Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 12/3 -12/04 In recess w/hearing

[Truth Detector]

Is it just me or do others remember this whole incident when JA described it during her testimony differently than what her DT are now putting forth?

Iirc, JA had said that she had walked in on TA doing his thing and that in his haste to get up when he saw her, he jumped up and one picture of a boy in spideypants fell on the floor from a pile of pictures that had been sitting on his bed. As it turns out there's an old family photo of TA as a young boy in spideypants with his Dad.

So imo, chances are he had a bunch of old family pics out(by then he was writing his blog articles and reflecting on his past, see the beginning of his book) and whether he was doing the deed or not, JA surprised him by walking in unannounced which likely lead to an argument. I believe that pic of a little boy had stuck in her head until she found a way to use it against TA(accusing him of the unspeakable AND making her wear little boy spideys... what a crock), she strikes me as the sort to make you pay for every little thing that you have ever done to rock her boat.

I don't believe a word of it -- not a single word. (Her lips were moving when she said it.)

 

[Truth Detector]

That's just a theory. Personally, I don't think it was the wrong computer, but there is something fishy about all this. BN did hand in the wrong hard drive from the wrong computer at one point after handing in Travis' hard drive damaged.

It was more than a theory, according to the State.

JM demanded to have the hard disk drive (HDD) the DT examined after they filed their accusation of law enforcement deleting *advertiser censored* from TA's HDD.

When the DT coughed it up, instead of a 'mirror image' of TA's Compaq Presario HDD, it was an HDD from a Dell registered to some guy named Tony.

 

[Dr. Know?]

Why has the defense been stalling? (JA and that DP charge, I know)

Wrong hardrive turned over after the claim was made. Nope, can't get the correct one either, need several days, just swamped. Nope can't show up or rearrange my schedule, I'm booked that day.

Can't wait for court tomorrow. j/k

 

[Truth Detector]

Why has the defense been stalling? (JA and that DP charge, I know)

Wrong hardrive turned over after the claim was made. Nope, can't get the correct one either, need several days, just swamped. Nope can't show up or rearrange my schedule, I'm booked that day.

Can't wait for court tomorrow. j/k

BBM

You said it, pal.

What better way to enjoy torturing TA's family and friends than by doing it in super s-l-o-w m-o-t-i-o-n???

 

[cindymac]

since your client has already been convicted of first degree murder with special circumstances. Does the DT think they are such magicians the jury will forget about all that "unpleasantness" if they distract & delay sufficiently? Cause that's a pretty tough thing to forget-being an especially heinous murder and all.

I've got to think that, to most normal people, these messages would be more illustrative of how much she tormented him while he was alive, prior to viciously murdering him. Not seeing how this is mitigation. I've never heard of DP mitigation being approached in this rather novel way. Not even sure what the point is-seems to veer between he deserved to die because he used her for sex, was mean to her, wouldn't emotionally commit to her, liked little boys, no, little girls and between him allegedly wanting to commit suicide which I guess means she somehow helped him or just sped his death up as he was going to die soon anyway so it's not THAT bad. But never about Jodi and how she realizes she made poor choices and is remorseful about killing and lying and lying and lying. No, nothing about Jodi, the actual convicted killer. Novel. Really.

BBM

The problem is that they've got lost themselves in their narrative - and lost sight of how "normal people" think, made all the more plain by the weird assortment of "experts" passing muster as "credible" in the Arias camp. To normal people, they're just... weird. Of course, beggars can't be choosers, but they've obviously been drilled on how to act on the stand - in ways that don't exactly impress "normal people".

Another strange thing about this Travis-trashing line of defense, implying that he deserved to be killed, is that it completely contradicts one of their brand-new mitigators - that "Ms. Arias is remorseful for her conduct".

Will be 'interesting' to see how they try to reconcile the two.

 

[MeeBee]

It was more than a theory, according to the State.

JM demanded to have the hard disk drive (HDD) the DT examined after they filed their accusation of law enforcement deleting *advertiser censored* from TA's HDD.

When the DT coughed it up, instead of a 'mirror image' of TA's Compaq Presario HDD, it was an HDD from a Dell registered to some guy named Tony.

Yes I know. What people are speculating to is that BN initially examined the wrong computer and used someone else's computer to find all the *advertiser censored*. I don't think that's so. It's a theory. What you're talking about is the hard drive he handed in to Juan that was not a mirror copy of the correct hard drive. I think people are getting confused. Those are two separate issues.

 

[garthmax]

It's interesting that you thought they might be saying Juan should have given her info. My impression was that she said she was given 30 odd pieces to go over out of 3000 and that the defense screened it. It sure will be interesting to find out what they were thinking. Thanks for showing me another perspective.

I hoping, since some of my questions are not quite understandable, that the question may read if it was unfair to (insert TA) she didn't get all the info first before her opinion.

 

[JSR]

I have to believe that Juan just letting out that line for her to hang herself during testimony. She said so much that he can come back with later. Either as a rebuttal or at closing



And if not, I perhaps as a juror might feel inclined to "take up" for the one that has left with their line of questioning.



I remember during the FCA trial, we had an entire thread of quotes from the trial. It was hilarious at times, and just downright fabulous words at other times. This trial, awwwww, we don't have one. But heck, we do have some folks who's names reflect the trial forever here, e.g. YesOrNo :floorlaugh:



Don 't say 4th of July... that was the verdict with Caylee... I'll have to head to her thread which Tulessa and WolfMom light a candle for her twice a day. So special... join in there perhaps to do a thanks on that thread which is always up top for recent posts EVERY DAY after all this time. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?217552-Light-a-Candle-by-Your-Computer-Tonight-3/page11



ene4!!! :blowkiss: ene4! ene4!



It's a long one, but I will watch it! Thanks for taking the time to post the link Shady!

Ugh the Casey Anthony trial flashbacks!!! I also was so impressed with Judge Perry! And I still maintain that trial gave US ALL PTSD!

Casey Anthony is also a scary woman but is mainly a threat to her mother and those who are vulnerable (like the very young or old). Jodi is FAR FAR more dangerous. She has no fear and is more sophisticated and manipulative. And Jodi will go after and attack anyone young, old, and those twice her size. And I think Jodi is far more likely to kill again if given the opportunity.

 

[Truth Detector]

The problem is that they've got lost themselves in their narrative - and lost sight of how "normal people" think, made all the more plain by the weird assortment of "experts" passing muster as "credible" in the Arias camp. To normal people, they're just... weird.

Another strange thing about this Travis-trashing line of defense, implying that he deserved to be killed, is that it completely contradicts one of their brand-new mitigators - that "Ms. Arias is remorseful for her conduct".

Will be 'interesting' to see how they try to reconcile the two.

BBM

They won't. There was a veritable plethora of defense inconsistencies in the first phase of this trial, but it always seemed to come down to throwing one more thing onto the wall to see if it sticks.

One lob that really stood out was LKN pivoting sharply from self defense to "she snapped".

AZL could tell us, but when you're defending someone so obviously guilty -- in an especially cruel manner -- I guess you will do just about anything to generate that one [un]reasonable doubt, or in the penalty phase that little (or not so little) spark of sympathy.

Maybe the more smoke, mirrors, and dust you throw into the air increases your likelihood of overwhelming some juror in a cloud of cr@p.

After all, it only takes one.

And who knows? There might just be another William Zervakos deliberating in there.

 

[MeeBee]

It's interesting that you thought they might be saying Juan should have given her info. My impression was that she said she was given 30 odd pieces to go over out of 3000 and that the defense screened it. It sure will be interesting to find out what they were thinking. Thanks for showing me another perspective.

See, that's another reason the question was hard to read. They could have been talking about Juan or they could have been talking about the defense. Just the word "unfair" hit to me as being sympathetic to her, at first. Like, her not getting all the info wasn't her fault and it hindered her and now she is the one being called out on it.

But the question was also interesting to me because the doctor had been saying she went through all these documents herself. But the question from the juror asked her about getting all her research from online. Just makes me wonder if they think they plucked her off the street and she got some info off the internet from third party sources without actually confirming it herself. And they were trying to call her on it. Often times, it did seem like she was just regurgitating what she'd heard or read somewhere without actually digging and getting confirmation for herself and was unable to provide specifics when questioned. So, what kind of expert does all her research online?

 

[Truth Detector]

Ugh the Casey Anthony trial flashbacks!!! I also was so impressed with Judge Perry! And I still maintain that trial gave US ALL PTSD!

Casey Anthony is also a scary woman but is mainly a threat to her mother and those who are vulnerable (like the very young or old). Jodi is FAR FAR more dangerous. She has no fear and is more sophisticated and manipulative. And Jodi will go after and attack anyone young, old, and those twice her size. And I think Jodi is far more likely to kill again if given the opportunity.

Her enemies list must be longer than that left arm -- measured from the top of her shoulder all the way to the end of that hinky finger she cut while butchering Travis.

 

[Steely Dan]

If you check the second court document at the following link, you will find a Motion for Sanctions(Compaq Presario Computer) from JM:
http://www.courtchatter.com/2014/11/juan-martinez-hurls-shocking.html

That's just a theory. Personally, I don't think it was the wrong computer, but there is something fishy about all this. BN did hand in the wrong hard drive from the wrong computer at one point after handing in Travis' hard drive damaged.

It was more than a theory, according to the State.

JM demanded to have the hard disk drive (HDD) the DT examined after they filed their accusation of law enforcement deleting *advertiser censored* from TA's HDD.

When the DT coughed it up, instead of a 'mirror image' of TA's Compaq Presario HDD, it was an HDD from a Dell registered to some guy named Tony.

It's all in the link above. Tony? :laughcry:

That is funnier than :censored:

 

[Dr. Know?]

I'm waiting for the next witness BN, to have a headache during trial.

jmo

 

[Val1]

Her enemies list must be longer than that left arm -- measured from the top of her shoulder all the way to the end of that hinky finger she cut while butchering Travis.

You mean this finger(courtesy of tabularasa6)? Anyone know how many days after the murder that this pic was taken?

 

[Val1]

I also wonder if Tanisha's anger was about the juror's questions and how they were mostly about TA behavior instead of CMJA.

I would think it was more to do with losing another juror, mostly if not all due to DT shenanigans making the proceedings go way past what the initial projected date had been, and thus putting the whole sentencing trial at risk should they lose more due to previous commitments, illness, etc.

 

[Peepers McPeep]

Well, another week...Thursday is hours away...
My heart...
May all the Energies of this universe empower our Prosecutor as never before.
Strength, and Character, and his Heart, will vanquish all darkness.
Amen.

For the one found guilty, she's one step closer to being purged from humanity.
D.P. or 5 years in isolation, followed by a long, hard life, of coveting her jelly packets from ruthless sorority sisters.
Befriending the roach that snuggled for warmth in her spare sanitary.
Endless noise, and chaos she can't control.

There will be Justice.

 

[bsk]

Yup. That was her story. Her initial story, told in interviews to her experts, was that she found him masturbating to *advertiser censored* on his computer. But when she realized that those things are easily traceable, she backtracked (as did her experts...) and came up with the new story of him lying on the bed with pics surrounding him...it actually makes me laugh, it's so stupid.

Pictures that the ninjas apparently stole since they were never found.

Or maybe the state found them and destroyed them like they did the *advertiser censored* on Travis's computer. :scared:

 

[bsk]

Hi all, I'd like to throw in some commentary regarding Mormon singles culture which might illuminate Jodi's strategy.

(valuable insight respectfully snipped in the interest of space)

I have no proof of this, but my gut tells me that Jodi Arias planted child *advertiser censored* on Travis' computer. Records show she accessed the computer during the visit. He didn't know she did it until she told him as part of her final blackmail attempt. She wanted to capture the look on his face when she told him--that's what the closeup camera shoot was about. You can see the strange look on his face where he seems to be realizing something. He's realizing she's a monster bent on destroying him. He knew what this would mean--even if he deleted it, it still would be "there". Sharing some speculation here and welcoming comments pro/con.

Hope you find this background helpful.

Someone else commented that they feared any Mormons on the jury could be a problem. Does it boil down to whether a Mormon would be more likely to:
a) Hold Travis's actions against him, see some sliver of what JA is saying, and possibly spare her life as a result; or
b) Be even more likely to realize that, while Travis had his troubles perhaps, she is a monster who invented all sorts of lies designed to use Mormonism to destroy him?

 

[bsk]

JM will never ask that question unless he knows the answer that DB must give will bolster his case.

Or would it be worth planting that seed in the jurors' minds that it is DB even if he denies that it is him?

 

[bsk]

It's interesting that you thought they might be saying Juan should have given her info. My impression was that she said she was given 30 odd pieces to go over out of 3000 and that the defense screened it. It sure will be interesting to find out what they were thinking. Thanks for showing me another perspective.

If you think about it, her words here prove that she is a d*mn no-good liar. She whined that Juan gave her nothing to review even though it's the DT's job to prepare her for cross, but she also stated that the tiny bit that was cherry-picked for her was "the kernel" of the case. There is no way that she could know what "the kernel" was unless she reviewed everything and decided for herself what was most important. If she were honest, she would have said that the DT said they gave her the kernel of the case, a huge difference.

She did the same thing during jury questions, i.e. state something as fact that is at best conjecture and at worst a lie. When asked whether JA knew what set Travis off at the end, she didn't say "JA told me that she didn't know"; rather she said "JA didn't know". There is a huge difference between the two, kind of like we always see at trials where a witness denies recalling that something happened as opposed to denying that it happened.

This was embedded throughout Dr F's testimony. I hope some jurors picked up those nuances/subtleties and will impart that to the others. It seems to me like one of those things we see in life all the time where you don't notice something, then once it's pointed out you can see or hear nothing but that and you don't know how you ever missed it to begin with since it now seems so utterly obvious. For example, have you ever been enjoying a movie and then your spouse says, "Do you think that guy over there could be any noisier with that freaking popcorn?"