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

[MeeBee]

"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.

:ditto:

!!!

 

[samspace070]

I was just viewing again the testimony of Darryl Brewer and saw his hands. I checked the minutes and court filings and there was a secret closed hearing before Deworkin's testimony. I think Juan was going to ask about the penis picture but JSS would not let it come in because of prejudicial issues. He did ask Darryl about JA taking pics of him naked so we know she had a pic of him naked. There is no other reason Juan wasn't able to get that into evidence except JSS kept it out.

I was thinking, this woman knows everything about this case, including all the secret things we don't know. Much less the jury and they found JA guilty of PM 1st DEGREE MURDER. So my thinking is she should give JA LWOP if this jury doesn't give her the DP, because she knows she is guilty of lying and trying to fabricate evidence and all her hissy fits she threw. How can she not sentence her to LWOP

 

[ShadyLady]

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.

Wasn't her fav word Dynamics?

 

[ICit]

"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.

Sorry! See post 19 on this thread. Sorry again. That's the last time I post so close to Lambie slamming the door. I could not edit to clarify there, so I did here, along with my apology for the lack of clarity.

 

[NashBridges2]

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.

We miss you on the late crew. Hope everything is ok.

 

[pacnwgal]

Sorry! See post 19 on this thread. Sorry again. That's the last time I post so close to Lambie slamming the door. I could not edit to clarify there, so I did here, along with my apology for the lack of clarity.

The clarification offended me more than the original post. You are entitled to your point of view, and I know the majority will agree with you, just please consider that belief systems and codes of ethics can come from sources other than religious teachings.

 

[ICit]

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.

I just may give up on clarifying this! This is the last time I will try.

1. I think we agree Geffner is lying and knows he is lying.
2. Considering the statements Geffner made against the Mormon religion and how he answered the one juror's question about other religions ( something like : it would depend how deep their beliefs were) I wondered if he could be an Atheist because then He would be free to pick what he believed in like lying under oath for secondary gain.

I apologize again.

 

[Becky Sharp]

Wasn't her fav word Dynamics?

Yes, you're right. Thank you! (Not that I want to hear that word again--from her mouth, at least.)

 

[MsJosie]

V

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

Thank you for this comment. That is just what my husband said. He has had it since the 1970's.

 

[pacnwgal]

I just may give up on clarifying this! This is the last time I will try.

1. I think we agree Geffner is lying and knows he is lying.
2. Considering the statements Geffner made against the Mormon religion and how he answered the one juror's question about other religions ( something like : it would depend how deep their beliefs were) I wondered if he could be an Atheist because then He would be free to pick what he believed in like lying under oath for secondary gain.

I apologize again.

I see what you're saying, I understand your clarification and there is no need for an apology, we are just discussing back and forth. :loveyou:

 

[bettybaby00]

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.

Speaking oh the Geff.....

 

[Caylee Advocate]

Tex Mex posted this on previous thread:


"Godzilla shots bcse Juan is stomping Geffner like Godzilla stomping on Tokyo"




Well Tex Mex it's true, Juan was Godzilla-like today, I have proof!!!!


View attachment 69739



CMJA is looking forward to her new boob job in Perryville it is rumored.

 

[RickshawFan]

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.

Geff inserted the argument from religion as a matter of convenience. It was so incomprehensible, I don't believe it's fruitful to try to analyze what he said or figure out what all it meant. What he said is offensive whether one is an observant Mormon or whether one is an upstanding human being. There is no way to "flavor" this so it's tenable. It's a shame if we feel compelled to make arguments over religion because of Geff. His testimony has nothing to do with personal values: it is Machiavellian and amoral.

 

[RickshawFan]

Wasn't her fav word Dynamics?

Too bad JSS won't allow dynamite in her courtroom: Fonseca's BS could use some.

 

[Wing Ding]

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.

There is a television commercial from the 70's that I keep trying to remember every time these so-called defense witnesses testify. Even after a few Google searches I couldn't figure out what commercial it is I'm thinking of, but it goes like this...

"that again? that again? that again? that again?"

It's unbelievable to me the absolute crap the defense continually spews out. Again and again and again. They just don't stop. Juan Martinez... clean upon aisle 5!

Bonus points to anyone who remembers "The Biz Bag" commercial.

 

[RickshawFan]

CMJA is looking forward to her new boob job in Perryville it is rumored.

View attachment 69740

Big Bertha probably handcuffs the nipples to the cell bars and slams the door.... Maybe the honeybuns in lieu of inserts?

 

[neesaki]

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.

And Geffner wasn't good enough, or just not enough for them? I just don't get why they have to have Fonseca back, is it just for one last desperate attempt to get rid of a few more jurors ?

 

[Shadowboy]

Hope4More: I apologize for not quoting your post properly. That said:

1) Thank you for this amazing "e-message/emotional timeline."
2) IMO, this is a great launching pad for this weekend's discussions.

Hope4More posted the following:

Part One. Chronology, with texts/emails/chats/testimony incorporated

Mid to end of February 2008, Lisa breaks off relationship with TA. Mimi enters the picture end of February. JA first mentions leaving Mesa in early March.

3/18 Text, TA to JA, do you know what happened to my diamond ring. TA journal entry: I’ve lost my journal, my Ipod, my diamond ring. JA says she has the ring for some reason.

3/19 and 3/25. TA journal entry: I want my lost journal back.

3/21 TA journal: Haven’t spoken to Mimi in a long while. Trying to play it cool.

3/26 TA journal: Mimi didn’t call me back. Getting discouraging. Leaning towards not proceeding with her. I have 4 months left in the ward.

3/27 TA journal: I really need more self discipline. I think Jodi moving will be good for me in a lot of ways. She is a great girl. But we are not good influences on each other. She has an uncanny ability to get under my skin. So although I’m used to having her around and I’ll most probably miss her. But I’m certain it will be good for both of us. But I need to get married and she can get in the way of that and does in fact.

3/30 TA journal entry: about sin bringing momentary happiness but followed by misery. Moral of the story: “wickedness never was happiness.”

4/1 JA writes goodbye note in TA’s journal.

4/1 Text (or chat) TA and Michelle Lowry: “there’s a Michelle in our ward who has been playing spy for Jodi for months, giving her info about Lisa and Mimi. I have had no privacy for a year. (She;s read) my journals, goes into my texts and emails.”

4/3 TA journal entry: I’m still quite lonely. Jodi keeps leaving but hasn’t left. In fact she pulled out of my driveway headed for CA this afternoon but she showed up this evening. I think she is having a hard time. But I think I’d be better off and so would she if she got out of here. Dreamt of Lisa. I miss her. I still love her.

4/7 Text TA to JA: Don’t call. Don’t text. The next text I want is this Michelle K that is friends with Elena that nobody knows but who knows details about my life…….(so tell me the truth or give me your imaginary friend with the worst BS story you’ve ever told or leave me alone. (tell me)m before I tell the Hughes, Leslie Udy, the Freemans, your parents and anyone else that matters about all the crazy things you’ve done.”

4/8 JA leaves Mesa. Text, TA to JA: Do not call back. I’m sick of you playing stupid….Bitter feelings are brewing in me towards you…..If it keeps up I fear I will have a genuine dislike of you.

4/8 TA journal entry: Lost my journal and I wouldn’t be surprised if it was stolen…most of my time with Lisa was in in it.

 

[neesaki]

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

Sounds like a smart juror.

 

[neesaki]

"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.

If I'm not mistaken I believe I just read a few posts up that the poster apologized for this post. Sorry you missed it. :hug: