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

[Nali87]

Seriously? The transcripts of chamber meeting? Today? When I'm already late for work? :scared:

 

[04009margaret]

Getting caught up and it appears that Geffner went against JM again. Is Geffner the guy who sent Jodi books while she was in jail while doing a psychological evaluation?

He was the nutter the DT had come in for the guilty phase to rebut Dr Horn's testimony regarding the gunshot & to back up Dr Samuels testimony. Spilt his water when JM started his cross x.

 

[LinasK]

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.

I love it! It's one of those questions with no good answer like: Do you still beat your wife? or Do these jeans make me look fat?

 

[LinasK]

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

She will. Keep the faith in JSS.

 

[LinasK]

She even went so far as to tell the Judge threats were not only made against her if she testifies to certain things but TA's family as well, but JM was all over that and then she backed off of that particular lie when the Judge asked JM if the Alexander's had any concerns to which he stated they did not

:what: BBM. What Chutzpah! ullhairExcuse my Yiddish) Especially when the Alexanders can be asked directly if they felt threatened.:thud: She has NEVER had any right to speak for them. :gaah:Makes me feel like slapping her!!!:cursing:

 

[LinasK]

Yup and in the chamber meeting jodi made it perfectly clear, she didn't want the public/media EVER getting her testimony or even knowing she testified. Even tried to get the judge to allow the same for her witnesses. Unreal. I love how Juan stated the decision would be overturned on appeal, he knew it.

BBM. No wonder it was reported she was so pissed when the media came back in while she was on the stand. She must've had a cow when the transcripts were released. She thinks she can hold the whole court hostage.

 

[LinasK]

Pretty freaking hilarious, the Judge telling JA she had not even ruled on that and JA all but says that she assumed her scared witnesses would get special treatment of never having any record of their testimony released to the public.

Haha, yeah that's Marc McGee wanting to keep his name hidden. Sorry Marc,:seeya: you're not going to hide behind a keyboard and lie and not be revealed and be Jodi's knight in shining armor.

 

[LinasK]

For some inexplicable reason this Judge thinks of herself as a champion of Arias' rights. She genuinely believes in Arias' right to secrecy and that her rights deserve to be protected above all else. Oh sure, the Judge believes that Arias is manipulative and if it comes down to LWOP versus LWP, the Judge will probably choose LWOP. Still, the endless delays, fragmented testimonies, and secrecy have all benefited the defendant. Sad to see this abysmal state of affairs.

BBM. Disagree. JSS is only doing this because the Death Penalty is what's at stake. She'd act the same way for any other defendant facing the Death Penalty. Did you see her championing Jodi's rights in the Guilt Phase? No you didn't. And actually, very shortly all the delays, fragmented testimony, and secrecy is all for naught because Juan has effectively destroyed the DT's case.

 

[Val1]

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......

BBM - I would just like to note that according to what BK tweeted from the very first bit of JW's direct yesterday morning(19th), JW had shown Exh#769 and was discussing the DAPS profile form for women with Dr.G and he responded that it was a standard administration test given to JA when she was in jail.

Anyway, apparently JA had said her most traumatic incident was what led to the murder and that the event had happened 1-3 months prior to it. BK noted that she was focused roughly on July 2008.

Am I just confused ... July is after she'd already murdered TA and was either when JA was realizing she hadn't been as clever as she'd thought and was about to be busted, or already had been and was having her first taste of jail(re her adjustment disorder, or as I like to call it, being told NO).

So does anyone know if it was JW that was focused on July(re JA's adjustment disorder) to create confusion about these tests that were shown to have been done incorrectly, as JD had said, or was it JA herself when filling out the form that was focusing on that month and was reporting how she was feeling about being arrested when answering the test instead of what the test was designed to do which iirc, was to determine if her pre-murder(1-3 months prior to June/08) traumatic event is what caused her PTSD?

I thought JA hadn't been diagnosed by anyone with anything(whether it was true or false) until 2010 so unless someone did some preliminary testing in July 2008, I really don't understand why any of this is being taken as fact ... it's all coming from the one person who had literally years to do research and come up with a plausible excuse to get away with murder, notwithstanding that any answers or explanations given at least up to that time JA has since declared were all lies(not there, ninjas, can't remember...).

Sorry if that doesn't make any sense... just trying to understand the whole July reference and why that was even mentioned, unless BK heard it incorrectly?

 

[Val1]

:what: BBM. What Chutzpah! ullhairExcuse my Yiddish) Especially when the Alexanders can be asked directly if they felt threatened.:thud: She has NEVER had any right to speak for them. :gaah:Makes me feel like slapping her!!!:cursing:

Careful, next there will be a motion that you've been threatening her... like this unnamed person they spoke of that apparently was such a threat that he was never detained, by any of the authorities that supposedly saw him as such a threat that they warned MDLR and JW about him and of course they quickly passed this on to their poor mentally ill defendant....

 

[Val1]

She will. Keep the faith in JSS.

I'm trying... but after having just followed the OP trial(not to mention many others since OJ), it's really difficult to believe in justice when so much of the truth never sees the light of day because it might trample on some perp's rights.

 

[Val1]

Getting caught up and it appears that Geffner went against JM again. Is Geffner the guy who sent Jodi books while she was in jail while doing a psychological evaluation?

Haha, no it was Dr.S and LaV that gave JA books to learn how real victims react....

 

[rose222]

BBM. Disagree. JSS is only doing this because the Death Penalty is what's at stake. She'd act the same way for any other defendant facing the Death Penalty. Did you see her championing Jodi's rights in the Guilt Phase? No you didn't. And actually, very shortly all the delays, fragmented testimony, and secrecy is all for naught because Juan has effectively destroyed the DT's case.

I'm trying... but after having just followed the OP trial(not to mention many others since OJ), it's really difficult to believe in justice when so much of the truth never sees the light of day because it might trample on some perp's rights.

So, next week we will probably have 2 days with Dr. Fonseca, 1 day for the computer guy plus JA's allocution, 1.5 days for closing arguments and jury instructions. If things go smoothly then next week this time we could very well be on verdict watch!

 

[Val1]

So, next week we will probably have 2 days with Dr. Fonseca, 1 day for the computer guy plus JA's allocution, 1.5 days for closing arguments and jury instructions. If things go smoothly then next week this time we could very well be on verdict watch!

The DT has both "Sue" and LD listed for the computer guys plus Dr.F, then JM may have surrebuttal, then I think if JA does do her allocution, that will come after all the witnesses are released and finally the closing arguments which may take a day each(no idea how long they're allowed)... I doubt we'll get into verdict watch until March..February is a short month, even if it was a leap year I doubt that would help.:/

 

[My-Future-Ex-Husband]

She will. Keep the faith in JSS.

I can't see JSS giving LWP. She gave 20 years to a woman for diddling a 12 year old girl, she's not going to give CMJA just five years more for slaughtering a man.

 

[My-Future-Ex-Husband]

Careful, next there will be a motion that you've been threatening her... like this unnamed person they spoke of that apparently was such a threat that he was never detained, by any of the authorities that supposedly saw him as such a threat that they warned MDLR and JW about him and of course they quickly passed this on to their poor mentally ill defendant....

What was unnamed person going to do? Get a job as a prison guard so he could get CMJA? :facepalm:

 

[Val1]

What was unnamed person going to do? Get a job as a prison guard so he could get CMJA? :facepalm:

Haha, well he allegedly was purporting to have been one of JA's attorneys... reminds me of the ex-wife of the Dr. that had performed OP's amputations when he was a baby making claims to the court that his deceased mother had come to her in a dream telling her to protect him... because he had some sort of mental issues or something to that effect. Ludicrous comes to mind.

 

[pinkandgreenmom]

Are the chamber minutes allowing JA to testify in secret available anywhere else but BK's site? I am searching but no luck.

 

[Val1]

Thanks! I'm new here

:welcome6::greetings:

 

[YESorNO]

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/20/2015 8:00 AM

02/18/2015

TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY FORTY-TWO

10:00 a.m. Trial to Jury continues from 2/12/15...

Dr. Robert Geffner, having previously been sworn, testifies further.
Defense Exhibit 937 is marked for identification.
The Defense offers State’s Exhibit 839 and it is admitted in evidence.
The Defense offers Defense Exhibit 937 and it is NOT admitted in evidence.
Defense Exhibit 938 is marked for identification.
The Defense offers Defense Exhibit 938 and it is NOT admitted in evidence...

Defense Exhibits 939-941 are marked for identification.
The Defense offers Defense Exhibit 940 and it is NOT admitted in evidence...

The Defense offers Defense Exhibit 939 and it is admitted in evidence.
Defense Exhibit 942-946 is marked for identification.
The Defense offers Defense Exhibit 942-946.
Exhibit 942 is admitted in evidence.
Defense Exhibits 947-951 are marked for identification.
Exhibits 944 and 943 are admitted in evidence.
Exhibits 945 and 946 are NOT admitted in evidence.
Dr. Robert Geffner testifies further.
Exhibits 945 and 946 are now admitted in evidence.
Defense Exhibits 952 and 953 are marked for identification.
The Defense offers Defense Exhibit 952 and it is admitted in evidence...

Defense Exhibit 954 is marked for identification...

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/022015/m6706286.pdf
-------------------------

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/20/2015 8:00 AM

02/18/2015

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court having previously unsealed the hearing on 10/31/15 but did not include the
hearing on 10/30/15 in that minute entry order,
IT IS ORDERED unsealing the proceedings held on 10/30/15 to include the transcript
and minute entry dated 10/30/15 and docketed on 11/4/14.

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/022015/m6705723.pdf