Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 12/05-08 In recess

[netbrsr]

Think of all the expense the Alexander family has endured, how many trips back and forth to AZ from CA, hotels, eating out, etc etc.

Even now, they have to drive or fly over once a week for 1 day a week trial.

 

[Marshmallow]

She didn't leave out the possibility that the the vote would be for life, just that she thought it would be unanimous.

I fail to see how she hurt anything with regard to the trial. She is free to speak to the media now. She was probably told this.

To call someone to back up MF would be disasterous and unnecessary. They don't need it.

I think people just look for things sometimes. She did nothing wrong, she was professional, unbiased, fair, and secretive. Really, with all that's going on, I don't think it's going to be an innocent juror interview that will derail things, nor will this be a main concern for Nurmi. Again, she offered nothing in the way of strategy. MF has already testified. The damage is done. If Nurmi wants to drag this out, that's his call. He was going to do it anyway. I think 12 people will make it.

Also, BK reported Nurmi said his case was winding down.

Nurmi says lots of things and then does something different. I think what myself and my fellow posters are saying is this: while it may not hurt for her to have been given an interview, it certainly would have seemed smarter to issue a statement saying (in as few words as possible) why she had to leave. Then save the interviews for after this is over. With so much secrecy I can see why people were so eager for her to speak but it wasn't necessary that she did. Why add fuel to the fire?

 

[gcharlie]

Twitter is definitely not the way to follow something technical like computer forensics. Right now, we only have tech talk from the defense expert, so there is a lot of info that still needs to be cleared up.

I don't get it with these defense "experts". Seems like most of them so far have been long on ego and short on knowledge in their field. For example, BN saying that the three phones were missing SIM cards. Travis used Verizon and at that time, all of their devices were CDMA, which means they never had SIM cards. Same thing for Arias' Helio phone. BN also linked the Zblog virus with a media player for *advertiser censored* sites, with the implication that was the only source of the virus. Another false statement was that Apple QuickTime and Itunes cannot update automatically.

BN, like Dr. Samuels, was not well prepared and could not answer technical questions. But he certainly made some strong claims and used emotional language in delivering his message. He is unequivocal that Travis purposefully visited *advertiser censored* sites. In both hearings, he has made statements by which he appears to be saying he can identify certain entries in the registry as automatic files vs. keystroke files. I have been researching this and cannot find the basis for him to be able to state this so clearly, unless TA's computer had a key stroke logger program installed on it. Last week, BN testified that Travis had 19 AV/scrubber programs on his computer and yesterday that number went up to 22, without any explanation for the difference.

I'm also confused by BN saying that he has not touched Travis' hard drive. Surely he is not playing games up there trying to say that he personally did not touch the drive when his agents may have? Willmott wrote the 11/20/14 Defendant's Response to State Motion...and included a picture of the hard drive after pins had been straightened so that the expert could access the drive.



Mr. Expert called previous experts grossly incompetent for not having found *advertiser censored*. It had been previously suggested that the first defense expert, Dworkin, did not find anything because he had been given a tampered copy of the drive. Yesterday it was learned that on 6/3/2008 a newer version of SpyBot was installed and then run on 6/4/08 at a corrected time of 2:44 pm. It may be that because SpyBot was run on 6/4/08, it did quarantine any active virus exe program on the computer, thus leading to Melendez answer on the stand. It may also be that the *advertiser censored* files were encrypted and coded, and as such, did not qualify as *advertiser censored* by forensic examination standards. BN had to do a lot of work to recover these files, and the type of work may not be accepted practice. We have to wait and see.

To me, this is quite simple. There are three distinct dates in question with this computer. By using the same software, a qualified examiner should be able to work from copy A to copy B and finally to copy C, producing the same results. For some reason, the defense expert is balking at providing the State with the unaltered copy, which presumably should be B.

 

[Steve44]

I thought there was a hearing today on Nurmi's (latest) motion to remove the DP. Just when you think it can't possibly move any slower, it does.

 

[Hope4More]

(((( Bravo!!!!))))

 

[geevee]

I've never seen a trial where a computer that was not password protected, was kept in the common area of a house with multiple people living in it, multiple roommates, friends and friends with benefits who had access to it, be admitted into evidence as proof the VICTIM, let alone the perpetrator did something on it. How is it even possible they are arguing this? It CANNOT be proven that if any *advertiser censored* sites were visited on that computer, child or otherwise, that TA was the person who was using it at the time. And I mean actual sites that were searched and accessed, not sites that a computer full of viruses was hitting on.

How has the judge not made that determination already? No KN, you cannot tell this jury that TA was looking at *advertiser censored* on that computer. There is no absolute proof of WHO may have been looking at it, if it is even there...so it doesn't matter. People get off on child *advertiser censored* charges all the time for this exact reason. A computer that is in a home where others have access to it. Think Cindy Anthony taking claim for the searches that Casey did. Happens all the time. And in that case they did prove she couldn't have been there at the time. I think the "misconduct" allegations were well proven to be absurd yesterday, which was the actual reason for the hearing. That whole thing should have been over by lunch. And you could tell that JM was frustrated beyond belief that he got all this evidence together to exonerate himself and LE and no one was even bothering to listen to it. It just kept going back to *advertiser censored* on the computer.

MOO

A round of applause! Totally agree, the reason for the hearing has been corrupted as much as the retrial of the sentencing phase has.

 

[Hatfield]

The *advertiser censored* on computer hearing should be being held Friday. Maybe if they actually started having more than 1 or 2 court days a week ( and actually starting on time after each break etc) they could maybe get this wrapped up by summer time.

Hello everyone. Just catching up. Life is sidetracking me. LOL

This post just struck a funny bone that long before now we used to joke how we may not get done till end of year 2014. Then we started joking about not till early 2015. Now we are joking about summer 2015.

The sad thing is its happening for real. This case will go into 2015 and at this point its anyones guess how long into 2015 it will be.

Kinda crazy when all that should be done is to decide on her sentence.

Everyone have good weekend.

 

[Hope4More]

Also, BK reported Nurmi said his case was winding down.

She didn't say that. She reported that Nurmi thought hearings on the computer stuff could be wrapped up next week because his mitigation witnesses were unavailable for next week (implying I guess next week should be devoted to computer hearings ).. And then he mentioned the 14 witnesses.

 

[Amster]

When posting what BK has to say, does that come from her membership/pay site? Or, does she also post elsewhere?

 

[pinkandgreenmom]

I thought there was a hearing today on Nurmi's (latest) motion to remove the DP. Just when you think it can't possibly move any slower, it does.

I thought so, too. But the whole reconsideration motion was based on the fact that his only 3 witnesses were afraid to testify. He now has 14 witnesses. I wonder if he withdrew his petition?

 

[Kamille]

This computer "expert" and the "sexpert" were both brought on by JA during her brief time representing herself? Is that correct? So she is the one who told BN what to look for? And told both of them how to deal with JM? Is it possible that the Spybot deleted whatever she was doing or accessing at a previous time, on June 4th at 1:44pm just before she killed TA? It's obvious she knows *advertiser censored* was accessed on that computer at some point. Sounds like she was going to blame it on the roommate who got kicked out as a possible motive for him to have murdered TA? Before she herself was charged?

This is so convoluted. And really should not be happening. Let her deal with all this on appeal, where it belongs, when she has new lawyers to train and different judges who aren't so soft. If she'd gotten the DP the first time around like she should have, she'd be sitting on death row for quite some time before they'd look at her case for appeal anyway.

MOO

 

[Hope4More]

When posting what BK has to say, does that come from her membership/pay site? Or, does she also post elsewhere?

When I refer to her and what's she's said, it is always from her paid site. I don't know if she posts elsewhere. I know she does occasional interviews.

 

[ShadyLady]

Regarding Nurmi's 14 witnesses: I doubt he will have/need 14 to testify about this computer stuff so I am thinking that newly submitted (if it was?) list of witnesses is for the penalty trial. My question is: How can it be justified that he submit a new or updated witness list at this stage of the game? Or if it is his first submission why does he get to submit so late? And does the judge have to accept it at this stage? We know she will, but is it her choice or because she is required to accept? I know witnesses can be added late if there is good reason--usually someone was not available sooner--but 14??? Seems kinda hard to justify that.

I am just sick of Nurmi not following procedures (if that's what he's doing here) and getting away with it (if he is).

Arizona biggest mistake was to give Nurmi a pay scale from the private sector. There is NO limit to the bottomless well of money and he knows it. Just more money in his pocket the more motions he files. If he was being paid by a private party, there would be a limit to the money he could spend.

 

[Steve44]

I've never seen a trial where a computer that was not password protected, was kept in the common area of a house with multiple people living in it, multiple roommates, friends and friends with benefits who had access to it, be admitted into evidence as proof the VICTIM, let alone the perpetrator did something on it. How is it even possible they are arguing this? It CANNOT be proven that if any *advertiser censored* sites were visited on that computer, child or otherwise, that TA was the person who was using it at the time. And I mean actual sites that were searched and accessed, not sites that a computer full of viruses was hitting on.

How has the judge not made that determination already? No KN, you cannot tell this jury that TA was looking at *advertiser censored* on that computer. There is no absolute proof of WHO may have been looking at it, if it is even there...so it doesn't matter. People get off on child *advertiser censored* charges all the time for this exact reason. A computer that is in a home where others have access to it. Think Cindy Anthony taking claim for the searches that Casey did. Happens all the time. And in that case they did prove she couldn't have been there at the time. I think the "misconduct" allegations were well proven to be absurd yesterday, which was the actual reason for the hearing. That whole thing should have been over by lunch. And you could tell that JM was frustrated beyond belief that he got all this evidence together to exonerate himself and LE and no one was even bothering to listen to it. It just kept going back to *advertiser censored* on the computer.

MOO

That's fine, logical and all, but how do you apply logic in this trial? JSS allows a hearing about prosecutorial misconduct to devolve into insulting the prosecutor and speculating about Travis' interest in *advertiser censored*, and it ends in another wasted day and more questions than answers. This trial was supposed to be about Arias' mitigators, instead it's been about Travis' alleged character flaws. Of course its dragging on, JSS is allowing it to go in every direction but the true one. This is exactly what she should be preventing, or at least minimizing. I don't understand what she thinks she's supposed to be doing up there, or how she thinks what she is, or rather isn't doing is helping, at all.

 

[Meemaw12]

Wonder who will testify on Monday?

 

[geevee]

Twitter is definitely not the way to follow something technical like computer forensics. Right now, we only have tech talk from the defense expert, so there is a lot of info that still needs to be cleared up.

I don't get it with these defense "experts". Seems like most of them so far have been long on ego and short on knowledge in their field. For example, BN saying that the three phones were missing SIM cards. Travis used Verizon and at that time, all of their devices were CDMA, which means they never had SIM cards. Same thing for Arias' Helio phone. BN also linked the Zblog virus with a media player for *advertiser censored* sites, with the implication that was the only source of the virus. Another false statement was that Apple QuickTime and Itunes cannot update automatically.

BN, like Dr. Samuels, was not well prepared and could not answer technical questions. But he certainly made some strong claims and used emotional language in delivering his message. He is unequivocal that Travis purposefully visited *advertiser censored* sites. In both hearings, he has made statements by which he appears to be saying he can identify certain entries in the registry as automatic files vs. keystroke files. I have been researching this and cannot find the basis for him to be able to state this so clearly, unless TA's computer had a key stroke logger program installed on it. Last week, BN testified that Travis had 19 AV/scrubber programs on his computer and yesterday that number went up to 22, without any explanation for the difference.

I'm also confused by BN saying that he has not touched Travis' hard drive. Surely he is not playing games up there trying to say that he personally did not touch the drive when his agents may have? Willmott wrote the 11/20/14 Defendant's Response to State Motion...and included a picture of the hard drive after pins had been straightened so that the expert could access the drive.

View attachment 64937

Mr. Expert called previous experts grossly incompetent for not having found *advertiser censored*. It had been previously suggested that the first defense expert, Dworkin, did not find anything because he had been given a tampered copy of the drive. Yesterday it was learned that on 6/3/2008 a newer version of SpyBot was installed and then run on 6/4/08 at a corrected time of 2:44 pm. It may be that because SpyBot was run on 6/4/08, it did quarantine any active virus exe program on the computer, thus leading to Melendez answer on the stand. It may also be that the *advertiser censored* files were encrypted and coded, and as such, did not qualify as *advertiser censored* by forensic examination standards. BN had to do a lot of work to recover these files, and the type of work may not be accepted practice. We have to wait and see.

To me, this is quite simple. There are three distinct dates in question with this computer. By using the same software, a qualified examiner should be able to work from copy A to copy B and finally to copy C, producing the same results. For some reason, the defense expert is balking at providing the State with the unaltered copy, which presumably should be B.

Good job gc, I'd only add that the corrected time of Spybot being run on 6/4 was 1:44 p.m. (stated time on image/clone/report was 2:44), and if that pin realignment is proof of BN's expertise, the pin on the top row second from the right end is still bent and likely won't seat. The one next to it also isn't exactly lined up - my biggest question about them taking a pic and including it with the motion is where is the before pic of all the bent pins, and why wasn't that included?

I'm very much looking forward to JM's expert and hope the tweeters can keep up with the details and data.

 

[Hatfield]

I've never seen a trial where a computer that was not password protected, was kept in the common area of a house with multiple people living in it, multiple roommates, friends and friends with benefits who had access to it, be admitted into evidence as proof the VICTIM, let alone the perpetrator did something on it. How is it even possible they are arguing this? It CANNOT be proven that if any *advertiser censored* sites were visited on that computer, child or otherwise, that TA was the person who was using it at the time. And I mean actual sites that were searched and accessed, not sites that a computer full of viruses was hitting on.

How has the judge not made that determination already? No KN, you cannot tell this jury that TA was looking at *advertiser censored* on that computer. There is no absolute proof of WHO may have been looking at it, if it is even there...so it doesn't matter. People get off on child *advertiser censored* charges all the time for this exact reason. A computer that is in a home where others have access to it. Think Cindy Anthony taking claim for the searches that Casey did. Happens all the time. And in that case they did prove she couldn't have been there at the time. I think the "misconduct" allegations were well proven to be absurd yesterday, which was the actual reason for the hearing. That whole thing should have been over by lunch. And you could tell that JM was frustrated beyond belief that he got all this evidence together to exonerate himself and LE and no one was even bothering to listen to it. It just kept going back to *advertiser censored* on the computer.

MOO

Excellent points. Wonder why Juan cant revisit these points with the judge.

 

[RickshawFan]

Respectfully,
Dr. DeMarte is needed to paint a psychological picture of CMJA. IMO, his friends could paint a nice, real picture of Travis, but the DT would ask them a simple question of whether or not TA confided in them about CMJA. The fact that he didn't substantiates the DT claim that TA kept his relationship with CMJA a secret, thus diminishing her and give the appearance she just "snapped". Then no DP verdict. IMO

Respectfully also.....
IIRC from Flores' interrogation of JA, TA's friends knew the status of TA's relationship with JA: they were immediately able to state that she was "obsessive, fatal attraction...." The great thing about Dr. "Data Point" DeMarte is that there is no fog, no attempt to obfuscate, and opinions based on evidence. I don't believe adding to or getting sucked into the "fog" aspects of the trial would get TA's case to the goal. But, also, JM in the past has shown a photo of TA with JA in his lap while TA's friends were sitting around. This was not at all a secret relationship, apparently: it's just that TA didn't think of JA ever as his girlfriend, so why broadcast it?

 

[Kamille]

I can completely understand the state's and families fight for the ultimate punishment for their brothers murderess, that being said. At this point, I would personally think in the pursuit of justice and fairness for the victim taking the DP off the table right now and putting cmja in front of the judge for her sentence would be justice best served. I do not believe jodi arias is fighting for her life, nor do I believe that's what this is even about for her. She has an audience, and stage to proclaim despicable lies about her victim, all on the taxpayers dime! We should remove this avenue from her, she thoroughly is enjoying killing travis over and over and over. The real punishment for her, is her being moved quietly and having her avenue to speak removed.

I think LWOP or LWP will give her an avenue to speak however. Not sure about death row but I can imagine the number of interviews she'll be giving from inside prison. I can also imagine the people she will manipulate and the following she will garner there. The fan club she'll continue to run on the outside and the letters and gifts she'll receive. Because her fans will have a purpose. To raise money for her appeal. If she receives the DP that "JA appeal fund" will be unnecessary and hopefully that fan club will disband eventually. She'll take courses and do people's hair and nails, make friends and it'll be a much easier time on her in general population than in isolation on death row. It is easier on women in prison. It just is. And she is a chameleon who knows how to manipulate and fit in.

I understand why TA's family wants the death penalty. Too bad the last jury didn't see it.

MOO

 

[JSR]

Wonder who will testify on Monday?

My guess is no one. I don't think Nurmi has any witnesses. And I think Jodi might refuse to testify in open Court.