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

[Val1]

A lot to think about here..... I guess what's striking to me about the whole 2006-2008 debacle is the degree to which JA's whole "relationship" with TA was not rooted in reality. There is no evidence that they actually went on a "date" kind of a date, no evidence that they had sex with any frequency or passion (despite the sex talk), no evidence that there was anything serious in their relationship, no sign of mutuality, no evidence that she was ever close to being "his girl". Any scaffolding which would have said this was a significant boyfriend/girlfriend connection was all a figment of her imagination, and constructed from lies and manipulations.

While I agree JA "had to make Travis go away" because she couldn't unravel her mind from her fantasies, that doesn't account for the virulence with which she has tried to erase everything he was about. I suppose "erasing" is another method of digging someone out by the roots, but with JA it's never enough. She's as obsessed with destroying his reputation as she was obsessed with him in life. And she will never stop, because without an obsession, she is nothing.

In a slight way, it's like an unwed mother in the old days claiming that her "husband" died in the war, so as to take away her shame. It's not like anyone was about to go checking to see if her story was true, especially if she moved somewhere where eligible young woman were in demand.

 

[My-Future-Ex-Husband]

All I know for sure is Jodi Ann already had anal and oral with Travis by Nov 2006 (if she is telling the truth), and on Dec 2006, Abe's hand was inside her pants.

I can't believe a juror didn't ask what CMJA's reaction was when he did that. Granted Nurmi and Willmott probably wouldn't have let it get asked out loud, but at least it would've been on the record once all the records are all unsealed in 2525.

 

[Retrofit]

I'm way behind reading the thread (and the one before) but I'm curious if anyone else thinks that maybe the DT is attempting to "throw" the case. Some of the stuff they pull is just so over-the-top, like the way they treat the witnesses like DR. Maybe they really want JA to get the DP and are going out of their way to alienate the jury? They just seem so incompetent at times ... Not to mention their witnesses (especially the computer "expurtz") who are, IMHO, total idgits. "No, I don't have any education, any evidence or know what I'm talking about but I stayed at the Holiday Inn Express last night so you can just take my word for it." If I was on this jury not only would I be furious at the way they waste my time, I would probably disregard what most of the defense witnesses say. I sure wouldn't believe anything in an affidavit from someone who won't even give their name or testify over the phone, let alone show their face. The only corroboration is by the known liar JA and given second or third hand through other witnesses. The witnesses who do appear in court don't seem believable, are hostile to the prosecution, and just keep saying the same claptrap over and over like if they repeat it enough you'll think it's true. It's ridiculous. It doesn't even seem like mitigation to me, just slander.

Just sayin'

 

[MaLou]

Well that picture was taken before the murder trip. So she had the shirt then. When and where did she claim that pic was taken?

From what I've seen of the crime photos, that looks like Travis' room.

 

[DexterMorgan]

The state should be ashamed for the sentencing process. If the jurors couldn't have agreed on death than it should have automatically been life without parole. I guess Juan and the judge have no other cases that need serious attention. Juan is probably stalling on other cases which leave defendants in limbo while he drains our money on this sentencing phase. Attn Juan and The Judge: We need you sending people to jail and not spend a year on one person sentencing phase. Even if she gets death then we will have to hear from her for the next 20 years. Just for some college kid (who will then be Governor) commute her sentence to life 20 years from now. Good grief.[/QUOT


---------------------------

Not sure how to respond to this tone deaf posting without sounding harsh. Justice isn't measured in dollars, it's meted out in sentences deemed appropriate according to the laws of the land. The laws in play here are the result of a finely honed system based on centuries of legislation and jurisprudence, both of which have evolved independent of one another. While far from perfect, the system as a whole works pretty well. The fact that an admitted killer has been afforded millions of dollars in defense of her heinous actions speaks directly to that point. Please don't blame Arizona for this debacle. If it weren't for the murderer's many lies and manipulation of the facts, this case would have been settled long ago.

The jurors are not dumb. So if it takes this long for both sides to state the valid mitgating factors in this case; then this means that all involved are using Travises gruesome death to entertain their careers. This is nothing but shenanigans. Bottom line. Its merely for ratings and publicity.

 

[Val1]

We haven't even included the older guy from Monterey (?) who funded the murder trip to Mesa....

Heck, there's John Dixon, Steve ... (can't remember offhand), MM's friend that went to karaoke with them the night before she left, the "cutie" that she thought was too short down south that she talked about dropping in on(or was that John Dixon?), just so many pics of men with her to wonder about.

 

[Kamille]

I'm often wrong but it wiuldn't surprise me if it is dropped by the DT. I doubt they want the audio played and the abrupt end if court today may have been a put up or shutup by JSS.

I think there was only about 15 minutes left in the court day anyway and obviously JW wasn't willing or able to move past this question with DR and no one had the audio of the interview there in the courtroom, so JSS probably just told them to bring it in with them tomorrow and ended the day.

MOO

 

[MaLou]

Just when I think I have reached some understanding of how deluded JA was (is), another layer of the onion-of-madness is peeled away!
Seriously, this is one loony gal. I just revisited her word-vomit blog. Those few entries (written with the same cluster-**** of garbled jawing
that comes out of her lie-hole when she speaks) were written in April & May of 2008. IMHO she was worked up into a pre-murder frenzy.
Her desperation to be noticed, admired and wanted by TA is puked out in these "deep thoughts". She wrote this hot-mess of junior high school faux-philosophy
for HIM to read. http://jodiarias.blogspot.com/
NOTHING about her thought process is normal.
I need to go wash my brain in hot soapy water and hit the hay. :gaah:

Hmm. Just noticed on May 4, 2008, she claims to have stopped believing in the Law of Attraction six months ago. So that means from November 2007 on, her journals should reflect that.

 

[TxJan1971]

Heck, there's John Dixon, Steve ... (can't remember offhand), MM's friend that went to karaoke with them the night before she left, the "cutie" that she thought was too short down south that she talked about dropping in on(or was that John Dixon?), just so many pics of men with her to wonder about.

Paul Stern is the one that loaned her $ in June 2008 to go see Travis right before she murdered him. He said she used to frequent a bar/lounge nightly where he lived in CA so she could use the internet there. She would always sit next to him and she knew he had a gf so didn't come on to him.

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/02/06/man-who-gave-jodi-money-visit-travis-speaks-out

 

[Kamille]

And all the while JA was professing her "eternal" love for her beloved TA.... just wondering, which Christmas was it that she so conveniently fell asleep under the tree after being told there was no room for her to spend the night, 2006 or 2007? Didn't she go home for at least one of those holidays? Oh wait, wasn't she still in her house in 2006...

From: http://lindapariscrimeblog.com/?p=664 and originally from CNN transcripts iirc:
"Another woman, who wanted to only be know as, “Debbie,” said that her daughter “Ashley,” met Arias in October, 2006. Later in January, 2007, when Arias claimed that Brewer, “left her high and dry”…Ashley moved into Arias’s home, to help out with expenses. Ashley found it extremely troubling that Arias had a constant and steady stream of men in and out of her bedroom, at all hours. When these men would show up, Arias would order Ashley to her room, and tell her to shut the door. Ashley could clearly hear them, having sex. Arias would call these encounters “bible studies.” Ashley lasted all of three weeks, living with Arias but as many do, she found it difficult to extricate herself from Arias. Debbie had to step in and threaten Arias with a restraining order, in order to get Arias, to leave her daughter, alone. The same Arias that was trying to woo Alexander!! (Ashley met Alexander, as he visited, too) The same Arias, that wanted the world to know that, she wasn’t promiscuous!"

Did we ever hear testimony that TA visited JA's house in Palm Desert? I don't think I believe this random internet poster TBH.

 

[Wing Ding]

Nah...she was fishing all right but I don't think she had an intended target going in. At this point she already had Abe on the line but was looking to throw him back and catch a bigger fish. She obviously thought she'd found the prize winning catch when she learned more info about TA from her friends after meeting him and especially after he brought her to the banquet and into the executive area during the speeches. Although she did still keep Abe in the bucket for a while...just in case.

MOO

Jodi had to borrow a dress from Sky Hughes just to conform to her new environment for the night so if she was fishing, I bet she didn't anticipate hooking herself a real mover and shaker in the company that quickly.

 

[Kamille]

From what I've seen of the crime photos, that looks like Travis' room.

That's what I wondered. Not to mention that it appears someone else is taking the picture. And no one has come forward to say that they took it.

 

[Val1]

I can't believe a juror didn't ask what CMJA's reaction was when he did that. Granted Nurmi and Willmott probably wouldn't have let it get asked out loud, but at least it would've been on the record once all the records are all unsealed in 2525.

I don't think he was allowed to say, the DT and JSS disallowed his testimony about her saying she had "magic" in her panties when he commented on her thong, her manipulation of TA, and he wasn't allowed to talk about her "dabbling" in Mormonism either iirc.

What he did get out according to the tweets, was that he was able to just slide his hands down inside her pants and that they carried on passionately for 10-15 minutes before he pulled back(they were in a parking lot...).

 

[Val1]

She had them made for herself.....after the murder, presumably. Look at how cheap they are, and TA wasn't at all about low quality: he projected classiness even in his closet!

In her journals, JA goes on about how she wants to start a t-shirt business. TA, trying to be supportive and get her employed so she could pay him back might have said, hey sounds like a plan, maybe I'll get some made for my blog...

 

[Princess of Oz]

MeeBee, I just read your siggy for the first time. I have manage to wake up my husband, get the dog barking and spew water all over myself. I love it!

 

[Wing Ding]

That's how AA and JA got talking, she somehow was "magically" sitting just a couple chairs down from him on the "executive only" row, oh and noone was seated between them.

Huh. I didn't know that either. I wonder if she snuck in?

 

[I Object!]

As a court reporter, I will attest that, yes, mistakes happen -- although not in my transcripts -- so never waive signature, always request to read and sign.

I was just reading a local news story where the court reporter was married to the senior partner of the wc defense firm employing the attorney taking the claimant's deposition. Naturally, after a dissatisfying outcome, she claims her testimony was not captured accurately. Whether it was or was not, there's a valid conflict of interest on the part of the court reporter. Who the bleep at that defense firm thought it was a good idea to use the senior partner's wife?

 

[Val1]

Nah...she was fishing all right but I don't think she had an intended target going in. At this point she already had Abe on the line but was looking to throw him back and catch a bigger fish. She obviously thought she'd found the prize winning catch when she learned more info about TA from her friends after meeting him and especially after he brought her to the banquet and into the executive area during the speeches. Although she did still keep Abe in the bucket for a while...just in case.

MOO

Yea, I'm sure she had a few on the line... she signed up with PPL in March 2006. Plenty of time to find out who the movers and shakers were and as she said in her "secret" testimony, it was "a great opportunity to make a lot of money, passive income".

 

[katydid23]

I think there was only about 15 minutes left in the court day anyway and obviously JW wasn't willing or able to move past this question with DR and no one had the audio of the interview there in the courtroom, so JSS probably just told them to bring it in with them tomorrow and ended the day.

MOO

I am really curious to see which way JW goes at her tomorrow. It won't be as effective now, if she tries to accuse her of lying in the interview. Deanna is ready for it, and she will have solid responses. And from what we have seen so far of the wording, it is way too ambiguous and vague to qualify as a direct question of any kind.

JW cannot afford to get out in the weeds on that, while ignoring DR's full on denial of witness number 1's accusations about the altercation. I am sure the jury is waiting to see what the DT is going to do with that. The DT is hinging a whole lot of their mitigation upon the fantastic claims made by witness number one. I don't think they can hope to damage DR's credibility because of some vaguely worded question in the pre-trial interview. Deanna told the TRUTH on the stand about being intimate with TA. So it is a losing battle to try and paint her out to be a liar by saying ' I don't Know' when they ask if she is surprised to know how many women TA was sleeping with.

They seem to be trying to make the jury see Deanna as being ='the same as' witness number 1 in terms of credibility. LOL That will be a real uphill battle. There is no comparison. First of all, Deanna is there in flesh and blood, hand on the bible, looking them in the eyes. She is opening herself up to examination, cross examination and jury questions, while under oath. Witness #1 wont even allow his name to be uttered.

 

[Princess of Oz]

Wait, didn't she testify that she got melted chocolates and Spiderman underwear? And this?

:floorlaugh:

I'm dying over here. Sweet Georgia peaches!!