Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 27, Part 2

[Hope4More]

I do know Travis cared for Jodi. I do remember Skye saying Travis didn't want to hear it when other people spoke ill of her. He did seem more open to discussing it with his friends though. I think he was conflicted. That's pretty normal for someone you have or had strong feelings for. My sister was recently in a relatiobship with a guy, on and off, who drew this conflict out in her. He was her first love. He was not a good guy. He treated her terribly, would lead her on, was a bad influence on her life. Break up with her and take her back. I didn't like him. And she was depressed all the time and he created negative feeling in her. But she would wait around for him, try and get him to take her back even though she knew he wasn't good to her. I tried to tell her this guy was no good for her. She'd complain about him but try and tell her how you feel and she would get mad. Didn't want to hear it.

I do think he wanted to be free of Jodi. If she never moved to Mesa their dysfunctional relationship would not have become the mess that it did. She'd be in Cali and he'd be in AZ and they would just be friends. She created a conflict in him.

Eta: I disagree very much she isn't trying to convince the world she knew him better. Very much. She is. That's exactly what all this is. It's the reason for that psychotic letter to the family. It's the reason she had to stamp all over Samantha and Steven's VIS's. Travis wasn't the glue, his grandmother was. You're wrong. Don't talk about your grandmother like I didn't know her. Travis confided in ME about her and I even met her. She had to be the one.

I think "conflicted" says it all. The DT tried to twist this into a reason why he abused her. I think the truth is he was simply exhausted by feeling conflicted, nonstop , about a woman who just would not leave him alone, ever.

I agree with you 100% that he was incredibly relieved to see her move back to CA. That journal entry of his is self explanatory....on an evening, shortly after she left, when he realizes he hasnt heard from her all day and writes:

Havent heard from her all day! Never thought that would happen! It feels great!

 

[Bravo]

Leaving shortly but thankfully my day ends and will get back here by 3ish. It's just better in real time. Today should prove to be most interesting.

 

[TartLemon]

Is court ½ day before or after lunch?

ETA is this it for the week or is there court Thurs as well?

 

[daisydomino]

Is court ½ day before or after lunch?

After lunch. 1:30pm MST

 

[DebinGA]

The one thing said by JA in the first trial that was truth is her "I couldn't keep my lies straight" comment. And boy does this ring loud and clear in so many aspects of this case. All of the recent discussion and comments about her PPL history-when it started, where was she living, who was she with, when was she with them, all her tales are wrought with lies. It would be a tremendous sleuthing effort, but it sure would be something if it could all be laid out, cross referencing all her stories, all the testimony of others, all the documents, emails, texts, etc....to show that her entire tale is a jumbled, delusional mess. The whole issue raised by Juan of whether or not she and Travis ever were "dating" at all is so pointed. I think if they were, the DT would have been able to provide texts or emails from Travis to corroborate. But they haven't. They've got nothing. Nada.

Someone here lamented the other day that there weren't more "visuals" for the jurors to see. I amen that, as I remember what I see a lot longer than what I hear. I know JM will do a stellar closing, but jurors will only have their notes of it. In his closing, I wish JM would provide a timeline/roadmap of some sort that jurors could copy and refer to during deliberations.

 

[bettybaby00]

I think "conflicted" says it all. The DT tried to twist this into a reason why he abused her. I think the truth is he was simply exhausted by feeling conflicted, nonstop , about a woman who just would not leave him alone, ever.

I agree with you 100% that he was incredibly relieved to see her move back to CA. That journal entry of his is self explanatory....on an evening, shortly after she left, when he realizes he hasnt heard from her all day and writes:

Havent heard from her all day! Never thought that would happen! It feels great!

Gee wonder what the Geff "believed" that meant?!

:giggle:

 

[ElleElle]

You may have seen an answer in your other reading since you posted this, but the gist of it is that JW is trying to say that Deanna lied in their interview with her about having had sex with Travis. She apparently replied "I don't know" to a question something like "Did you know Travis was having sex with women other than JA?"
ETA: I think my wording is poor here - The "other women" part seemed to be worded in such a way as to mean other than Deanna herself.

JW claims that makes Deanna a liar because she should have replied "Travis and I had sex."

Deanna claims she didn't lie and wants to hear the audio recording of the interview because she doesn't believe the transcript. Deanna wouldn't budge and JW got her panties all in a wad over it.

My gut feel is that it's going to boil down to semantics - the defense worded the question poorly/ambiguously and she answered honestly. I'm willing to bet that when all is said and done that the jury will see it Deanna's way.

Now JW is going to have to come back today and try to get only a snippet of the tape in while Deanna and Juan will argue that more is needed to establish context. In addition to having the exact wording of the question and answer, I'm willing to bet the tape shows that the DT was acting incredibly obnoxious and/or condescending to her.

At any rate, the stage is set for this to be all-out combat between Deanna and JW, whereas in the original trial Deanna more or less just answered KN's questions without ramping things up. I think she caught JW off-guard today.

:rocker: BSK ! Brilliant! Deanna will stand her ground. JW better be careful, otherwise she will have a misconduct against her.

 

[Bravo]

I'm surprised we never saw a pic of the melted chocolates LOL

 

[Hatfield]

If they allow in the audio today of Deanna's interview, does that open up her entire audio where I am sure Nurmi and Wilmont are trying to trap her with trick wordings and such so they can and have take things out of context?

I hope so because I suspect if Wilmcott brings the audio it will be chopped up just like they chopped up the audio sex tape recordings to make Travis look worst. In the sex tape I always wondered what she may have said preceding some of what we hear.

I hope Juan has the entire thing and he gets to bring it in.
Then POW. See Jury what the DT was doing?

 

[bettybaby00]

I hope so because I suspect if Wilmcott brings the audio it will be chopped up just like they chopped up the audio sex tape recordings to make Travis look worst. In the sex tape I always wondered what she may have said preceding some of what we hear.

I hope Juan has the entire thing and he gets to bring it in.
Then POW. See Jury what the DT was doing?

This just conjured up the mental image of Wilma sitting at her kitchen table late into the night listening to the audio, while frantically making notes as she smokes a joint!

 

[atthelake]

How do you put someone on "Ignore"?

Top of your screen top right, go to Settings
Under "My Account" go to "Edit Ignore List"

voila, start typing in the name of the person you want to ignore, and it will autocomplete for ya too

HTH

ETA: I never have used for folks that I disagree with! I love love love others opinions. Only for those who I believe may be just wanting to inflame and seem to come in especially near the end of trials iykwim.

 

[FinallyRegistered]

OMG, I'm envisioning an Excel spreadsheet ... each documented date across the top columns, each source (text, email, blog post, testimony, interrogation) on the left-side column and details in each cell. I want to tackle this project SOOOooo bad.

Wow. Wouldnt that be something to see all the discrepencies at a glance like that. Even if it could not possibly include everything it would be great to have something like this. It would be utterly amazing to see. The only problem is it would take a lot of work for sure. The good thing about it though is it could be shared at certain points even though we know it would not have everything included. Even if 25% got completed at first it would show some amazing contradictions and then it could always be added to if people had time to keep adding things.

I could do it; however, I would want accurate hyperlinks to embed in the spreadsheet. Is there a WS-trusted cache of them somewhere? I'd hate to go through all the trouble just to find out the sources (i.e, Google) are bunk. I'm tempted to just post my personal email so you guys can flood me with hyperlinks and pdfs, but I won't.

 

[atthelake]

OMG, I'm envisioning an Excel spreadsheet ... each documented date across the top columns, each source (text, email, blog post, testimony, interrogation) on the left-side column and details in each cell. I want to tackle this project SOOOooo bad.

OMG, when I was working I subscribed to a FREE weekly newsletter from the excell addict at http://www.theexceladdict.com/ . Years later, I still get his free helpful hints that are FABULOUS and highly recommend to anyone who uses excel and wants to be a power user or better their skills.

ETA: One of the BEST that used excel for trials was ACandyRose which we at WS often referred to during the Caylee Anthony case. She had ALL the links and details in excel spreadsheets and helped organize for us. :websleuther:'s miss her :blowkiss:

Here is her FCA link, but acandyrose.com is the major link

http://www.acandyrose.com/casey_anthony_31days.htm

 

[cricket49]

If they allow in the audio today of Deanna's interview, does that open up her entire audio where I am sure Nurmi and Wilmont are trying to trap her with trick wordings and such so they can and have take things out of context?

This has been addressed many times during this trial, but how can lawyers take bits and pieces of letters, videos etc out of context and make them appear to be something else? Just like the Hughes letter they sent to Travis. If they can't allow the whole video or letter to go into evidence it appears smarmy. I know there are some very good ethical lawyers out there but this sure makes the legal system seem shady. JMO


ETA: and don't get me started on JSS.

 

[TartLemon]

WTF does it matter if Travis had sex with Deanna? Even if he did with a hundred people still no excuse for what Jodi did to Travis.

 

[FinallyRegistered]

I could do it; however, I would want accurate hyperlinks to embed in the spreadsheet. Is there a WS-trusted cache of them somewhere? I'd hate to go through all the trouble just to find out the sources (i.e, Google) are bunk. I'm tempted to just post my personal email so you guys can flood me with hyperlinks and pdfs, but I won't.

Continuing to brainstorm... As an example, here's a great timeline with hyperlinks of Casey Anthony's activities: http://www.acandyrose.com/caylee_anthony_timeline_index.htm

 

[DebinGA]

Anticipating the Riverside LDS pastor today, did JA claim in the first trial she confessed her affair with TA to a bishop? And if so, which one ... hers or TA's? I doubt her ward's bishop would have even recognized her as one of his flock pre-murder.

 

[Hatfield]

I could do it; however, I would want accurate hyperlinks to embed in the spreadsheet. Is there a WS-trusted cache of them somewhere? I'd hate to go through all the trouble just to find out the sources (i.e, Google) are bunk. I'm tempted to just post my personal email so you guys can flood me with hyperlinks and pdfs, but I won't.

Take a look at the Sticky Threads above this thread. There are a couple that may be helpful like the "transcripts one" and the "Jury Q+A" one. You are right that the source documents would be best and not sure if someone here at WS maybe has attachments of the actual court documents somewhere that is linkable.

Someone may PM you if they have an idea that could help.
You are right that some planning first is good before any of the legwork begins.

 

[MeeBee]

I think the bishop will be able to say what dates Travis lived with him and confirm what Deanna said, that Travis had moved out by August 2000. They can say Deanna is a liar if they want, but try it with a bishop. He'd have no reason to lie.

 

[Hope4More]

Someone here lamented the other day that there weren't more "visuals" for the jurors to see. I amen that, as I remember what I see a lot longer than what I hear. I know JM will do a stellar closing, but jurors will only have their notes of it. In his closing, I wish JM would provide a timeline/roadmap of some sort that jurors could copy and refer to during deliberations.

I know I'd love a visual. We've spent years working out do many details.. it would be awesome to see the core of that summarized in one place.

But for the jury? I don't think JM needs to, and he may actually not want to. His closing is going to be even more powerful this time around. Less to focus on, and more to be righteously angry about.

All he needs to convey to the jury is that she lied about every last thing about Travis, starting with what she said about the very first day they even met. And that those lies speak directly to her utter lack of remorse.

I can hear and see JM now....


"How can you believe anything she says about Travis when she's lied to you even about the date when she says they became "official? "

DeMarte will explain things, but even so I think its possible he won't emphasize the fact they never had a relationship. That she invented everything makes her seem flat out crazy....not a sympathy mitigator, but maybe a geez, she's batsheet crazy mitigator...