Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 2/20 thru 2/23 - Break

[ICit]

Also, after Fonseca we will have the computer expert and then one more? Would that be Dworkin? It would be stupid to call them both since Dworkin gave some pretty conflicting testimony to Sue Smith.

As we have seen, that would not stop the defense team from doing it anyway!

 

[ICit]

I have been following this trial from the beginning. I'm a long time lurker and have never posted until now. I got hooked on trials with OJ when my daughter was an infant. She will turn 21 this year. What? This trial is craziest I have ever observed. I don't understand how anything the defense team has put on is mitigation. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that what this is all about. I will be glad to see the murderess hauled off into the sunset at Perryville. Life, death, obscurity, she deserves it all. If I was an Arizona tax payer, I'd be livid. Also I have enjoyed reading all of your thoughts and comments!

:welcome:

 

[geevee]

I have been following this trial from the beginning. I'm a long time lurker and have never posted until now. I got hooked on trials with OJ when my daughter was an infant. She will turn 21 this year. What? This trial is craziest I have ever observed. I don't understand how anything the defense team has put on is mitigation. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that what this is all about. I will be glad to see the murderess hauled off into the sunset at Perryville. Life, death, obscurity, she deserves it all. If I was an Arizona tax payer, I'd be livid. Also I have enjoyed reading all of your thoughts and comments!

Welcome, welcome to non-lurkdom! If you're lucky, this will all be over before her first child reaches 21.

 

[wendiesan]

One day closer to Justice for Travis.

 

[ShadyLady]

Really sorry I was not here today, to follow JuanTwitterTrialLive, had to go do taxes.

But, now that I have caught up, just wow!! I hope someday soon I get to watch a video of Juan's cross. I want to see Bob squirm for myself. And Jodi's "sad face".

Also, any news on JA's secret closed door hearing release??

 

[ShadyLady]

I am so competitive. I do not want JA and cronies to "win". I feel like one of my fourth graders (former teacher). THIS IS NOT FAIR!
Then I remind myself that JA has been convicted of first degree murder. She will never get out of prison according to most legal experts including our own AZL.
I cannot understand how someone who was so brutally murdered can have their reputation be dragged through the mud. Something is so wrong with our justice system. The accusations about Travis are based on lies or partial truths told by someone who has everything to gain with no outside verification.

When Jodi was being questioned by Flores, and when she finally knew she was catch, she started crying.....she said: "It's just not faaaaiiiiirrrr...." booohooooooo.

 

[Love Never Fails]

I've been dealing with a lot of personal stuff. It appears I missed a lot. Jodi's journals were released? I'm gonna have to go to BK's site soon and read them.

Hi Steely. We have missed you and I am sorry you have had some personal issues. Hope you are ok. The journals are posted on BK's website, along with the 18 page letter Jodi wrote to his family after she was arrested. The journals aren't worth reading. She sounds like an obsessed 15 year old and we think she doctored the last couple of months to cover her crime.

 

[Kensie]

I've been dealing with a lot of personal stuff. It appears I missed a lot. Jodi's journals were released? I'm gonna have to go to BK's site soon and read them.

I tried to read some of them but I cannot tolerate her handwriting. There is a thread for her journals .

 

[Love Never Fails]

I have been following this trial from the beginning. I'm a long time lurker and have never posted until now. I got hooked on trials with OJ when my daughter was an infant. She will turn 21 this year. What? This trial is craziest I have ever observed. I don't understand how anything the defense team has put on is mitigation. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that what this is all about. I will be glad to see the murderess hauled off into the sunset at Perryville. Life, death, obscurity, she deserves it all. If I was an Arizona tax payer, I'd be livid. Also I have enjoyed reading all of your thoughts and comments!

Welcome!!

 

[Love Never Fails]

Really sorry I was not here today, to follow JuanTwitterTrialLive, had to go do taxes.

But, now that I have caught up, just wow!! I hope someday soon I get to watch a video of Juan's cross. I want to see Bob squirm for myself. And Jodi's "sad face".

Also, any news on JA's secret closed door hearing release??

no News yet.

 

[Becky Sharp]

When Jodi was being questioned by Flores, and when she finally knew she was catch, she started crying.....she said: "It's just not faaaaiiiiirrrr...." booohooooooo.

Which my son also screamed at me between the ages of two and seven or eight. Then he grew up. He matured. He began to realize that he wasn't the centre of the universe. Coincidentally (cough), he also began to develop a sense of ethics, a sense of genuine fairness that is beyond an individual's immediate desires or demands. And that's called maturation, no?

 

[katydid23]

Her journals are vomit inducing. Don't bother. uke:

 

[bznbear]

I just finished reading BK's site and the juror question about the internalized anger is now even clearer to me. Remember Geff said JA scored very low on the anger scale? The question is worded in such a way as to ascertain how common this anger is in DV, PTSD, child abuse. Geff answers it's pretty common. That's somewhat of a contradiction between the killer's test score and Geff's dx of PTSD. IMO

 

[RickshawFan]

I'm not delighted with the way I wrote this on the Trial thread, so I'm trying again:

Jen's Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ · 10s 10 seconds ago
Would absence of internalized anger be consistent with PTSD, Bi Polar or DV #jodiarias #3tvarias

I think this question would be pro-prosecution....

It's a yes or no question and there are two possible answers:
#1 No, absence of internalized anger is not consistent with PTSD, Bipolar, DV. In other words, Jodi isn't an angry gal, so she doesn't have PTSD, Bipolar, DV. Whoosh! There go the mitigators!
#2 Yes, absence of internalized anger is consistent with PTSD, Bipolar, DV. In other words, Jodi isn't an angry gal, and this means she can certainly have PTSD, Bipolar, DV. Yeah, right: no juror is going to go for that one, since everyone's experience dictates otherwise. Whoosh! There go the mitigators!

Whatever way Geff answers this, he has de-mitigated Jodi's psych "mitigators" in spectacular fashion!

So he tries the "yes and no" answer, #1 and #2 all in one, clever man. Heck, he's de-mitigated the mitigators twice over in double-speak!

Via Demarte, JM came at this proposition from a different direction. His presentation is that there was a festering morass of internalized anger (actually externalized anger in many instances) and Jodi does not have PTSD, DV or bipolar, but she does have BPD [and is plain evil].

Well, Miss Princess didn't like the BPD concept because it came from DeMarte's mouth (nuke that mitigator!) and now her own "expert" has spectacularly nuked the other alphabet-soup mitigators....BOOM!

Ergo: I read this juror as a snark genius.

 

[Becky Sharp]

Oh, and speaking of maturity, JA's tweets today reminded me of grade nine.

Weird how today keeps bringing up random memories of 70s tv commercials and school wannabe bullies.

 

[GigiG]

Oh, and speaking of maturity, JA's tweets today reminded me of grade nine.

Weird how today keeps bringing up random memories of 70s tv commercials and school wannabe bullies.

I know I am, but what are you..

 

[Becky Sharp]

So, next week is Fonseca and her non-diagnostic-but-yet-diagnosis on "relationship patterns" (if Irrc). She will likely repeat her previous testimony, JM will shred her on cross, and JW will try to redeem her testimony by having her repeat it--all in long drawn out psychobabble that overlooks the obvious truth.

I really, really hope that in future years law schools will play the DT's strategy as an example of how not to alienate a jury.

 

[franquerolane]

"He is so suspect of any religious person having reason to lie to him that it makes me wonder if he isn't an Atheist. Especially since he does not seem to have any problem lying on the stand under oath."

I brought this over from the previous thread to say how offended I am at this remark. I am not religeous, and under no circumstances would I ever lie under oath. Not being religious does not make someone a liar.

 

[RickshawFan]

I want to give a small look into my experience with PTSD. I'm surprised at some triggers/non-triggers. It's not as cut and dried as one might think. And I'm positive each experience is unique. I'm surprised that some things I would think would bother me don't. And some very mundane things bring me to my knees. But one thing I can attest to is my reaction is immediate and undeniable. The butcher doesn't have PTSD. JMO

I agree with everything you say, although my own experience with PTSD has different idiosyncracies.

I believe it could be said in general that PTSD is maladaptive. But Jodi is nothing if not adaptive; she's a veritable chameleon. She's even, by all accounts, happy as a clam in jail (I'll bet she is, too, since it fosters her sneakiness.).

There's no evidence in Jodi of intrusive thoughts, creepy feelings, hallucinations, inexplicable fears, avoidance, acting as if at a prior trauma. She hasn't to my knowledge even spun lies that would indicate she was experiencing these features of PTSD, like: What exactly does she avoid? What shows up in her dreams? What aromas bother her? What is going on when she is startled? What kinds of things has she imagined that were not there?.....

I don't believe Jodi dissociates, either. It's more like she's not on the ball, and this happened because she spent her days obsessed with men who did not (or no longer) want to be with her. Plus, she's never been a focused kind of a gal, fixated on men, maybe, but not focused. The messy crime scene is testimony to her lack of focus: not lack of planning, but disorganized follow-through. That the crime scene happened is, of course, a sign of her fixation. None of this at all qualifies as "dissociation."

And, to use an example from today's testimony, if Travis truly had his hands around Jodi's neck, that would have been a typical spot to dissociate. For instance, I might not even be able to process what was happening, I might not notice pain, and I might be in a stupor. But what does Jodi do? The opposite! She galvanizes her no-doubt-newly-manicured fingernails into action, contemplates whether or not to scratch him in the eyeballs, and decides not to as a matter of selflessness. This one sentence amounts to about 5 examples of being fully present.

If Jodi were really a PTSDer who once experienced a man's hands trying to strangle her, she should by rights, these days, be having all kinds of nightmares about hangmen's nooses around her neck....

And I don't believe you could get PTSD if you're the aggressor; you get PTSD from a feeling of helplessness. It's not even possible, in other words, to get it during a murder you are committing. No way, I'm thinking. In Jodi's case, she was doing fight and flight, the opposite of helplessness: she stabbed, shot, galvanized herself into action on the cleanup, and fled.


As an aside, the whole "I am in a fog about the murder" echoes the excuse of another murderer Juan prosecuted (put on death row?) successfully: the guy who claimed he was sleep-walking when he killed his wife. Yes, Juan has been through this schtick before......

 

[pacnwgal]

Bringing this over from the last thread:

Odd that the person he believes that he can take their word is the liar herself. He should have had a psychiatrist for himself while he was speaking to her to keep from being sucked into her magical world. If he paid attention in school, he would know that is recommended.

He is so suspect of any religious person having reason to lie to him that it makes me wonder if he isn't an Atheist. Especially since he does not seem to have any problem lying on the stand under oath.

I would like to add the following;

I apologize to any Atheist that I might have offended with this comment. Sometimes in the heat of the trial my posts do not have the clarity that they should. I in no way think that all Atheists are liars. I have known many throughout my life and most were good honest people. I was only wondering aloud if Geffner ascribed to any religious beliefs because of his blatant lying testimony and that saying he did not believe would give him the freedom to lie for secondary gain.

BBM I generally stay out of religious debates, so I'm not sure why I am engaging in one, but this does offend me deeply. Lack of belief in a religious deity or ideal does not give one freedom to lie. Besides religious teachings, someone might also be bound by a code of ethics or personal belief that lying is not acceptable due to the harm it causes, by the shame of deceit, or for many, many other reasons. I deeply respect the religious beliefs held by others. I'm sad and surprised when I hear people say that a "non believer" has no beliefs or morals, because I know they do, they just might come from a different source. Please understand I say this in friendship, not confrontation, I understand this is a forum for everyone to express their ideas.