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

[Hatfield]

What you're implying is that the Hughes' were instrumental in driving Travis towards a more extended relationship with Jodi than he might have wanted otherwise? Because they got him to feel guilty about maybe he wasn't being more overtly sensitive to her needs? Interesting......

I don't much care for the Hughes' myself: I think they see a big opportunity in this situation. But they also aren't my friends. They were Travis' friends and he highly valued their opinion. Their connection was complicated by his business relationship with them. That's on Travis, though, and it was between him and the Hughes', not something we could evaluate in hindsight, given that he's not here to explain. Relationships often aren't simple, and this one evidently was in that category. I don't think we should be judgmental about how either party handled that relationship, because all 3 of them might have been quite fine with it.

I also think some posters are letting go of the fact that Jodi was manipulating all 3 them. They could never have guessed that evil was in their midst and letting loose among them. In the same situation, I don't think I would have guessed, either. Jodi's manipulations laid the groundwork for opinionatedness on all sides—Skye, Travis, what's his name—because they all had to dig in their heels just to attempt to sort out the situation. She was deliberately divisive.

Plus, the Hughes' were in some sense taking care of Travis, because they knew he wanted a wife. Blame Jodi: they were three normal naive people whose complicated relationship she made even more complicated.

Some things in Travis' life were on him, not on anyone else. One of the signs of his maturity is that he knew when that was the case. I think we should put his relationship with the Hughes' in the "it was on him" category and not second-guess either party.

with all sincere respect, sorry but I am not letting them off the hook for some of the damage they have caused. Whether intentional or not, they have brought a lot of negatives to this trial and even to Travis before he was killed.

For all we know Travis may have been trying to dump Jodi at the time and was just doing it in his own way. Some people have a tough time being honest with people when they want to breakup with them and they simply dont like them anymore as they once did.

The way Travis was behaving with Jodi may have just been his way of trying to give her hints and signs he was losing interest in her. And then here comes the Hughes to put a guilt trip on him and it may have affected his own way of dealing with her.

I agree Jodi was definitely manipulating the Hughes, however, they erred too by being too gullible and taking the bait. If they had done a better job of vetting out what JA was telling them, then things may have turned out quite different.

 

[TexMex]

Great question. Last i recall Jodi was telling Travis...."about that ring...I can explain".

And thats the last i heard of it.

Probably went something like...."oh right! I was doing a deep clean of all the drawers in your room and I noticed a velvet box....I thought my social security card I have been looking for might be in there! Well..it wasn't but I couldn't help notice the ring that was in the box sure was dirty. I'm taking it to a jewelry shop to be cleaned and appraised then I really think you should make sure you list it on a homeowners insurance form...

 

[pacnwgal]

Great question. Last i recall Jodi was telling Travis...."about that ring...I can explain".

And thats the last i heard of it.

I want to know about the ring too!! KN was objecting like crazy during JM's direct of JD and I assumed he would question JD about the ring during cross, you know, to straighten out JD's "misleading" the jury to believe Jodi stole it, and then crickets during cross.

 

[Hatfield]

Probably went something like...."oh right! I was doing a deep clean of all the drawers in your room and I noticed a velvet box....I thought my social security card I have been looking for might be in there! Well..it wasn't but I couldn't help notice the ring that was in the box sure was dirty. I'm taking it to a jewelry shop to be cleaned and appraised then I really think you should make sure you list it on a homeowners insurance form...

LOL Yeah, something along those lines for sure. It may have even been worse like this....

"I was really broke and had very little food and was too embarrassed to ask if I could borrow some money, so I saw this old ring that I didnt think you would ever need and I hocked it at the pawn shop so I could get something to eat. I am sorry if that ring really meant something to you. I had no idea"

 

[Paintr]

LOL Yeah, something along those lines for sure. It may have even been worse like this....

"I was really broke and had very little food and was too embarrassed to ask if I could borrow some money, so I saw this old ring that I didnt think you would ever need and I hocked it at the pawn shop so I could get something to eat. I am sorry if that ring really meant something to you. I had no idea"

If TA purchased the ring and she gave him this 'I'm broke/hungry need a stake for my move' story, then I think TA would have easily let the ring go. From all that I have read (giving homeless man clothes and room and buying dinner for friends) TA was generous with money. However, if it was a family ring I do think he would have been hurt by the loss. That is why I wondered where it came from.

 

[Wagara]

I don't think Juan not calling them had anything to do with the book. He called Abe and he had a blog and had given several interviews to HLN. The book is also a new thing and he never called them before either. I think it has to do with the issues they had with the defense before, with Gus and with them believing in the pedophile claim after Nurmi lied to them.

I agree...that's why I said actions and the book!

 

[pinkandgreenmom]

I envision the ring scenario like this

Jodi: oh yeah, the ring. I will tell you about it later.

Later....

Travis: where is my ring?
Jodi: what ring? What are you talking about? I cannot believe you would accuse me of taking your ring. I sit here all Christ-like and you accuse me of taking your ring. I think I will kill myself. Wanna tie me to tree later to make it up to me?

 

[MeeBee]

I agree...that's why I said actions and the book!

But I don't see how the book made Juan's job harder.

 

[Stripehaven]

I'm sorry; I can 't hold back any longer.

1 Hughes + 1 Hughes = 2 Hugheses.

My last name ends in "s" and incorrect plurals of my name drive me crazy. I had to say it.

 

[Hatfield]

If TA purchased the ring and she gave him this 'I'm broke/hungry need a stake for my move' story, then I think TA would have easily let the ring go. From all that I have read (giving homeless man clothes and room and buying dinner for friends) TA was generous with money. However, if it was a family ring I do think he would have been hurt by the loss. That is why I wondered where it came from.

I am not 100% but I could have sworn I thought it was mentioned during the 1st trial that the ring was his Grandmothers that she gave him to use when he gets married.
If I remember it correctly, yes, it had a lot of sentimental value.

You are so correct that Travis would have gladly given Jodi money if she asked for it.
My example was just being silly about JA's possible excuse as to why she may have pawned it for money behind his back.

It would be really interesting to know if Travis ever got the ring back. I suspect not.
But could be wrong because i have no idea.

 

[Wing Ding]

I want to know about the ring too!! KN was objecting like crazy during JM's direct of JD and I assumed he would question JD about the ring during cross, you know, to straighten out JD's "misleading" the jury to believe Jodi stole it, and then crickets during cross.

I only remember Nurmi objecting to Dr. D using the word "stolen" in regards to the ring, not to the discussion of the ring itself. But for some reason Juan moved on after the objection, so maybe there wasn't much discussion about it. Maybe Dr. D was just listing the many things Jodi Ann had done or was suspected of doing, and she wasn't going into detail about those things.

At any rate, I'd also like to hear what innocent excuse Jodi has for taking someone else's personal property from their house without asking. I wonder if it's in storage sitting next to her professional camera and her social security card?

 

[Spycraft]

It did cross my mind after reading the transcript that judge, being aware this would be appealed, decided to make this ruling to leave it up to the COA since she was unsure of how this would look to a future appeals court. Give it to the COA and see.

But I don't think so. That seems an inappropriate thing to do and would be, and was, a waste of everyone's time, including the court of appeals. She doesn't seem like the type to play those games.

ON THE DECISION TO CLOSE THE COURTROOM....I FINALLY UNDERSTAND!

“MR. MARTI NEZ: I think what they are asking is that you clear the courtroom of all people, and I don't think that they have met the criteria to seal—

THE COURT: I need to pull out my sheet on this to see what the criteria is.”

After reviewing the magic sheet, it’s obvious she made the correct decision:
1. If the physical presence of people in the gallery bothers the defendant, close the courtroom.
2. If the defendant claims to be receiving threatening letters when letters are not even allowed in the jail, close the courtroom.
3. If the defendant is nervous looking into a crowd, close the courtroom
4. If there’s a possibility there’s someone in the courtroom who is one of the people who possibly sent a possibly threatening “letter”, close the courtroom.
5. If anyone (unspecified) attempts to visit the defendant at the jail, close the courtroom.
6. If the defendant can’t say “sorry for murdering…” publicly, close the courtroom.
7. If the defendant has a bogus diagnosis of PTSD, given by a doctor who based said diagnosis on lies, close the courtroom.
8. If the defendant claims she is nervous for any reason, close the courtroom.
9. If the defendant realizes her prior experience with 18 days on the stand was rightfully ridiculed by the public and media and doesn’t want her feelers hurt again, close the courtroom.
10. If the defendant believes the public and media will hear her and then report it, close the courtroom.
11. If the defendant has a tantrum and refuses even with reasonable alternatives, close the courtroom.
12. If an unidentified man, possibly crazy, possibly with white hair attempts to visit the defendant at the jail, close the courtroom.
13. If the defendant wishes that NO ONE have knowledge of her testimony, close the courtroom.
14. If anyone writes anything perceived hateful by the defendant, close the courtroom.
15. If there is a possibility that people might have access to the defendant while in jail, close the courtroom.
16. If the defendant believes it is only because of her testimony, and not the million TV jail interviews she gave, caused the “big frenzy”, then close the courtroom.
17. If it’s not just the testimony the defendant gives that must be in given in secret due to the unidentified anonymous threats, but also the very fact she is testifying at all, close the courtroom.
18. If Miss DeLaRosa reports from her secret messengers at the Arizona Republic that an unidentified delusional scary man is claiming to be the attorney, and claims he also has pictures of Arias, yet never seen by MDLR, close the courtroom.
19. If the defendant has a diagnosis of BPD from a psychologist they despise, disbelieve, ridicule and harass, close the courtroom.
20. If the defendant, in her passive aggressive threatening style claims that anyone being privy to her answers in court will affect how she answers, close the courtroom.
21. If, as judge, you acknowledge this is manipulative on the part of the defendant and counsel, close the courtroom.

If you mark "YES" to 5 or more of these criterion, close the courtroom.

 

[ElleElle]

UMMM. for those who believe the May 10th call was not made on May 10. It couldn't have been.

JA asks TA during the call whether or not he's going to visit her before he goes to Cancun. Travis, according to his journals, did not know until May 14 that he was eligible for the trip.

BBM ~ Makes sense, but is it possible he told he her was going (even though he wasn't sure he qualified) just to avoid visiting her?

ETA ~ NM answered above.

 

[RickshawFan]

Oh. Yeah. I'm sure you'd all be glad for an update regarding me being on the fence regarding BPD and the death penalty or LWOP.. Well, I'm no longer on the fence... I've left the barn completely LOL! After private tutoring lessons on BPD from Britskate :loveyou: I'm still not clear on it all. I hope the jurors somehow made better sense of it all.

Oh well, I probably wouldn't have made it on to the jury anyways.

There is a statistic that I think might simplify the role—i.e. nonexistent—of BPD in the slaughtering of Travis. IIRC, BPDers have a significantly lower rate of homicide than the general population. BPDers have a significantly higher rate of suicide than the general population. So, to say "BPD shoved me in the direction of slaughtering Travis"....just NO! Given the statistics, a non-BPDer would have a statistically higher chance of killing him.
Evidently, the source for these statistics (cited in Wikipedia) is Chapman and Gratz 2007, a handbook for BPDers.

But here's the wrinkle: a significantly high percentage of violent criminals in prison have been diagnosed with BPD (most studies are done in this area). That likely reflects the fact that these criminals frequently have co-morbid conditions (such as anti-personality disorders), have an increased likelihood of being studied because they're available, and their crimes might be unusually violent.

 

[Dr. Know?]

Guilty of plural abuse and about every other mistake you can make when writing. Not a writer...I'm old...don't want to...not a writer...just kidding.

To me, the best book I could read would be every document, investigative report etc...all in a stacked and neat pile, unredacted. jmo So many unanswererd questions like the ring, the trips, the complete words spoken by someone and so on.

Wishful thinking, I know.

 

[Paintr]

I am not 100% but I could have sworn I thought it was mentioned during the 1st trial that the ring was his Grandmothers that she gave him to use when he gets married.
If I remember it correctly, yes, it had a lot of sentimental value.

You are so correct that Travis would have gladly given Jodi money if she asked for it.
My example was just being silly about JA's possible excuse as to why she may have pawned it for money behind his back.

It would be really interesting to know if Travis ever got the ring back. I suspect not.
But could be wrong because i have no idea.

Oh! I got the silly. I was just continuing the thought...sort of trying to figure it out.

I really do hope that it was not his Grandmother's. It probably was though. That would make JA delight in stealing it even more. :sigh:

 

[Paintr]

ON THE DECISION TO CLOSE THE COURTROOM....I FINALLY UNDERSTAND!

“MR. MARTI NEZ: I think what they are asking is that you clear the courtroom of all people, and I don't think that they have met the criteria to seal—

THE COURT: I need to pull out my sheet on this to see what the criteria is.”

After reviewing the magic sheet, it’s obvious she made the correct decision:
1. If the physical presence of people in the gallery bothers the defendant, close the courtroom.
2. If the defendant claims to be receiving threatening letters when letters are not even allowed in the jail, close the courtroom.
3. If the defendant is nervous looking into a crowd, close the courtroom
4. If there’s a possibility there’s someone in the courtroom who is one of the people who possibly sent a possibly threatening “letter”, close the courtroom.
5. If anyone (unspecified) attempts to visit the defendant at the jail, close the courtroom.
6. If the defendant can’t say “sorry for murdering…” publicly, close the courtroom.
7. If the defendant has a bogus diagnosis of PTSD, given by a doctor who based said diagnosis on lies, close the courtroom.
8. If the defendant claims she is nervous for any reason, close the courtroom.
9. If the defendant realizes her prior experience with 18 days on the stand was rightfully ridiculed by the public and media and doesn’t want her feelers hurt again, close the courtroom.
10. If the defendant believes the public and media will hear her and then report it, close the courtroom.
11. If the defendant has a tantrum and refuses even with reasonable alternatives, close the courtroom.
12. If an unidentified man, possibly crazy, possibly with white hair attempts to visit the defendant at the jail, close the courtroom.
13. If the defendant wishes that NO ONE have knowledge of her testimony, close the courtroom.
14. If anyone writes anything perceived hateful by the defendant, close the courtroom.
15. If there is a possibility that people might have access to the defendant while in jail, close the courtroom.
16. If the defendant believes it is only because of her testimony, and not the million TV jail interviews she gave, caused the “big frenzy”, then close the courtroom.
17. If it’s not just the testimony the defendant gives that must be in given in secret due to the unidentified anonymous threats, but also the very fact she is testifying at all, close the courtroom.
18. If Miss DeLaRosa reports from her secret messengers at the Arizona Republic that an unidentified delusional scary man is claiming to be the attorney, and claims he also has pictures of Arias, yet never seen by MDLR, close the courtroom.
19. If the defendant has a diagnosis of BPD from a psychologist they despise, disbelieve, ridicule and harass, close the courtroom.
20. If the defendant, in her passive aggressive threatening style claims that anyone being privy to her answers in court will affect how she answers, close the courtroom.
21. If, as judge, you acknowledge this is manipulative on the part of the defendant and counsel, close the courtroom.

If you mark "YES" to 5 or more of these criterion, close the courtroom.

:yeahthat::laughing:

 

[LambChop]

A reminder that this thread is for discussions regarding the retrial. While rules are relaxed the same rules apply about off topic subjects.

 

[MeeBee]

I'm sorry; I can 't hold back any longer.

1 Hughes + 1 Hughes = 2 Hugheses.

My last name ends in "s" and incorrect plurals of my name drive me crazy. I had to say it.

Lol I thought that was going somewhere else. Like

"1 Hughes + 1 Hughes = 2 VULTURTUNISTSPLOITATERS!"

 

[RickshawFan]

Right? Like when your child just continually is crying, ranting, and raving for the 1,000 time and you just finally say OK!!!!

What I also found interesting is that JA said that in the future she will be at a different facility and at that facility people will have access to her. To me, that means that she is confident that she is getting life and will be in gen pop. JMHO

I thought at Perryville Jodi'd get fewer visitors. In fact, my understanding is that she'll be in solitary for a few years if she gets LWOP. In her last allocution, she was in lala land about what to expect from Perryville. No doubt she's now in lalalalalalala land.