Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 11/26 -12/02/14 In recess

[katiecoolady]

I recently had to go to therapy for a very personal tragedy. The therapist had very similar dolls in the office, along with a cuddling blanket. I instantly recoiled from those props, because to me they represented the pain I experienced. Those dolls looked evil to me. I saw this therapist twice and couldn't go back. I disliked this person intensely. I felt they were completely out of touch with compassion and victim agony; way too much in my face! Maybe I had a normal reaction, but I wouldn't have taken my child back there either.

I sense this same lack of compassion for true victims from doc. She said there were 30-31 boxes of evidence to review from this case. We've seen Travis berate the killer in one email trail, and all she got from the voluminous documentation was that Travis was a master manipulator? She's seriously from the same sick alternate universe as the murderer, and an unconscionable prognosticator, imo. Seriously, how does she do this and ever look herself in the mirror?

I'm glad you listened to your gut w/ that therapist. I firmly believe many MANY people in the Psych field are nuttier than the patients (I can say this from experience having been raised by two of them--don't get me wrong, I love my father dearly but, ya know--and I WAS a nutty psych RN at one point having been driven nutty from working too long w/ that population with too much of my own avoided crap going on ). Anyway, long winded way to say I'm glad you didn't go back and walked away. Sometimes the whole opportunity in a relationship is the one we take when we walk away from it.

I sense a lack of compassion for MEN from this Dr. as I did from LaViolette. How anyone could look at that crime scene, know what she did and decide she was some victim, something is screwy there. Hugs for your situation too.

 

[katiecoolady]

I am very jealous!

I felt a little sheepish writing him after so long but now I'm glad I did.

 

[MeeBee]

I'm glad you listened to your gut w/ that therapist. I firmly believe many MANY people in the Psych field are nuttier than the patients (I can say this from experience having been raised by two of them--don't get me wrong, I love my father dearly but, ya know--and I WAS a nutty psych RN at one point having been driven nutty from working too long w/ that population with too much of my own avoided crap going on ). Anyway, long winded way to say I'm glad you didn't go back and walked away. Sometimes the whole opportunity in a relationship is the one we take when we walk away from it.

I sense a lack of compassion for MEN from this Dr. as I did from LaViolette. How anyone could look at that crime scene, know what she did and decide she was some victim, something is screwy there. Hugs for your situation too.

It's funny you say this because my husband met a psychologist once at his gym who was kind of eccentric and...off. Lol. He found out that it's not unusual for people get into that field of study to understand their own psychology and mental states. Not saying that's the case for your parents, lol, but I can definitely see that.

 

[bznbear]

I'm glad you listened to your gut w/ that therapist. I firmly believe many MANY people in the Psych field are nuttier than the patients (I can say this from experience having been raised by two of them--don't get me wrong, I love my father dearly but, ya know--and I WAS a nutty psych RN at one point having been driven nutty from working too long w/ that population with too much of my own avoided crap going on ). Anyway, long winded way to say I'm glad you didn't go back and walked away. Sometimes the whole opportunity in a relationship is the one we take when we walk away from it.

I sense a lack of compassion for MEN from this Dr. as I did from LaViolette. How anyone could look at that crime scene, know what she did and decide she was some victim, something is screwy there. Hugs for your situation too.

Me too Katie. Thank you. We are sisters in a club no one ever wants to be in.

ETA: Don't feel sheepish. You are a beautiful tiger for victims, and Juan knows that!

 

[hindsight2020]

Mdee @EmsterD70 · 50m 50 minutes ago
Check out another superb writing of my friend Paul's observations in the #JodiArias trial today! #JuanMartinez
https://www.facebook.com/paul.sanders.921025/posts/857680784277322

Paul A. Sanders, Jr.
The 13th Juror MD @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

Another article, Jodi Arias stalking evidence emerges, tweets 'No good deed goes unpunished'
http://www.examiner.com/article/jod...e-emerges-tweets-no-good-deed-goes-unpunished

 

[bznbear]

Mdee @EmsterD70 · 50m 50 minutes ago
Check out another superb writing of my friend Paul's observations in the #JodiArias trial today! #JuanMartinez
https://www.facebook.com/paul.sanders.921025/posts/857680784277322

Paul A. Sanders, Jr.
The 13th Juror MD @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

Another article, Jodi Arias stalking evidence emerges, tweets 'No good deed goes unpunished'
http://www.examiner.com/article/jod...e-emerges-tweets-no-good-deed-goes-unpunished

I love the 13thjuror's detail as to what is actually spoken by the witness and JM. Why oh why can't the tweeters do that? They're reporting so much of their own thoughts, out of context, bless their hearts.

 

[MeeBee]

Mdee @EmsterD70 · 50m 50 minutes ago
Check out another superb writing of my friend Paul's observations in the #JodiArias trial today! #JuanMartinez
https://www.facebook.com/paul.sanders.921025/posts/857680784277322

Paul A. Sanders, Jr.
The 13th Juror MD @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

Another article, Jodi Arias stalking evidence emerges, tweets 'No good deed goes unpunished'
http://www.examiner.com/article/jod...e-emerges-tweets-no-good-deed-goes-unpunished

He has got a way with words.

 

[MeeBee]

I love the 13thjuror's detail as to what is actually spoken by the witness and JM. Why oh why can't the tweeters do that? They're reporting so much of their own thoughts, out of context, bless their hearts.

It's just so difficult in such a confined medium like twitter. You only get 140 characters and by the time you write it out on your little screen five more questions have been asked. I agree, other than probably Beth Karas, he offers the best assessment each day. It's a treat.

It also really did highlight how condescending it is when she says good morning with a smile. She ignores him to say it. Look how impolite this man is, he doesn't even say good morning to me or to you.

 

[bznbear]

And what's up doc, with all the references to T-Dogg??? Don't even try and tell me you aren't dxing! Insinuation - is that in your code of ethics? You have severed my last nerve!!!!!

 

[bznbear]

It's just so difficult in such a confined medium like twitter. You only get 140 characters and by the time you write it out on your little screen five more questions have been asked. I agree, other than probably Beth Karas, he offers the best assessment each day. It's a treat.

It also really did highlight how condescending it is when she says good morning with a smile. She ignores him to say it. Look how impolite this man is, he doesn't even say good morning to me or to you.

IKR? Totes ignoring his question? I'm doing lots of praying and lots of drinking to get through this!

 

[Steve44]

MeeBee, not sure if you saw my reply in the closed thread. I read somewhere last week that Flores has moved on to other cases and would only be popping in and out when he could. I'm sure Juans boss is only in there to help, assist. I wouldn't read too much into it at all.

Just a wild guess, but given Nurmi's inflamed sensitivities to the 'prosecutor's behavior during this trial' suppose he requested JSS provide some oversight of 'this behavior', and Juan was like 'Yea, whatever, no objections'.

 

[YESorNO]

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
11/24/2014 8:00 AM

10/31/2014

MINUTE ENTRY

David Bodney and Christopher Moeser are present.

Counsel for the Defense makes an oral Motion to Not Video the Defendant in her Jail
Attire, State objects and counsel argue the motion to the Court. For the reasons stated on the
record,
IT IS ORDERED denying the Defense Motion to Not Video the Defendant in her Jail
Attire.

This is the time set for Oral Argument on Media’s Motion by News Organizations to Stay
Closed Portions of Trial.

Argument is presented to the Court and for the reasons sated on the record,

IT IS ORDERED denying the Media’s Motion by News Organizations to Stay Closed
Portions of Trial.

IT IS ORDERED affirming prior custody orders....

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov...4/m6586430.pdf

 

[CarolinaMoon]

I agree with AZlawyer that JM has no need for a re-cross. Nurmi did all the damage on his re-direct. He managed to have the doctor admit her voluminous amount of testimony was a mere 35-40 pages (and that includes a 12-page, 2-hour long exchange between Travis and JA.

Then, he got her to say that the Dr. F says listening to the phone sex recording doesn't give us anything on dynamics of relationship. WRONG! That sex tape showed JA as the leader of the relationship, directing the conversation with a sleepy Travis.

Dr. F. can whine and mewl about the unfairness of the legal process of cross-examination all she wants. It's Martinez' job to impeach the witness, and the Dr. knows this. Yep, she got caught and fessed up that Travis wasn't a pedophile and JA was intrusive (read stalker).

In fact. If Nurmi's smart, he'll end his re-direct promptly at starting time on Tuesday.

Then, we will get our first real clue as to how the jury feels about Fonseca! I do love states like AZ that have juror questions.

Well, I'm off to bake and prep for tomorrow. I'll check back for more words of wisdom from my fellow Websleuthers!

 

[BritsKate]

I'm glad you listened to your gut w/ that therapist. I firmly believe many MANY people in the Psych field are nuttier than the patients (I can say this from experience having been raised by two of them--don't get me wrong, I love my father dearly but, ya know--and I WAS a nutty psych RN at one point having been driven nutty from working too long w/ that population with too much of my own avoided crap going on ). Anyway, long winded way to say I'm glad you didn't go back and walked away. Sometimes the whole opportunity in a relationship is the one we take when we walk away from it.

I sense a lack of compassion for MEN from this Dr. as I did from LaViolette. How anyone could look at that crime scene, know what she did and decide she was some victim, something is screwy there. Hugs for your situation too.

RBBM

My husband (now retired) was a psych nurse too and would absolutely agree. A lot of mental health professionals tend to choose the field, we hypothesize, as a means of self-medicating. It's also a bit terrifying how many professionals can put blinders up to certain conditions and diagnoses. And don't get me started on mandatory treatment over here for (incurable and highly resistant to treatment) personality disorders. As a result many of my husband's former PD patients learned simply how to strategically manipulate the medical community for their personal gain. It's the definition of madness.

 

[bsk]

I agree with AZlawyer that JM has no need for a re-cross. Nurmi did all the damage on his re-direct. He managed to have the doctor admit her voluminous amount of testimony was a mere 35-40 pages (and that includes a 12-page, 2-hour long exchange between Travis and JA.

Then, he got her to say that the Dr. F says listening to the phone sex recording doesn't give us anything on dynamics of relationship. WRONG! That sex tape showed JA as the leader of the relationship, directing the conversation with a sleepy Travis.

Dr. F. can whine and mewl about the unfairness of the legal process of cross-examination all she wants. It's Martinez' job to impeach the witness, and the Dr. knows this. Yep, she got caught and fessed up that Travis wasn't a pedophile and JA was intrusive (read stalker).

In fact. If Nurmi's smart, he'll end his re-direct promptly at starting time on Tuesday.

Then, we will get our first real clue as to how the jury feels about Fonseca! I do love states like AZ that have juror questions.

Well, I'm off to bake and prep for tomorrow. I'll check back for more words of wisdom from my fellow Websleuthers!

The DT seems to think the jury is stupid.
- There were dozens of boxes of evidence.
- She examined a few dozen pieces of evidence.

She claims that she examined the "kernel" of evidence, but as someone else pointed out earlier, how would SHE know what the key parts of the evidence are? She doesn't, so when she says "kernel" she means whatever cherry-picked pieces of evidence the DT chose for her. Jut like how whatever JA said is true she takes as fact, she takes as fact whatever the DT said are the only pieces of evidence that are relevant. This was reflected over and over in her testimony.

In fact, that leads me to something Juan could recross about - KN's question of (paraphrased): "If you see a thousand of something and you see one of something else, that doesn't change the conclusion you drew from the thousand does it?" Juan could come back with "Did you see a thousand of anything?" "Did you even see a hundred of anything?" "Ma'am, isn't it a fact that you drew conclusions from some docs related to ONE boyfriend, but you refuse to draw any conclusions from her stalking one ex-boyfriend after another after another after another?"

 

[pinkandgreenmom]

I looked up unconventional sex studies and what that relates to. It's a pretty broad term. One man's "unconventional" is another man's Friday night lol. It's a bit subjective and to be honest seems a bit of an antiquated area of study.

Again, why was Fonseca, an expert in this area of study, even called if she wasn't here to discuss the sexual aspects but assess their relationship? If she wasn't there to discuss TA's alleged pedophilia, why call her? Couldn't any old body from AZ have done that, without the need for the person to be an expert in that particular area? And with the licensure to conduct an actual evaluation? They were very careful to avoid that so the doctor could speak in broad terms. It just seems like the DT just keeps dipping from the same pool. Why? Why can't they find anyone in their neck of the woods with the qualifications who are willing to testify for them? Are they just not trying or have they gone all clique-y?

So many questions, so little answers :sigh:

My best guess to your excellent questions: after "expert witness shopping" and the seemingly bottomless pit of taxpayer money to pay for such services, this is the best the defense can do. And it makes me LOL.

On a slightly different topic, I'm a little surprised that one can get a doctorate from an unaccredited school and still be licensed (at least in CA). Yikes.

 

[ParrotGal]

I'm glad you listened to your gut w/ that therapist. I firmly believe many MANY people in the Psych field are nuttier than the patients (I can say this from experience having been raised by two of them--don't get me wrong, I love my father dearly but, ya know--and I WAS a nutty psych RN at one point having been driven nutty from working too long w/ that population with too much of my own avoided crap going on ). Anyway, long winded way to say I'm glad you didn't go back and walked away. Sometimes the whole opportunity in a relationship is the one we take when we walk away from it.

I sense a lack of compassion for MEN from this Dr. as I did from LaViolette. How anyone could look at that crime scene, know what she did and decide she was some victim, something is screwy there. Hugs for your situation too.

I can understand professional detachment.<modsnip>(medical examiner) testified in that way~ cool, calm & collected~ just the facts. But this gal...<modsnip>~ she is a hot mess...all pi$$y and rambling, rude and just WRONG. She is ill-informed, illogical, out of touch with the current decade (off by SEVERAL) and clearly without any integrity. At her age, she should know better. A person's true character ALWAYS becomes evident.

 

[rose222]

And guess who I just heard back from thanking me for the text. Mr. Juanderful himself. GO JUAN!!!

No, wait, what?!? I am red as a rose (cough cough) with envy! You lucky, lucky thing! :loveyou::loveyou:

I know I say this every single day but I am in awe of Juan Martinez. His brilliance AND compassion blow me away. :juanettes: :juanettes:

 

[ParrotGal]

I agree with AZlawyer that JM has no need for a re-cross. Nurmi did all the damage on his re-direct. He managed to have the doctor admit her voluminous amount of testimony was a mere 35-40 pages (and that includes a 12-page, 2-hour long exchange between Travis and JA.

Then, he got her to say that the Dr. F says listening to the phone sex recording doesn't give us anything on dynamics of relationship. WRONG! That sex tape showed JA as the leader of the relationship, directing the conversation with a sleepy Travis.

Dr. F. can whine and mewl about the unfairness of the legal process of cross-examination all she wants. It's Martinez' job to impeach the witness, and the Dr. knows this. Yep, she got caught and fessed up that Travis wasn't a pedophile and JA was intrusive (read stalker).

In fact. If Nurmi's smart, he'll end his re-direct promptly at starting time on Tuesday.

Then, we will get our first real clue as to how the jury feels about Fonseca! I do love states like AZ that have juror questions.

Well, I'm off to bake and prep for tomorrow. I'll check back for more words of wisdom from my fellow Websleuthers!

BBM ~ LOL! That cracked me up!!:happydance:

 

[Love Never Fails]

I just woke up so this may have been posted last night. I just read over on the Sidebar a post that Yes or No placed for us from the 13th juror, from FB. He is covering this trial and writes in depth the way none of the tweets have covered this trial. It is an excellent post. He is a former juror and takes excellent noted during this trial and is teamJuan all the way. There is so much left out by the tweets but this man gets in every little thing. You will love it, especially the way de talks about how JM disabled this Dr F yesterday. Enjoy!!!