Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 31

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Didn't they also say Dr D was totally incorrect with her BPD diagnosis? Are they going to thank her for it now seeing as they say it is mitigating?

Nurmi said in his opening that that jury would hear two doctors testify that CMJA has BPD and the only one who has is Dr D. Dr G went with bi polar based on things her friends and family said, not nothing he noticed.

It seems to me, none of JA's expert Doc and pseudo-Doc and MA witnesses has supported a BPD diagnosis, which surely presents a problem for the DT since BPD is supposed to be a mitigator according to them!
 
I think of the Alexander Family often. Stephen is the one who concerns me the most. I hope he is doing better. I wish them well as they begin their journey of healing. I don't think it will begin until this phase of Trial ends. I hope they can find a positive to pursue from this in memory of their Brother. They have endured so much thru their lives and this Trial. Too much.
 
AZL, has the defense introduced a "legal" diagnosis of PTSD? Samuels testified to it in the trial, but I don't know whether legally he could offer a "diagnosis" or just an "opinion". If there has been no "diagnosis" of PTSD, then could the judge strike it from the list of mitigating factors for the jury to consider?

This isn't like "she's young" where there are shades of cray --oops I mean gray involved - either she's diagnosed with it or she's not. If you could list it as a mitigating factor without a valid diagnosis, then hell why not list every entry in the DSM and let some juror pick one that he or she thinks fits?

The difference between "diagnosis" and "opinion" is irrelevant to this case. They have presented evidence that she has PTSD. The state has presented evidence that she does not have PTSD. Both sides will be permitted to argue this issue in closing.

There are no shades of gray at all for the "age 27" mitigator. :) She's either 27 or she's not. But for PTSD experts can and very often do disagree.
 
It upsets me to see so much negativity in the posts today, disagreeing between members etc. This case has everyone on edge, all riled up and I worry that at the end, if she's sentanced to LWOP that so many people see that as a loss. DP or LWOP, really makes no difference, she's never walking out, ever. I think we all need to accept that and focus on the one thing each and every one of us has wanted from the start. Travis' name to be cleared. And it has been. Between yesterday and today, I can honestly say the sentance doesn't matter to me anymore. Juan won today, the family won today, justice was served today. Her team will try to dispute it. Her experts will be back to blab more BS. But it doesn't matter. We all saw the real truth today and for me, knowing hOw much it destroyed Jodi to have all her BS made public, I'm good. DP or LWOP, I don't care. We've already won.

I'm not upset and do understand many want her to get the DP. I did as well up until part yesterday and today. Today was a victory. For all the reasons you stated. I'm good with whatever the Jury decides again for the reasons you stated. Yet if she gets Death I will celebrate. LWOP I'm still going to feel satisfied. I just want her to go. Away.
 
It seems to me, none of JA's expert Doc and pseudo-Doc and MA witnesses has supported a BPD diagnosis, which surely presents a problem for the DT since BPD is supposed to be a mitigator according to them!

They are relying on Dr. D's testimony, it seems.
 
See here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-of-Jodi-Arias-Day-31&p=11463270#post11463270

What I was responding to your post here. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-of-Jodi-Arias-Day-31&p=11463270#post11463270

I don't think anyone ever has mentioned bi polar EVER, but you did in your post. That's ALL I responding too.

Dr G(effner) has mentioned bi polar in his testimony by way of friends and family thinking she had it.

The defence said two doctors would testify that CMJA had BPD.

The only doctor who has is Dr D(e Marte).

I never said that Dr D(e Marte) said that CMJA had bi polar.

Which is why I'm confused at your post to me.

Off to make dinner, have a nice evening.
 
So trivial but I think it's what is keeping me up tonight LOL What excuse could Jodi ever give as to why she had that ring??!! I wanna know her answer! Yet Travis's response in that text/email whatever is telling. As telling as that final night. I think Travis responded as a victim of abuse would. Say or do anything to keep everything calm. I'm sure Travis was privy to outbursts that we will never know of. IMO.
 
See here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-of-Jodi-Arias-Day-31&p=11463270#post11463270

What I was responding to your post here. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-of-Jodi-Arias-Day-31&p=11463270#post11463270

I don't think anyone ever has mentioned bi polar EVER, but you did in your post. That's ALL I responding too.

I'm stepping in as arbitrator. An honest mistake was made: it doesn't matter who made it. As far as I can tell, you are probably both saying the same thing; the facts from both posters are likely correct. To summarize: Dr. D=Borderline, Dr. G=Bipolar (not a diagnosis, but second-hand), 2nd DT Dr.=apparently no diagnosis, but definitely no mention of Borderline.
That completes my task as arbitrator (let's hope I didn't goof, too, lol).
 
I know I misunderstood your post too My-Future-Ex-Husband. My sincere apologies.
 
I too am a bit concerned that the jury might be sympathetic, upon hearing that she has a mental disorder, which presents as explosive anger, and devaluation of idealized partners.

However, I am thrilled that the true EVILNESS of Jodi was revealed to the jury and the world. Whether she gets the DP or LWOP, is less important to me, than Travis being cleared from all the vile slime the DT tried to heap on him. JMO
 
I feel instantly nauseous thinking about Nurmi cross examining Dr. DeMarte tomorrow. I t w i l l b e s o s l o w s o o o s l o w.

RSBM

I'm actually looking forward to his cross. She can more than handle herself as evidence by...

Willmott: You wouldn't want to do any further investigation as to why he [Travis] might say something like that, right?
Demarte: I can't do that. He's not alive.
Willmott: We would want to look at, then, behaviors and investigate maybe whether or not there is any true meaning behind these words, right?
Demarte: I couldn't do that because he's not alive.
Willmott: So when somebody is not alive, you can't get any information from them. Is that what you mean?
Demarte: From them directly, that's correct, because they're not alive.

Thanks to my-future-ex-husband for having this little gem in your signature!

Also, trying to discredit Dr, d for lack of experience wont be overly effective either considering the experts they've hired to testify lie on the murderess's behalf.

Dr. #1 was completely taken in by the murderess, and even after he realized she had lied on the tests, didn't think it was relevant to retest her :facepalm: this failure was relied upon by all the rest of their experts as a basis for their "opinions"

Expert #2 had so much bias against DV perpetrators men, she couldn't even grudgingly admit that just maybe the murderess's violent, brutal slaughter of Travis made him a victim.

Dr. #3 has such an embarrassing track record of failed "expert" testimony that one presiding judge told the jury to disregard his testimony.

Expert Flake #4 is another example of how deep the DT had to dig before they found someone to agree with their DV/emotional abuse construct that it came as no surprise to find out how incestuous the relationship is between all 4 hired frauds....oh and Wilma can get thrown into that cesspool of questionable alliances as well.

All and all, I don't think they will be able to do any damage. Over the last 2 days, Dr. Ds testimony revealed just how arrogant, the stalking, vicious, lying, murderer really is, and there wasn't a shred of remorse to be found in any other the info they have learned.

Yup, bring it on....and I can't wait for the juror questions either :)
 
I'm stepping in as arbitrator. An honest mistake was made: it doesn't matter who made it. As far as I can tell, you are probably both saying the same thing; the facts from both posters are likely correct. To summarize: Dr. D=Borderline, Dr. G=Bipolar (not a diagnosis, but second-hand), 2nd DT Dr.=apparently no diagnosis, but definitely no mention of Borderline.
That completes my task as arbitrator (let's hope I didn't goof, too, lol).

Sweet. Blessings
 
I'm stepping in as arbitrator. An honest mistake was made: it doesn't matter who made it. As far as I can tell, you are probably both saying the same thing; the facts from both posters are likely correct. To summarize: Dr. D=Borderline, Dr. G=Bipolar (not a diagnosis, but second-hand), 2nd DT Dr.=apparently no diagnosis, but definitely no mention of Borderline.
That completes my task as arbitrator (let's hope I didn't goof, too, lol).

It's odd, isn't it, that no DT "expert" has spoken up for BPD when that is supposed to be a mitigating factor. They all got so busy covering each other's asses with PTSD and DV, they ignored BPD altogether. I don't think either Dr. G or Dr. F were even licensed to give a mental health diagnosis in Arizona, and their agenda was to defend ALV rather than give an expert perspective. All smoke and mirrors.
 
Looking back at Alice LaV. I point and laugh. Good god that was a disgrace. I have to find something to laugh at to get thru this.
 
Night all. Off to check on a few other threads of interest before retiring. It was a really great day today. I hope the Alexander Family felt some measure of comfort.
 
For those of you feeling like the jury will take sympathy for her and blame it on mental illness, don't worry. Before we know it, Nurmi will be back up, with Fonseca and Geffner, both of whom will do their parts to convince the jury that jodi is sweet, innocent and that TA was the bad guy. Then the sympathy they might have felt today will be long gone :happydance:

Ps--- I feel no sympathy. All this is doing is showing me she's a cold blooded killer who knew she had to cover her tracks and clean up after herself.
Since Juan started his case (and maybe beginning with his cross of Geffner), I don't see how the jury can have anything but contempt for Jodi.

Nurmi can play word games all he wants from now on, but that will only prove to be an exercise in futility. And I think the jury knows it.
 
From WAT:

Wild About Trial @WildAboutTrial · 14s 14 seconds ago




TA says he's afraid JA will kill herself.

I sure Travis did whatever he could to keep the peace with her so she didn't hurt herself (or worse) and have that guilt on his conscience.

Too bad he didn't grab any suicide prevention manuals at a mall kiosk to help her with her problem.
 
I’ve read many posts where folks have, understandably, wondered why Travis would have let Arias in his home after all that had happened, and why he didn’t do anything preventatively.
A few of my late night, can't sleep, listening to the Oregon rain thoughts:

1. From my own experience as a DV/SA advocate, I can say that only rarely did men come to the center for any kind of help or advice. On the rare occasions, he would come alone, embarrassed, openly humiliated and reluctant to cast blame on his partner or admit he was being mistreated. As an advocate, we could hear the potential danger in the events he relayed to us, but the men would downplay it in a kind of “I can probably handle it myself” attitude. It’s only recently society has accepted and spoken loudly about domestic abuse toward men. Men have always been considered the abusers, not the abused. Women would usually come with a support person/group/family to corroborate the incident(s) and offer help. They were instantly believed and embraced by a caring staff offering a wide range of help and support. When a man would come in to our advocacy center, I'm ashamed to admit there were certain immediate and likely subconscious responses from many workers: check the doors, approach with care, insure the safety of any women currently being sheltered in the building, phones in hand, looking around for male colleagues should something happen. It’s unfortunate and thankfully slowly changing.

2. The few times I accompanied a man through the legal system to obtain a restraining order, he was scrutinized in a way women weren’t. The clerk would respond with surprise, the court personnel would ask where my client was, as they were looking toward the man. The judge would ask many more questions and in more depth about the incident(s) involved in an order request. Almost always he was asked if he was sure this is what he wanted to do, something not asked of women seeking the same.

3. Coming from the perspective of a victim of assault, I knew my perpetrator and knew of his violent and creepy past, his potential, his threats toward me and my family. I saw him as a punk who threatened, who bullied, who loved attention. I had known him since he was a baby and despite his verbal and physical creep factors, could not see him perpetrating the kind of horror on me that he ultimately did. I let him in my home. I lent him money on occasion. I attended family gatherings on occasion with him present. I didn’t go out of my way to see or speak to him, but neither did I run the other way, lock the door and reject him. Even when he was younger I kept my own children away from him, “rearranging” family celebrations and such so that we stayed separately and had as little time together as possible, and always heavily supervised by both my husband and me.

Perhaps because I knew a lot of his history and what he was capable of, I did NOT want to be on his bad side. To keep him happy, through allowing these few safe social exchanges, seemed appropriate and much better option than angering him or ostracizing him. I always had that ick factor feeling when he was around, but placating him seemed the best way to handle him.

That is, until it wasn’t. Had he knocked on the door the evening he attacked me, I probably would have let him in even though it was late and I was alone. Again, I didn’t want to reject him and appear frightened and until then I had been able to pacify any anger with words, money, or cookies. But that night he didn’t knock on the door, but instead broke through the window into my bedroom. How I wish I had done so many things differently, listened to that little voice in my head warning me, taken measures months earlier to keep him away, installed security………it’s endless if you go the “what if” route, and it doesn’t change the outcome.

4. I believe Travis had no idea, nor did he have any perspective to even believe Jodi was capable of more than being a giant, persistent, stalking, tire slashing pest. Yes, he could have asked for a restraining order but in this case it would have probably only angered Jodi more and made her even more resolute to destroy him. He could have locked his doors more securely, refused her entrance. But why would he have feared this kind of outcome? It sounds as if he had “talked her down” many times, listened to her cry for hours, forgiven her repeatedly, and had been the brunt of her manipulation. But again, why would he have feared her next step was murder?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
175
Guests online
2,259
Total visitors
2,434

Forum statistics

Threads
600,991
Messages
18,116,705
Members
230,995
Latest member
truelove
Back
Top