Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 11/21-11/23/14 In recess, Part 2

[Reagan]

I don't have the time to sift thru all the threads, but is there a place where the tweets for each hearing are listed in chronological order? I know someone posted a websleuths blog of the tweets for Thursday's hearing in order, but I can't remember for the life of me which poster that was.

Any help is appreciated.

 

[Nali87]

I don't have the time to sift thru all the threads, but is there a place where the tweets for each hearing are listed in chronological order? I know someone posted a websleuths blog of the tweets for Thursday's hearing in order, but I can't remember for the life of me which poster that was.

Any help is appreciated.

Daisydomino! ETA: And she's even here right now, making it even easier for you to click on her username.

 

[Dmacky]

I tried to follow using my DH's cell phone on the town wi-fi as I chauffeured him to his appointments and miscellaneous errands yesterday. There was no way, I found, to follow and keep my composure to drive. I read "enough" here and on the Tweets to get a good sense of what happened yesterday. I then slept all night, after taking a good-sized :chillpill:.

Reading on here, in a calm manner I have put some things together:

1. The defense dearly wants a mistrial and is using this hide-and-seek to prove a Brady violation. That isn't going to work. There is no way that the DT can prove the prosecution deliberately altered the hard drive on the computer. Also, there is no exculpatory value to the information. It's really just a part of the JA slash-and-burn Travis' memory campaign.

2. B is the most unprofessional "professional" I've seen, other that MF and ALV. He testified he did NOT use the prosecution's mirror-image disk, stating that it wasn't worth the effort because it was altered/damaged. I can't believe he said that! How can he judge what he hasn't examined? Instead, he used the mystical Tony Dell image which he somehow can't provide to the defense in a timely manner.

3. Oopsie! Travis computer drive is busted! All of a sudden...

4. Only the defense could see the image of Jodi without a knife in that weird eyeball picture! Juan saw a German Shepherd, I saw The Blob. The prosecution washed their hands of it by stipulating that the German Shepherd/Blob didn't have a knife in his/it's paw or whatever.

I'm looking forward to the next part of this hearing. So far, I can only hope and pray that JSS sees through the smoke and mirrors. It's the same as in this penalty phase, the prosecution has yet to speak.

My thanks to all who tortured themselves yesterday to provide Tweets and commentary!

Great post Carolina!

BBM ~

Gotta love JM. Notice how he throws in "Chihuahua" for good measure, as a joke to Jodi's delusional reference to how Travis made her shake. :cold:

"It looked like a German Shepherd or perhaps I would probably say a Mexican CHIHUAHUA"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaJ5_gZCBzY

 

[Kakidoll]

Thank you. I didn't know that the computer being accessed needed to give permission.

Not all do. You can set them up so that you can log in 'in the background' and watch what is going on, control the mouse if you want, or wait til the computer is 'idle' then do what you want. You can do it without permissions if it is set up that way. You can go in and no one would even know you were there.

 

[daisydomino]

I don't have the time to sift thru all the threads, but is there a place where the tweets for each hearing are listed in chronological order? I know someone posted a websleuths blog of the tweets for Thursday's hearing in order, but I can't remember for the life of me which poster that was.

Any help is appreciated.

Hi Reagan! That's me http://www.websleuths.com/forums/blog.php?115109-daisydomino
I'm not 100% sure how it works, but I've been told that you can subscribe to my WS blog (this is all I will post in it) and get the posts by email.

ETA: It's not all the Tweets, it's just the ones I think reflect testimony or factual observations. I try not to include opinion, snark and humor Tweets but a few of those creep in if they are good. Sometimes I miss things and sometimes I have to be away from Twitter and can't collect the Tweets.

 

[Hope4More]

I've concluded all the computer stuff is a tempest in the teapot, whatever comes next. The State didn't tamper with evidence and Travis didnt look up child *advertiser censored* on his computer


The only person benefitting from this todo about nothing is the convicted murderer, CMJA.

Reality is, we are nearer the end than it seems at the moment. JM will dispose of Dr. F. quickly. After Thanksgiving we are back to Nurmi-- perhaps one more psych witness and perhaps more CMJA and that's it. Nurmi's big gambits for mistrial and weeks-long delays have failed.

We're nearly near the very end. Nurmu's kicking and screaming and baseless accusations aren't going to prevent sentencing or delay it for much longer.

Sweet relief.

 

[Kensie]

I've concluded all the computer stuff is a tempest in the teapot, whatever comes next. The State didn't tamper with evidence and Travis didnt look up child *advertiser censored* on his computer


The only person benefitting from this todo about nothing is the convicted murderer, CMJA.

Reality is, we are nearer the end than it seems at the moment. JM will dispose of Dr. F. quickly. After Thanksgiving we are back to Nurmi-- perhaps one more psych witness and perhaps more CMJA and that's it. Nurmi's big gambits for mistrial and weeks-long delays have failed.

We're nearly near the very end. Nurmu's kicking and screaming and baseless accusations aren't going to prevent sentencing or delay it for much longer.

Sweet relief.

I so hope that you are right. This whole retrial seems to be paid witnesses babbling on and on.
Soon the joke experts will be done and then what is left except sentencing the killer.

 

[Hatfield]

Your welcome

I don't know of any other way it could be done. Even when my provider accessed my computer I had to give/put something on my computer.

But I guess hackers do it somehow now that I think about it.

I just don't know.

There are multiple ways that people's PCs can be remotely accessed.

Just to be clear, this sort of remote access is very different than an existing Virus residing on a person's PC and the Virus software itself unleashes its "payload" to start causing all kinds of bad actions on a person's PC. Actions like automatically bringing up multiple Internet Browser windows and accessing *advertiser censored* sites. And even copying data from a *advertiser censored* site and downloading pictures (from known sites) onto a persons PC. That sort of thing is all done by a virus someone has gotten on the PC. The Virus software is also obtained in different ways. Ways like a user mistakenly clicking on a bad internet link, clicking on an email attachment, installing an infected screen saver, etc etc.

Remote access is quite different. Remote access that people are most familiar with is when they contact TECH HELP and the PC technician asks if they can help fix their PC remotely. They typically will ask the user to type something in "START" box in lower left corner. The new windows may be different now. But most of us have used this sort of tech service and have watched the technician move the cursor on their own PC screen while we just sit back in awe that some guy from another country is now trying to fix our PC.

That is 1 WAY. There are mutliple ways that a persons PC can be accessed remotely.

Another easy example is our automatic Windows Updates where we get a pop-up saying that Windows needs to update our software. We allow it because we think it is safe and needed. That sort of remote access is done externally by windows software and windows databases (not a person), but still the same concept. Something externally is coming onto our PC. In this case, it is data and software being installed onto our PC.

Most all of these types of remote access do require Administrative (us) rights to be granted to access our "drives" or our PC. Like our C-drive.
Now, here is the kicker. We usually get default settings when we buy a PC. Most of these default settings would typically prevent remote access to our PC and its drives without us granting permission. Which is usually why we would get a pop-up or warning of some sort if something is about to happen.

However, once a setting is changed to "SHARE" or "ALLOW", then unless it is changed back, we could be vulnerable. Some Viruses also change these settings themselves.

If our PC is not setup to require a password to be keyed whenever Administrator rights type settings are changed, we are vulnerable. For example, years ago, a lot of us either didnt know or dont like to setup our PC's to require these sorts of passwords to be keyed each time we turn on our PC because it is a hassle to do it and we just didnt know about it. Nowadays, we are getting better at setting up our PCs to be password-protected upon startup and also some of us know how to change our administrator settings to require a password to be keyed whenever an administrator type setting is changed. We get a popup asking for password whenever we need to change a setting. Its a hassle, but it helps prevent this sort of remote access.

The bottom line is remote access can be done without our knowledge if our settings are setup to "ALLOW" or "SHARE" to our drives and PC. And most of us don't know where the settings are or even how to do something like that.
The GOOD NEWS though is most good Anti-virus software does this sort of thing for us and they protect us when they can. Which is why whenever we get a pop-up OR message OR warning from our Anti-virus software or Windows itself. Read that message carefully and DONT do anything until you know it is ok to proceed.

Hope this helps.

 

[Reagan]

Hi Reagan! That's me http://www.websleuths.com/forums/blog.php?115109-daisydomino
I'm not 100% sure how it works, but I've been told that you can subscribe to my WS blog (this is all I will post in it) and get the posts by email.

ETA: It's not all the Tweets, it's just the ones I think reflect testimony or factual observations. I try not to include opinion, snark and humor Tweets but a few of those creep in if they are good. Sometimes I miss things and sometimes I have to be away from Twitter and can't collect the Tweets.

You're the best! Even if there's a few tweets missing here and there, I find your blog extremely helpful. I read the tweets while im at work, but between the distractions and the fact that Twitter posts are backwards in a sense, I find it really hard to follow. Having them in chronological order is the only way my mind can absorb the information. Your blog is appreciated

 

[bznbear]

Return to the stand. First he provided the wrong disk which he should have provided a replacement prior to yesterday's court testimony. He did not do that. Now he is saying he never intended to do it by saying he can't provide it until next Wednesday. If he did something wrong that can be proven, which he would know that, I'd be telling defense no way will I return to testify. You need to drop it. I'm surprised the judge did not charge BN with contempt for not providing the information that had been asked for. jmo

I don't understand why he didn't provide it prior to testifying y'day! He knew he'd need to, so why didn't he bring it? Because he knows it was corrupted while in his possession?

 

[bznbear]

The more I think about this (and maybe I'm thinking too much lol), the more I realize the defense really has nothing. There was really only one opportunity for the state to do whys the defense is claiming it did and it's July 19th, 2009. And I think it's obvious they got this wrong. The defense made the request to sign out and see evidence and the computer was only on for 12 minutes. There was not, reasonably, enough time for Juan to do what they're saying he must have done. And I think they realize this. So they're bringing up other stuff that isn't related to make it look like something it isn't.

Neumeister says the state must have given Dworkin an incorrect copy of the hard drive. I find that impossible. I've been reading about computer forensics and, from what I understand, to make sure the right copy has been provided and it's complete and accurate, the expert will compare it to the original hard drive to make sure he has a perfect copy and it matches. I don't know how this is done and I don't even know if I'm right. But I feel pretty sure Dworkin would know if he got an incorrect copy. They were able to get emails and IMs from this copy. So how does BN explain the hard drive being partially correct but not fully? They'd have to have deleted this *advertiser censored* and virus stuff and then given it to Dworkin. But BN is finding it now. So why didn't Dworkin find these deletions then? There is another explanation for why the viruses and *advertiser censored* was missed and I think this part will be the most important to explain. But it's like Steve said last night, the court will not find that the state was being deliberately misleading and the defense expert wasn't. So there must be another explanation for missing this stuff or it was just an honest mistake.

Then there is the business of damaged evidence. Willmott claims the hard drive was already damaged when it came to her expert. To bolster this claim, she brought up damage to Jodi's electronics as proof that damage is always being destroyed in possession of LE. Well, that's just stupid. The judge knows as well as we all do that Jodi is responsible for that damage and they came to LE in that state. Why would the state, with an eye to hide hurtful evidence to Travis, destroy Jodi's electronics but not Travis'? That's just backwards. And maybe I'm missing something, but I don't remember seeing any tweets referencing the hard drive and BN having to reset the pins when he got it, but I might be misremembering. It's like they glossed over it.

But when Juan said he has proof BN destroyed the hard drive BN's response was "that's just slimy, Juan." That's interesting to me. When an accusation is made, and the response is over the top like that, it signals guilt to me. Because a normal person, while incredulous, would deny that claim. They'd be confident in themselves. But "that's just slimy..." I don't know. That's not a normal response.

I noticed Nurmi has been very quiet since Juan has began responding. Willmott is the one who wrote their response to sanctions, she's the one doing all the questioning of witnesses. I wonder if Nurmi wishes he could take the motion back altogether but Willmott wants to keep pushing it, just needing to be right. Clearly, they did not have all their facts when they wrote it. And when you looked at this from one side, it seemed they had something, but the more that came out they realized they were wrong.

Jeff Gold explained Brady Violations last night. He said to prove them the defense must prove 1.) intent and 2.) that the evidence destroyed was exculpatory. I don't think the defense has proven either.

First, Wilmott is just ridiculous. Honestly, do the DT ever proof what they write?
Second, you're right about BN's response "that's just slimy". He would, indeed, refute it.
Third, what's up with all the DT's witnesses trying to mock JM when saying his name? Geeze they look juvenile, vindictive and unprofessional!
Fourth, I love your posts MB!!!

 

[Dmacky]

:tantrum:

BBM

Yes fantastic, as in, seriously?! Everything but used-car sales.

I notice under the "What we do" section near the end (if you can make it that far without a seizure), it says, "We will come to Court and explain to the jury “Procedures” or Evidence of “Tampering”, etc."

Hmmm. Does that mean he will find it, for the asking?

http://www.skymeister.com/bryan neumeister.htm

And the Emmy goes to :drumroll: Bryan Neumeister

Who has 58 keyboards, 9 guitars, 2 drum sets , a slew of recording gear and amps as well as fx gear...
:laugh: He also has grand total of 1 follower

http://fandalism.com/skymeister

 

[Meemaw12]

There are multiple ways that people's PCs can be remotely accessed.

Just to be clear, this sort of remote access is very different than an existing Virus residing on a person's PC and the Virus software itself unleashes its "payload" to start causing all kinds of bad actions on a person's PC. Actions like automatically bringing up multiple Internet Browser windows and accessing *advertiser censored* sites. And even copying data from a *advertiser censored* site and downloading pictures (from known sites) onto a persons PC. That sort of thing is all done by a virus someone has gotten on the PC. The Virus software is also obtained in different ways. Ways like a user mistakenly clicking on a bad internet link, clicking on an email attachment, installing an infected screen saver, etc etc.

Remote access is quite different. Remote access that people are most familiar with is when they contact TECH HELP and the PC technician asks if they can help fix their PC remotely. They typically will ask the user to type something in "START" box in lower left corner. The new windows may be different now. But most of us have used this sort of tech service and have watched the technician move the cursor on their own PC screen while we just sit back in awe that some guy from another country is now trying to fix our PC.

That is 1 WAY. There are mutliple ways that a persons PC can be accessed remotely.

Another easy example is our automatic Windows Updates where we get a pop-up saying that Windows needs to update our software. We allow it because we think it is safe and needed. That sort of remote access is done externally by windows software and windows databases (not a person), but still the same concept. Something externally is coming onto our PC. In this case, it is data and software being installed onto our PC.

Most all of these types of remote access do require Administrative (us) rights to be granted to access our "drives" or our PC. Like our C-drive.
Now, here is the kicker. We usually get default settings when we buy a PC. Most of these default settings would typically prevent remote access to our PC and its drives without us granting permission. Which is usually why we would get a pop-up or warning of some sort if something is about to happen.

However, once a setting is changed to "SHARE" or "ALLOW", then unless it is changed back, we could be vulnerable. Some Viruses also change these settings themselves.

If our PC is not setup to require a password to be keyed whenever Administrator rights type settings are changed, we are vulnerable. For example, years ago, a lot of us either didnt know or dont like to setup our PC's to require these sorts of passwords to be keyed each time we turn on our PC because it is a hassle to do it and we just didnt know about it. Nowadays, we are getting better at setting up our PCs to be password-protected upon startup and also some of us know how to change our administrator settings to require a password to be keyed whenever an administrator type setting is changed. We get a popup asking for password whenever we need to change a setting. Its a hassle, but it helps prevent this sort of remote access.

The bottom line is remote access can be done without our knowledge if our settings are setup to "ALLOW" or "SHARE" to our drives and PC. And most of us don't know where the settings are or even how to do something like that.
The GOOD NEWS though is most good Anti-virus software does this sort of thing for us and they protect us when they can. Which is why whenever we get a pop-up OR message OR warning from our Anti-virus software or Windows itself. Read that message carefully and DONT do anything until you know it is ok to proceed.

Hope this helps.

Thank you

I once got a virus by opening an email Christmas card from a friend. I don't open any attachments anymore.

I also use a external hard drive and thumb thingies for all files. Only use computer hard drive for internet, and never have external plugged in unless I am working on a file.

 

[luvmygarden]

I've thought all along that this retrial would drag right through the holidays like the Grinch on steroids (and unrepentant) and in to 2015. Blech

Yes, this is the Gift cMja has given herself. She is thriving and celebrating the story of her miserable life. She loves it!!!

 

[Nosey Parker]

:tantrum:

And the Emmy goes to :drumroll: Bryan Neumeister

Who has 58 keyboards, 9 guitars, 2 drum sets , a slew of recording gear and amps as well as fx gear...
:laugh: He also has grand total of 1 follower

http://fandalism.com/skymeister

'Who has 58 keyboards, 9 guitars, 2 drum sets ' and a partridge in a pear tree.

Sorry, Dmacky, but that's what popped into my head as I read your post - must be getting in the Christmas spirit early. :santahat:

 

[Myvice]

Just a thought but if Travis was using his computer to write his book, could that have given JA the opportunity to do this stuff remotely so she could "edit" his first chapter? Not sure if I made sense.

 

[Hatfield]

Thank you

I once got a virus by opening an email Christmas card from a friend. I don't open any attachments anymore.

I also use a external hard drive and thumb thingies for all files. Only use computer hard drive for internet, and never have external plugged in unless I am working on a file.

I know what you mean. It is very easy to do something wrong. When my Dad started using a PC for the first time, it took me a long time to get him to "JUST SAY NO" to any pop-ups he got.

He would get a pop-up for all sorts of crud from his internet browsing and he was always saying "yes" and he started installing all kinds of crud. LOL

We are "conditioned" to accept things and the sneaky way infected Viruses are sent almost force us into accepting them. Thinks like "Emergency...your account needs udpated".

It sounds like you have found a creative way to protect yourself and whatever works for you is great!!!

 

[LambChop]

:seeya:

After a good night's sleep, and the anger from yesterday's ugly sidetracking abated, I have questions.

Why didn't the defence rehire Dworkin for this issue? Apart from being a more credible forensic computer analyst, he and he alone can say that he received a 'wrong' copy of the HD. Perhaps Juan intends to call him to the stand.
Secondly, I have never, from the first day of the first trial, ever sensed that Juan would make a statement that he couldn't follow through with. BN should be shaking in his boots right now. Could it be that Juan has already interviewed 'Tony the Tech', and has the real low down on the broken drive?

I think/hope this is all going to blow up in their faces. Sadly, it won't faze Arias. End results are not of particular interest to her - it's the chaotic mind games that she relishes.

BBM Portion: I'm thinking Dworkin was just not "magical" enough for the DT.

 

[Hatfield]

I don't have the time to sift thru all the threads, but is there a place where the tweets for each hearing are listed in chronological order? I know someone posted a websleuths blog of the tweets for Thursday's hearing in order, but I can't remember for the life of me which poster that was.

Any help is appreciated.

Someone may have already answered but the SIDEBAR thread (near this one) has pretty good summaries of the tweets in larger groups of them together.

 

[katiecoolady]

I've never felt so dumb in my life than trying to decipher this computer mishmash. I'll leave it up to you guys, the professionals and will someone please wake me when it's over? #ripvankatie #sorryforgotthisisn'ttwitter