Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 3

[daisydomino]

I think you are all correct that the problem of juror 17 was a misunderstanding regarding this jury or last year's jury. Very often Dr. Drew airs from NYC and on his Facebook page, all times are given in EDST. That is where the promo for juror 17 is announced as made at 2:45 pm up at the header of his entries. It is not qualified by time zone nor did he mention one when he tried to clear this up on his program. I was listening that night. So you are free to assume it matches all his other time listings--or not.

The fact is: nobody knows what happened. We are stuck speculating until someone who knows what really happened tells someone who can report what happened factually.

http://www.onthemedia.org/story/breaking-news-consumers-handbook-pdf/

 

[bznbear]

@ericksonvision: Flores had stated Travis Alexander was shot FIRST. Yesterday, Dr. Horn said he was shot LAST. That fact is the crux of #JodiArias defense.

I thought JA was in a fog, so how would the DT know which came first?

 

[jbc]

I thought JA was in a fog, so how would the DT know which came first?

Jodi says she remembers that she shot him first, as Travis was lunging at her.
Only after the shot does the fog roll in.
When the fog lifts, she's driving in the desert with blood on her clothes and hands.
Only then does she surmise she killed Travis.

It's fun writing this because it feels like I'm writing a fiction novel.

 

[Tuba]

The reliable J. DeMarte made clear that Arias had neither PTSD nor dissociative amnesia, she stated it just that clearly. By contrast, we know the dog's dinner Dr. R. Samuels made of the PTSD test. He never retested after learning the original was premised on the two intruders lie. What I never liked was the analogy of lions & bears, in fact it makes me chafe. If you commit a murder, your actions are obviously directed outward, toward and against your victim. Further, she was following a plan. If you witness a murder & are threatened yourself, in fear & with an urge to protect yourself, your reaction takes you inward, you shrink. Fear & efforts to escape harm are stressful. Any immediate stress she felt from slaughtering Travis would have come from the need to clean up with an eye on the clock. And to get away. Just outer directed practical moves to avoid detection. Her recollection and her answers do not derive from being involved with something like a lion versus something like a bear.

 

[bznbear]

How did Travis know JA the photographer would morph into Norman Bates before she ordered him, weapon in hand, to sit on the shower floor?

ITA, which makes what she did to a trusting soul even more heinous. She wanted to see the fear in Travis' eyes; she wanted to him to know what was about to happen was going to be brutal.

 

[bznbear]

I think Nurmi is trying to show that Jodi didn't become violent at other opportune moments and then something happened (camera shot of light which he will claim proves the camera was not in her control) and she was forced to "defend" herself at that time.... this is where I think he's trying to head.

She's already been found guilty of premeditated murder, yes? Self defense is no longer an option for these jurors to consider, IIRC. So, what does this have to do with mitigating factors? Sorry if this has been covered as I'm way behind.

 

[bznbear]

Condoms too...just in case they "attack" her.
I do find it amazing that her decision process when confronted with a male is: gun, knife, or condom?

Maybe the gun and knife are in case they don't attack her.

 

[Tuba]

Well, it would have to be something threatening that Travis said, if Nurmi was correct on Thursday. He was demonstrating Arias pointing the gun at a Travis seated in the shower.

I should add, not to show how she might have threatened him. Instead, to show the trajectory of the bullet from the gun in hand to the hole in his head.

 

[bznbear]

JA claimed at trial she dropped the camera, it bounced on the mat, and TA angrily "stepped out" of the shower and body-slammed her. She hadn't even run to the closet for TA's nonexistent gun when she claimed she took the shower pic.

Ah, yes, I remember this story now. Sorry, but I'm in a fog.

 

[daisydomino]

I'm back to gas cans here because I remember her buying one gas can at the Salinas Walmart. She borrowed two from Darryl Brewer. My memory is terrible, so I had to look it up.

It was only one. ETA: I got a screen cap.


I did find a good WS post that enumerates all of the receipts in evidence:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...e-monetary-transactions&p=8854668#post8854668

I re-watched Juan taking JA through the gas receipts and prices per gallon to show that she had three cans and never returned the one she bought at Walmart. This is a thing of beauty, starting around 52 minutes in.

[video=youtu;4BaLE7MiXvI]http://youtu.be/4BaLE7MiXvI?t=52m42s[/video]

Poor Amanda Webb, the Walmart employee. Can you imagine having to pick up and go back to Arizona to testify again? Just for working at a Walmart that sold Jodi Arias a gas can! Grr. If you read this Ms. Webb: everyone who wants justice for Travis—especially the Alexander family, I'm sure—is really grateful for your testimony again last Thursday.

 

[bznbear]

I want to give a big collective THANKS to everyone!!! My "thanks" button refuses to work today, and refreshing is not working.

 

[bznbear]

Forgery is the process of making, adapting, or imitating objects, statistics, or documents with the intent to deceive or make usually large amounts of money by selling the forged item. Copies, studio replicas, and reproductions are not considered forgeries, though they may later become forgeries through knowing and willful misrepresentations. (wikipedia.org/wiki/Forgery)

According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, to "plagiarize" means

• to steal and pass off (the ideas and words of another) as one's own
• to use (another's production) without crediting the source
• to commit literary theft
• to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source

In other words, plagiarism is an act of fraud. It involves both stealing someone else's work and lying about it afterward.


May or may not be considered plagiarism, unclear and depends:

- Re-creating a visual work in a different medium (for example: making a painting that closely resembles another person’s photograph). (plagiarism.org)

IIRC, JA actually got into some hot water over one of her "repros" during the first trial, but I don't remember specifics.

 

[daisydomino]

Well, it would have to be something threatening that Travis said, if Nurmi was correct on Thursday. He was demonstrating Arias pointing the gun at a Travis seated in the shower.

I should add, not to show how she might have threatened him. Instead, to show the trajectory of the bullet from the gun in hand to the hole in his head.

I'm really curious to see what Nurmi was getting at when he did that with Flores on Thursday. I guess that whole linebacker pose demonstration from the criminal trial is out the window now? Remember how JA so carefully turned her head and leaned forward to explain that trajectory? What's going on now?

 

[bznbear]

We keep saying the jury HAS to.... Yes, technically they do have to accept prior verdicts.

But they're human, and being asked to decide whether or not to put someone to death. Residual doubt may not be allowed, but clearly Nurmi is hoping for doubters.

Exactly. They can't unconvict her, but they can not vote for the DP.

 

[Truth Detector]

Ah, yes, I remember this story now. Sorry, but I'm in a fog.

Blame it on the hippocampus.

 

[bznbear]

Aother juror biting the dust or maybe a family emergency that is out of their control? Somehow this just flows with the Arias trial. This murderer has had more days of leniency than I have ever heard about. Every day she is in jail is one less day of prison. I mean, for one of us a night in jail would be a lifetime. But for JA? Nah.....this is a picnic compared to what she is facing.

I think of JA as chaos - everything/one she comes in contact with is disrupted, spun off its axis so to speak. Think of her as a tempest, blowing all those around her off course. JMHO

 

[bznbear]

I still think it could be the answer. Just because a formal announcement had not happened, does not mean the information was top secret. Leaks happen.

Though, I am not sure the juror issue is why court ended early. I think that was for an unrelated issue--and I have no clue what it could be. We may never know what happened that was "beyond the court's control."

Could one of the Dr. Drew show personnel be a CI for the DT? Someone who had inside knowledge of the guest list prior to release, and called Nurmi?

 

[fifteen89]

I re-watched Juan taking JA through the gas receipts and prices per gallon to show that she had three cans and never returned the one she bought at Walmart. This is a thing of beauty, starting around 52 minutes in.

[snipped by me]

Oh what fun it is to walk down memory lane, eh? I didn't watch the whole thing but it sure reminds me of how Jodi seemed to feel she was 'holding her own' in the sparring with Martinez. Yet she wants the jury to believe "men like him and Travis" make her brain "scramble". Sorry, but you can't have it both ways, Jodi.

 

[Foghorn]

[snipped by me]

Oh what fun it is to walk down memory lane, eh? I didn't watch the whole thing but it sure reminds me of how Jodi seemed to feel she was 'holding her own' in the sparring with Martinez. Yet she wants the jury to believe "men like him and Travis" make her brain "scramble". Sorry, but you can't have it both ways, Jodi.

Ann Stafford (SprayCanAnn) has put together a three-part series of Juan dismantling the pedophilia claim. If you really want to see Juan scramble her brain--they are a must see! (They are about 10 minutes each.)

Part One - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHDBFaGy4aQ
Part Two - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kMQ95JNIBI
Part Three - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ-8TR6UNnU

 

[cindymac]

Forgery is the process of making, adapting, or imitating objects, statistics, or documents with the intent to deceive or make usually large amounts of money by selling the forged item. Copies, studio replicas, and reproductions are not considered forgeries, though they may later become forgeries through knowing and willful misrepresentations. (wikipedia.org/wiki/Forgery)

According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, to "plagiarize" means

• to steal and pass off (the ideas and words of another) as one's own
• to use (another's production) without crediting the source
• to commit literary theft
• to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source

In other words, plagiarism is an act of fraud. It involves both stealing someone else's work and lying about it afterward.


May or may not be considered plagiarism, unclear and depends:

- Re-creating a visual work in a different medium (for example: making a painting that closely resembles another person’s photograph). (plagiarism.org)

I agree that Arias' pictures are not forged, but they are indeed plagiarized. She has closely copied other people's ideas and creations, and by not crediting the originals, she is allowing people to believe that they originated in her head, which they did not. Or more specifically, presenting their imagination, ideas and artistic visions as her own - and that's the very essence of plagiarism.

For instance, if someone sees her pictures and thinks, "that's a striking image", or "that's a clever idea", she gets the credit despite the fact that the images and ideas are not her own. And as a result, is considered a far better artist than she really is.

Personally, I don't think she's an artist at all, let alone a good one. To my mind, originality - from vision to execution - is the defining characteristic of a good artist. Arias has yet to show that she can have an original idea, let alone work with anything but colored pencils.