Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 11/14/14

[AngelWings444]

It sounds to me like Nurmi's allegation is a bit more serious than throwing a less serious allegation out there to make it stick. I posted this conversation between JVM and Beth Karas in a previous thread but will post again in case someone that has not seen it is interested. BK says the allegation is damning, serious. I cannot imagine both KN and JW making false accusations just for JA. It is not like she is OJ Simpson. Stranger things have happened though. Guess we will find out someday.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10154793765755693&set=vb.114250430692&type=2&theater

Respectfully, BBM: This video and the evidence Beth says is so damning was from Nurmi's motion. They made this video before Juan Martinez told the court what really happened and who had the computer. Again, the motion was filed and everyone was jumping to conclusions. Only to find out that the defense were the ones who powered up the computer and somehow deleted info.

IMO - nothing to see in regards to any wrongdoing on the part of the prosecution.

 

[katydid23]

It sounds to me like Nurmi's allegation is a bit more serious than throwing a less serious allegation out there to make it stick. I posted this conversation between JVM and Beth Karas in a previous thread but will post again in case someone that has not seen it is interested. BK says the allegation is damning, serious. I cannot imagine both KN and JW making false accusations just for JA. It is not like she is OJ Simpson. Stranger things have happened though. Guess we will find out someday.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10154793765755693&set=vb.114250430692&type=2&theater

When I first heard Nurmi's accusation, that Det. Flores walked into the evidence room, SIGNED OUT THE COMPUTER, then went and destroyed 1000 files of evidence, AFTER it had already been looked at many times, I was quite doubtful the accusations were true.

Flores is not an idiot. And he would not put his entire career and reputation and pension in the dumps tampering with a case like that. Especially not one in which he had so much damning evidence already. Why sign out a laptop and then tamper with evidence in such a glaring fashion?


So it was no surprise to hear that , in fact, the defense team was meeting up with Flores so they could look at the laptop. There goes Nurmi's brilliant motion---SPLATTTTT.....anic:

 

[Sedona722]

All the defence has to do is defend Jodi. All they think they need to do is make Travis look bad.
JMO

And that is exactly why I think Jodi is running the show. It so smacks of her threat to JM to drag Travis' name through the mud if he didn't take the DP off the sentencing. I just get so frustrated with the DT because everything they do is pure muddying of Travis.

 

[Sedona722]

It's a very serious allegation.

I'm sure they feel their accusation is serious and something like this should certainly be taken seriously. But it's clear they had not even gotten all their facts before they filed this motion. Perhaps it's hard to imagine them making false accusations, but they have before, most especially Nurmi.

The previous defense team requested permission to examine Travis' computer, Travis' phone, etc. And they were complied with. It was turned on, they looked at it, and they gave it back. On this date, when they were looking at it, some alleged deletions happened. Now Nurmi is accusing Juan and Flores of doing this. But the defense is the one who examined it. Couldn't they just as well be the ones who did it?Nurmi's accusation was based mostly around his allegation that the computer was wrongly signed out for "services" and no one was told. That is just not what happened. So that's a strike against something in his motion. Could they still have made deletions? It's possible. But thousands of deletions, en masse, between the time the defense attorney left and the time they signed it back in? For what purpose? If Juan was gonna destroy damning evidence, why'd he leave these Hughes emails? Why'd he leave the text messages where Travis is mean to Jodi? Why would he risk his decades long career on little old Jodi Arias? Why risk completely damaging his airtight case against her? Why do something that has a very good chance of being tracked, knowing the defense would hire their own forensics expert?

So what basis does Nurmi have for these accusations now? If he's going to make them, he better have some good evidence to back it up, because, again, they're very serious. And if he was so confident about what he was bringing, why would he change his argument in the middle of arguing the motion from destroying evidence to prosecutorial misconduct because they allowed the defense to do something that caused deletions? Because he's trying to make this stick and clean some of the egg off his face.

And if their expert did indeed destroy a key piece of evidence during his examination, that's no good either.

So very well said MeeBee!! You are the voice of reason that keeps me sane most of the time when I lurk and read. You make so much sense and it is very soothing to my frayed nerves with this trial. Between you and AZL, I always feel so much better even though I know the DT uses "dirty" tactics. I can remember one time when I was deposed for a case and the prosecuting attorney gave me hints on what to say and how to deal with the DT and it worked. I actually po'd the DT and the prosecutor said well done. When I did have to get up and testiy the DT didn't scare me because of that experience. The prosecuting team won that case.

 

[LinasK]

I was re-watching an interview of JA by Ryan Owens and had forgotten about one particular part.

Ryan Owens: "If you were on that jury and you heard what they have heard, would you kill you?"

JA: "I don't believe in capital punishment, um, so the answer would be no."

However that is exactly what JA did to Travis. JA decided that she was judge, jury and executioner because Travis "treated her wrong". I so wish that Juan would be able to show the jury the interviews that JA did after being found guilty of 1st degree murder, the interview where she stated that no jury would find her guilty, and any other media interview that shows JA for who she truly is. I can only hope and pray that this jury "gets it" and isn't swayed by the BS the defense team and JA are trying to get them to swallow.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrc9SgqtQos

MOO

Of course she doesn't believe in Capital Punishment, neither did Casey Anthony- they both know that they deserve it!!!:banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[LinasK]

Well, we know one thing for sure, Travis didn't access those *advertiser censored* websites on the last date, he was deceased. I wonder how they will explain that one?

Welcome Newbies. While I agree that everyone is entitled to their opinion, it would be helpful if everyone viewed all the evidence and testimony before forming a conclusion that contradicts anything/everything presented at trial. We are in the sentencing phase. The killer has admitted to the crime, perpetrated by her, solely. Additionally, I find it hurtful and offensive to continually drag innocent people into this crime. Matt was not there that night. Travis did not abuse the killer. The killer was not abused by her family. The ninja's didn't do it, the skateboarders weren't involved...etc.. Enough is enough. Let's leave the innocent victims out of this...please.

BBM. Excellent post!!!:clap::clap::goodpost:

 

[LinasK]

Respectfully, BBM: This video and the evidence Beth says is so damning was from Nurmi's motion. They made this video before Juan Martinez told the court what really happened and who had the computer. Again, the motion was filed and everyone was jumping to conclusions. Only to find out that the defense were the ones who powered up the computer and somehow deleted info.

IMO - nothing to see in regards to any wrongdoing on the part of the prosecution.

So what if it's a "damning allegation" if it's made without proof??? All Beth is saying is that it's a serious charge- doesn't mean it has merit.

 

[bsk]

Welcome Predator, I figured now is as good a time as any to jump in myself, although I did post a couple of days ago too. Anyway, I have always thought MM was involved with this murder because I just couldn't make myself believe CMJA was able to pull this off by herself without having more than a couple of cuts on her finger. I have no ideas on how it took place except I do believe that is how some of the evidence was left like it was, for example the camera, he may have been responsible for it and not knowing a lot about them thought he could ruin it with the wash. Imo that is why she says that she knows he would never turn on her. Just a thought. Imoo

There were times I wondered whether MM was her partner in this. But I have to believe that if Juan had any evidence of a second person involved that he would have gone after him. Maybe the state did some checking into it and found nothing (e.g. a solid alibi) or maybe it was impossible to prove one way or the other but has MM spooked enough to stay out of state and not testify. Or is there something else Juan might be holding over his head?

 

[bsk]

The more I think about the computer thing the weirder it gets from every angle.

The only way I can think of it that it would ever have been powered on takes a combination of things:
- It's a laptop that needed to be flipped open to access the hard drive.
- It still had power in the battery.
- The battery was still connected.
- It was in sleep/hibernation mode.
- It was set to awaken when opened.
- It was not password protected.
- An AV program was scheduled such that it would run the next time it awoke.

All those are plausible except that they would (should) have removed the power cord and the battery before opening it for this very reason - you don't want anything to accidentally kick off.

And once the hard drive was disconnected from the computer, it would immediately be locked/copied and you would never put it back in the computer again. I have a hard time believing they would be dumb enough to do that (state or DT) or that a judge would be dumb enough to order it.

Add that to Juan's seemingly contradictory remarks about it (e.g. were he and Flores present or not?) and it just gets weirder and weirder. The logs showing where both the hard drive and the computer were at any given point will be critical.

The only thing that might be plausible is if you had multiple images so that you could plug in one of them and power it on - then if something happened to it you would still have another original copy. Maybe this is what happened and Juan is saying that the defense should have made another copy before plugging theirs in. But the state should have had another copy before it left their possession. So that seems weird as well.

It's going to be interesting to see what comes out of this. I doubt it's as much of a slam dunk as either side says - somebody screwed up at some point.

 

[Nali87]

There were times I wondered whether MM was her partner in this. But I have to believe that if Juan had any evidence of a second person involved that he would have gone after him. Maybe the state did some checking into it and found nothing (e.g. a solid alibi) or maybe it was impossible to prove one way or the other but has MM spooked enough to stay out of state and not testify. Or is there something else Juan might be holding over his head?

I think that if JA didn't act alone, she would have implicated MM in a heartbeat and that she would have wanted a deal (f.e DP off the table) in exchange for such information. If there was anyone else involved in this crime, she would have said so.

 

[Hope4More]

Yes, let's please genuinely welcome new posters by treating all opinions with respect. Having just same group of posters who agree with each other most of the time risks creating an echo chamber and group think.

I think its great to hear from the brand new and nearly new posters who have chimed in the past few days. Gwen, for example, brought an entirely new and really important perspective to the table about Travis perhaps protecting CMJA's reputation by remaining discreet about their intimacy.

More, please. More contributors, more opinions, more respect.

 

[LambChop]

Lets stay on topic and not go off on discussions about what other prosecutors. Let's stay focused on this case only.

Thanks, Lambchop

 

[Gwen6275]

I get that. I just think the defense is WRONG. It doesn't matter what they claim TA did. If TA was a raging alcoholic that masturbated to *advertiser censored* all day, sitting around in his underwear eating Cheetos while working as a grouchy debt collector talking little old ladies out of their social security $ to pay their gandkids' debt. . .if he's not breaking the law in a most heinous way, how does that justify what CMJA did to him?

Yes! Even if everything she said is true, (obviously it is NOT), none of it is justification for murder. Travis was a great person but he was flawed, like all of us. There is no perfect murder victim. And any of those flaws should be irrelevant in a case where a murder is premeditated. She is not allowed to be judge, jury and executioner.

 

[MeeBee]

The more I think about the computer thing the weirder it gets from every angle.

The only way I can think of it that it would ever have been powered on takes a combination of things:
- It's a laptop that needed to be flipped open to access the hard drive.
- It still had power in the battery.
- The battery was still connected.
- It was in sleep/hibernation mode.
- It was set to awaken when opened.
- It was not password protected.
- An AV program was scheduled such that it would run the next time it awoke.

All those are plausible except that they would (should) have removed the power cord and the battery before opening it for this very reason - you don't want anything to accidentally kick off.

And once the hard drive was disconnected from the computer, it would immediately be locked/copied and you would never put it back in the computer again. I have a hard time believing they would be dumb enough to do that (state or DT) or that a judge would be dumb enough to order it.

Add that to Juan's seemingly contradictory remarks about it (e.g. were he and Flores present or not?) and it just gets weirder and weirder. The logs showing where both the hard drive and the computer were at any given point will be critical.

The only thing that might be plausible is if you had multiple images so that you could plug in one of them and power it on - then if something happened to it you would still have another original copy. Maybe this is what happened and Juan is saying that the defense should have made another copy before plugging theirs in. But the state should have had another copy before it left their possession. So that seems weird as well.

It's going to be interesting to see what comes out of this. I doubt it's as much of a slam dunk as either side says - somebody screwed up at some point.

Juan and the defense attorney said that a power cord was needed to turn it on. Obviously that was because the battery was either removed or it was dead.

I haven't found Juan's remarks to be contradictory. He says he was there. Has he said anything else? Are you saying they all just decided to have a computer and phone viewing party without a judge or anyone else knowing about it or without the defense making the request?

As for the rest of it, I think we need to learn more about what is proper protocol before jumping to conclusions. For instance, do we know the hard drive would have been removed and never put back in? It sounds like, in any case, they have been placing the hard drive back in, because everyone time the analysis is done on the computer, they request to see the whole computer.

I also don't understand what you're saying in the BBM. Juan didn't say they should have made a copy before turning it on. His latest motion is saying something else, that the original hard drive was destroyed and he needs the defense's copy of their mirror image. I think the latest motion for discovery was made by Juan.

Obviously, someone screwed up. But the question is did it amount to what the defense is saying: prosecutorial misconduct and evidence tampering? If not then the whole thing, while strange, is not going to get anyone in trouble.

 

[daisydomino]

FWIW, Dworkin examined the image copy made in 2008, he didn't have the laptop itself but I have yet to find the date that he examined it. That is accepted protocol, btw, to never access the HD itself - they should always used image copies, but if the court orders them to do something they have to comply. He did get JA's HD in 2012 per court order, after it was returned from the TX lab but could have examined TA's image copy much earlier. Yes, both Dworkin & Melendez testified there was no *advertiser censored* or viruses, but in JM's motion he now says they did find viruses and malware. No reason for the State's copy to have disappeared, so maybe they recently ran current AV software on their master and found what they couldn't/didn't see in 2008?

But in order to find out how/what happened and when, they'd need a recent image to compare w/2008 and also to verify what Nurmi is claiming was there. Another question I have is if the forensic team even knew the defense were going to power up that laptop in 2009 because you would think they would have protected it in some way and would have made another image copy once they'd finished. If they didn't realize it was powered up, there would be no reason for them to make another image copy before they turned it over to this defense team. Interested in all of this, but I'm not looking forward to trying to figure out what twitter reports of this hearing are supposed to mean (if the media is allowed in.) Some of those guys probably have very little understanding of the terms that will be used, and what might be important. So loving this trial by twitter!:maddening:

It's a minor detail, but where did you find that Lonnie Dworkin examined the image in 2008? In his testimony in the trial, he said that he received the read-only mirror image on November 5, 2012.

I was not able to find anywhere that he ever had the original hard drive.

 

[SwampMama]

I got the pop up *advertiser censored* from a house plan site!!

Somewhat o/t but when i worked with the library, we were looking up characters from kid's stories like Dora the explorer and we got slammed with *advertiser censored*, despite having firewalls and protections in place to supposedly prevent this. I was alarmed because we had kids who used those computers and often printed pics of such characters. she blamed me for finding it.

(My boss was a b**** and basically blamed ME for finding it and then proceeded to yell at me for causing this problem. She didn't do anything about it until a another librarian (one she liked, she didn't like me, lol) sent her some graphic pics of what was showing up.)

So *advertiser censored* can show up in computers where people are NOT looking for it and have taken precautions to prevent it. Jodi and Nurmi are vile for going down this desperate, disgusting and pathetic path.

 

[Predator]

There was one and only one attacker and murderer in this crime scene: Jodi Arias. Let's not get it twisted. And it was in no way any sexual assault. No matter what your "gut" says, it's not what the evidence nor her testimony of the crime supports.

If it appears that one person couldn't have commited this alone, that speaks to the strong degree of premeditation and planning this one murderer put in to it.

JM pretty much explained it in closing, step by step. You can find it on Youtube.

Was it CMJA's intention to make it "look" like 2 killers? Well, if you go with her story #2, you've got the 2 ninjas. But that negates story #1-She wasn't there or even in the State at the time of the murder, and #3- It was "self defense". The rest of her "stories" are just whims of magical thinking..........like unicorn poop.

I have just watched JM's closing argument and I truly wish I hadn't. It made me realize that I should leave all this stuff alone, his story of what happened even though quite possible and wasn't all that probable and as we all well know everything is possible even such things as time travel, Jodi not killing Travis and existence of God, however all these things are very improbable...

<modsnip>

P.S I truly hope I am wrong on this one.

 

[MeeBee]

I have just watched JM's closing argument and I truly wish I hadn't. It made me realize that I should leave all this stuff alone, his story of what happened even though quite possible and wasn't all that probable and as we all well know everything is possible even such things as time travel, Jodi not killing Travis and existence of God, however all these things are very improbable...

<modsnip>

P.S I truly hope I am wrong on this one.

With all due respect predator, I'm not sure if you're aware that Jodi admits to being the only one to kill Travis only she says it was self defense. So JM's version is pretty close to hers, with some things changed around, of course, because it was obviously not self defense, as her facts are lacking.

So, if I may, what about his version do you find improbable?

 

[krkrjx]

For the most part all opinions are welcomed and respected here. But I gotta say, at this point in time there is no way I feel compelled to respect an opinion that this killer may not even be guilty of the crime.

She is guilty. She confessed to the killing. She did it alone. She lied, over and over. Any discussion of her possible innocence is over.

I have to sit on my hands sometimes when things are posted that I believe to be too far off the wall to have a place in a discussion--IOW, I usually ignore rather than say what I am thinking. But, that's my modus operandi and I certainly cannot demand others do that. However, if something really of the wall is posted I cannot see pointing that out as being in their face, or disrespectful. Good grief, if GB comes here and posts his opinion, are we expected to respect that? I am saying here and now--I wouldn't, and I am not sure how long I would be able to remain sitting on my hands for that one!

 

[Love Never Fails]

Well, we know one thing for sure, Travis didn't access those *advertiser censored* websites on the last date, he was deceased. I wonder how they will explain that one?

Welcome Newbies. While I agree that everyone is entitled to their opinion, it would be helpful if everyone viewed all the evidence and testimony before forming a conclusion that contradicts anything/everything presented at trial. We are in the sentencing phase. The killer has admitted to the crime, perpetrated by her, solely. Additionally, I find it hurtful and offensive to continually drag innocent people into this crime. Matt was not there that night. Travis did not abuse the killer. The killer was not abused by her family. The ninja's didn't do it, the skateboarders weren't involved...etc.. Enough is enough. Let's leave the innocent victims out of this...please.

Excellent post. Thank you so much!