Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 21

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
TartLemon said:
All those days of direct with JM objecting very minimally throughout. Now, the defense team can't allow a complete question by JM on cross without interrupting with objections. If I was on the jury, ultimately I'd have to conclude the defense was trying to hide the truth of the matter brought out by the Prosecution.
Click to expand...

....jumping off your post ...

So, as of this lunch recess right now, these witness have not been allowed questions from the Jury (for various reasons):

1. Jodi Arias
2. Geffner
3. John Smith
4. Flores

I am at work and Twitter is blocked for me (that's how I found you guys), but has anyone in the courtroom reported anything about jury questions in the box for these DT's witnesses (except for CMJA, obv)? TIA
 
FinallyRegistered said:
....jumping off your post ...

So, as of this lunch recess right now, these witness have not been allowed questions from the Jury (for various reasons):

1. Jodi Arias
2. Geffner
3. John Smith
4. Flores

I am at work and Twitter is blocked for me (that's how I found you guys), but has anyone in the courtroom reported anything about jury questions in the box for these DT's witnesses (except for CMJA, obv)? TIA
Click to expand...

Nothing at all. And welcome to the madness. :)
 
Nali87 said:
I feel horrible for laughing. But that's what he gets for insinuating that JM is some of pervert. Lower than low. I don't know JM, but you don't just insult someone like that.
Click to expand...

Even Baez didn't do that with Ashton. :yuck: I thought I had seen it all with the Florida trial. This trial has been a life lesson for me--I've been exposed to new depths of evil...
 
FinallyRegistered said:
....jumping off your post ...

So, as of this lunch recess right now, these witness have not been allowed questions from the Jury (for various reasons):

1. Jodi Arias
2. Geffner
3. John Smith
4. Flores

I am at work and Twitter is blocked for me (that's how I found you guys), but has anyone in the courtroom reported anything about jury questions in the box for these DT's witnesses (except for CMJA, obv)? TIA
Click to expand...

And I thought the defense said calling them out of order would be problematic? :rolleyes:
 
TartLemon said:
All those days of direct with JM objecting very minimally throughout. Now, the defense team can't allow a complete question by JM on cross without interrupting with objections. If I was on the jury, ultimately I'd have to conclude the defense was trying to hide the truth of the matter brought out by the Prosecution.
Click to expand...

I guess they don't want the jury to think that they did the same as the state. They'd be just as guilty.
 
When I heard the DT would be calling a witness, I really didn't think it would be Flores. I wonder who's next.
 
I don't know how Juan handles this craziness. The depths of their madness would drive any sane rational person, over the edge mentally
 
rose222 said:
Even Baez didn't do that with Ashton. :yuck: I thought I had seen it all with the Florida trial. This trial has been a life lesson for me--I've been exposed to new depths of evil...
Click to expand...

I can only imagine what's on Nurmi's computer. And it's not Juan that specializes in defending pervs....as for Wilmot and Maria...there's just no rational excuse.
 
FinallyRegistered said:
....jumping off your post ...

So, as of this lunch recess right now, these witness have not been allowed questions from the Jury (for various reasons):

1. Jodi Arias
2. Geffner
3. John Smith
4. Flores

I am at work and Twitter is blocked for me (that's how I found you guys), but has anyone in the courtroom reported anything about jury questions in the box for these DT's witnesses (except for CMJA, obv)? TIA
Click to expand...

What too you so long? :smile: . . .Welcome to the :rollercoaster: and a Zany Bunch :giggle:

:wagon: :Welcome1: :welcome4:


:fireworks: :fireworks: :fireworks:
 
The most prolific *advertiser censored* watcher in this case is JA imo. As uninhibited, enthusiastic sex was her trademark appeal, she surely sought creative inspiration from *advertiser censored*. In fact, I think watching movies of all types and mimicking dialog, facial expressions, etc. before a mirror was a daily lifelong habit for JA, who had to work hard to pass as normal.
 
ShadyLady said:
I think this is all been orchestrated by Jodi. She is still seething from Juan taking her down in the first trial. Revenge is Jodi's middle name. It's why she killed Travis....and now wants to go after anyone that has crossed her. She takes no prisoners, and has a long memory for the holding grudges.

She would love to get back at Flores, Juan or Travis' family, anyway she can. Putting Flores or Juan [or Travis] on trial gives her some small sense of retribution in her pathetic isolated life. imo
Click to expand...
Excellent post. Her vengeance today is as powerful as it was on the day she pulled out of the Redding Airport in her Ford Focus rental.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk
 
Flores touching the computer would not have done anything to hide real *advertiser censored* visits. Touching the computer did not erase the registry or the history or any files that were already not in the trash.

Yes, there was *advertiser censored* ... *advertiser censored* LINKS shown in the computer, put there by a virus, captured by an anti virus program. Someone please make the distinction between *advertiser censored* links captured by the anti virus program and actual *advertiser censored*"

If there was really a visit to a site made by Alexa then what date was that? What year was that? Where was Jodi then? Was the roomate there that Travis kicked out for viewing *advertiser censored*? How many roommates? How many guests asked Travis to use his computer to check their email and facebook?

The lying liar knew how upset Travis was that a room mate infected his computer and likely how much it cost him to have it cleaned. Sociopaths store info like this to use later.

Prove it was his doing or shut up and sit down!
 
MeeBee said:
The defense wanted to tell the jury Juan was looking for nude photos of Jodi and the judge said no. They wanted to have him removed from the case so they could call him as a witness and the judge said no.
Click to expand...

Nurmi's tossing out every issue possible to get removed from this case, isn't he? He didn't select this case; it was assigned by the courts.
 
When the DT attorney made those nasty allegation about Juan I was waiting for some sort of admonishment from the Judge.

And again when the DT witness (i think Neumeister) was allowed to trash Juan openly, I again was waiting on some admonishment from the Judge.

Even a threat from the Judge would help stop their atrocious behaviors. It is very distrurbing to see this courtroom behavior being allowed from the DT.
 
ICit said:
Flores touching the computer would not have done anything to hide real *advertiser censored* visits. Touching the computer did not erase the registry or the history or any files that were already not in the trash.

Yes, there was *advertiser censored* ... *advertiser censored* LINKS shown in the computer, put there by a virus, captured by an anti virus program. Someone please make the distinction between *advertiser censored* links captured by the anti virus program and actual *advertiser censored*"

If there was really a visit to a site made by Alexa then what date was that? What year was that? Where was Jodi then? Was the roomate there that Travis kicked out for viewing *advertiser censored*? How many roommates? How many guests asked Travis to use his computer to check their email and facebook?

The lying liar knew how upset Travis was that a room mate infected his computer and likely how much it cost him to have it cleaned. Sociopaths store info like this to use later.

Prove it was his doing or shut up and sit down!
Click to expand...


Love this post! I wish Juan could settle all these points for the jury.
 
TartLemon said:
Nurmi's tossing out every issue possible to get removed from this case, isn't he? He didn't select this case; it was assigned by the courts.
Click to expand...

He wanted Juan removed from the case, I meant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 178 more.
Total: 2,501 (members: 179, guests: 2,322)

Online statistics

Members online
179
Guests online
2,322
Total visitors
2,501
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,878
Messages
18,100,657
Members
230,942
Latest member
Patturelli
Back
Top