of deciding life or death, a process that most report haunts them for years afterwards. Post-conviction judicial review for DP cases is extraordinarily lengthy, which inflicts significant additional pain on the victim's loved ones, especially when the review is used by anti-DP appellate judges to advance their own agenda.

And, all for what? Shawna Forde is on death row at Lumley, but she's been moved to the same cell block housing the . Forde seems actually to have more leeway in what BS she's allowed to send out for others to post on SM. What difference are we talking about here? That Forde doesn't eat with other inmates? That she doesn't have contact visits? That she'll never have to share her cell?

IMO the cost (not $$) of the DP greatly outweighs whatever satisfaction it provides the rest of us that "justice" has been fully served. I think it's pretty telling that even many (if not all?) of TA's family would have settled for a LWOP with DP restrictions, had such an option been available. I second their choice.

I'm not strongly for or against dp. I do feel if states decide to allow it that it should be used.
Since the dp was restored to states as an option in 1976 Texas has executed over 530. The next highest is Oklahoma with 112.

The guy executed last night killed five people in a home when he caught his wife with another man.

The next two scheduled are for a cop killer and for John David Battagalia

On May 12, 2001, Battaglia shot and killed his two daughters, ages 6 and 9. The mother of the children was on the phone with the 9 year old daughter at the time of the offense and heard the gunshots.

 

[TrialWatcher]

Well said. I also think the fact that the death penalty was involved gave Nurmi/Willmott some sort of justification-in their minds-to do and say anything to "save" their client from death. I wonder if there was no dp if they would have allowed half of the trash Travis stuff...maybe the alleged domestic violence but not the pedophlia?
I'm not against the dp at all. I'm from Texas! We euthanized another prisoner last night and two more executions scheduled before the end of March.
But I do think the death penalty affects the way jurors are picked and trial strategies of the lawyers involved.

There is no death penalty punishment in my country and I started the trial being against capital punishment. Something changed as I watched the grief of the family and the chilling calculation of Arias. I began to feel that it should be up to the loved ones to choose the death penalty or not. Of course, this would be unworkable in reality but I wish they could have more power. Mercy should be theirs to give - or not. I agree that death penalty cases affects the jury and tactics.

The American system is sometimes criticised but the openness of courts is a sign of health. More countries should allow justice to be seen. Every citizen should be allowed to observe what is going on, if they chose to. In the end, I wanted Arias to get the death penalty as it is what Travis' family wanted.

 

[b_lab7410]

There is no death penalty punishment in my country and I started the trial being against capital punishment. Something changed as I watched the grief of the family and the chilling calculation of Arias. I began to feel that it should be up to the loved ones to choose the death penalty or not. Of course, this would be unworkable in reality but I wish they could have more power. Mercy should be theirs to give - or not. I agree that death penalty cases affects the jury and tactics.

The American system is sometimes criticised but the openness of courts is a sign of health. More countries should allow justice to be seen. Every citizen should be allowed to observe what is going on, if they chose to. In the end, I wanted Arias to get the death penalty as it is what Travis' family wanted.

I am for it, I'll just leave it that I'd want the ultimate closure to losing a loved one. I have other reasons, I just don't want to go into 8 paragraphs right now... *sheepish look*.

It's a personal decision in the end, I do agree the victims have that option to decide upon between the two after trial as well... add to that, I personally feel if evidence is so concrete, we cut the inmate's bs and court's financial investment off after retrial/DP sentence, you are *done! These things should not take so long to wrap up. Ridiculous, *that is more inhumane, IMO, perhaps to all parties.

 

[Tiger09]

I don't think the sex tape nor the pedophilia stuff would've been introduced had the DP not been on the table. But then again, I also think that JA pushed for that hard. I think Nurmi did what she wanted to prevent appeal. I've followed lots of trials, and I've never seen a defense attorney book it so fast and cover it so much that his client couldn't win an appeal. It was like Juan dotted every I and Nurmi crossed every t. You really have to look past emotions, but it's there. Nurmi did do his job. He kept a dangerous murderer off the streets.

Sent from my SM-T310 using Tapatalk

 

[Only4Justice]

The Jury question of Dworkin was regarding his testimony of Jodi's Canon camera.

Like Juan Martinez said in the book Travis was not perfect. He sinned, according to his own religious standards. He had premarital sex. With Deanna, With Jodi. With several other ladies. He was sexting with a dozen others. But he was single, he was upfront with Jodi....friends with benefits. She knew the score but thought she could change him. So that doesn't make me think the "worst" of him at all.

I do not believe the Starbucks sex, the post baptism sex and probably not the sex at the Hughes. Those were lies by Jodi. But the sex in Edinburgh, the sex on their road trips...yep. Much of it is discussed on the sex tape by Travis.

Horrifically for Travis, he ran into a psychopath. She murdered him. He was neither perfect nor a bad man.

Thank you for your post. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Sent from my XT1031 using Tapatalk