Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 31

[rose222]

Exactly! This same man who would fly off and body slam her at a drop of the hat just lets her take his ring without resorting to violence?? The same man who had his BMW trashed by her who didn't resort to violence?? The same man that even while she stabbed him over and over didn't lay a finger on her?? I don't think he ever hit her. Heck the man didn't even hit her while she took his life, not even to save his own life. I hope this rings a bell in someone's head.

How I wish Juan could say exactly this during closing statements.

 

[Frigga]

Apparently the judge told the jury to disregard that speaking objection. Of course, the jury won't disregard it--they'll wonder what the hell he's talking about since they can see perfectly well from the texts that she took it without his permission.

Not only without his permission but without his knowledge! His response is anything BUT an abusers.

 

[Wizzy]

From the perspective of trial watchers, we can see the genuine evil that she has perpetuated in the pursuit of the destruction of Travis Alexander. But will the jury get that? There is so much they don't know. The blackmail regarding the second degree murder plea. The twitter account. The blog. The supporters. The manipulation of all things having to do with this trial both while representing herself and not. So much more I'm sure that I'm forgetting at the moment.

All the jury is seeing is a woman with an obvious mental illness/personality disorder who stalked and killed a man for no apparent reason other than she was obsessed with him, he wasn't that into her, so she killed him and then lied about it. Which is what you might consider a person with a mental disorder to do, blame the victim. So will there be at least one on the jury who doesn't think a person with a mental illness/personality disorder belongs on death row? I sure hope they think more along the lines of "what person currently on death row isn't there due to some kind of mental illness/personality disorder?"

I hope there is a psychologist on the jury and that they make it to the final cut. To explain to the jury why they can make the decision for the DP even though she may have a mental/personality disorder.

MOO

I agree. Also some on the jury might have in the back of their minds----- they (TA and JA) were still having a sexual relationship. Calling, texting, emailing, etc.

 

[DebinGA]

Here's the 3 hr. WS/Trisha interview of Chris Hughes in 2013:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/websle...as-true-crime-radio-sunday-night-8-pm-eastern

Around the 30 min. mark, CH says that one evening in Jan 2007, JA arrived unannounced to their home crying and complaining of TA's refusal to commit to her. Here's my note of what he said-she said to them: "I got into all his accounts and forwarded all emails from other women to me"...

This was only 3 mos. after they'd met, and before even JA claimed they were "official". No boundaries at all.

 

[bettybaby00]

Spycraft...

Thank you for sharing your experiences. Although I'm not personally connected to DV, I believe what you've stated will be simple common sense for the jurors. To believe that someone is in a DV situation and would then actively seek to re-engage that person after successfully escaping is beyond ludicrous. Yet that's exactly what the DTs fraud-perts would have us believe, b/c in their opinion a DV victim is too ignorant to even realize they're a victim



The double standard for woman and the DP is tragic, but hopefully in this case, the premeditation , stalking, and quite frankly terrorizing her victim, along with her complete lack of remorse will be too overwhelming to ignore.

I really feel this jury will get it. Their questions to DeMarte will likely offer insight into where their heads are at.

 

[Nali87]

I agree. Also some on the jury might have in the back of their minds----- they (TA and JA) were still having a sexual relationship. Calling, texting, emailing, etc.

How do you mean? Why would it be important?

 

[Kamille]

Tweet from JA from the Courtroom:

Jodi Arias Updates @JodiAnnArias · 4m 4 minutes ago


So glad TA's lies about #jodiarias were so ludicrous and went so far. Otherwise, they might actually be believable.

Well so now we know how the cross of this witness is going to go. Not that we didn't already think that but I guess now we know. Travis lied to EVERYONE about JA. While contemporaneously hiding her like a dirty little secret. Okay...got it. SMH

:notgood:

MOO

 

[pocketaccent]

Mentally ill ethereal young goddess no more for Miss Arias. How about mean evil manipulative promiscuous lying stalker killer? Man, I love Dr DeMarte and Juan combo. The best thing that happened to Travis seeking justice.

 

[kolokolo]

If the jurors believe she stoled Mr. Alexander's ring they will put two and two together and believe she stoled the gun from her Grandparents. Top it off with the tire slashing, stalking, lying, murder.

JMHO .... The jurors will figure out or already have how EVIL this murderer is. She can suffer in silence on Death Row.

 

[Snoopy1]

Nope, still didn't work for me. Booooo

I am seeing the photos in your post ... maybe hit the Refresh button and see if that works ?

Anyone ?

:seeya:

 

[Val1]

I bet she took the ring to pretend he had proposed. What a nut.

I wonder who she showed it off to, she had told her dad that she was expecting to marry TA.

Did TA ever get it back(or was it pawned for $699)?

 

[rose222]

I am seeing the photos in your post ... maybe hit the Refresh button and see if that works ?

Anyone ?

:seeya:

I can see them just fine, DGC. Thanks! :seeya:

 

[Wing Ding]

I'm way behind here but I wanted to say that Geffner and Fonseca don't actually interview anyone, they just form opinions based on emails, text messages and affidavit's done by someone else.

Because by asking questions, you sometimes get answers you don't want to hear. That's not me talking, that's Joey Jackson during the first trial.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

If I were a juror, I'd want to know if having BPD means being incapable of feeling remorse. If the answer is yes, JA gets off the hook for a lot. But, not for lying to the jury herself and for trashing Travis rather than at least taking responsibility, even if she didn't feel remorseful.

I think the evidence has shown she has no remorse because she is not remorseful and feels justified in murdering Travis. I believe she is remorseless because she felt entitled to murder a man that no longer wanted her. That's totally different than being unable to have remorse.

I would see her as someone who has no redeeming qualities and her attitude would weigh heavy. The BPD would not weigh into my decision. It is a disorder which many people have and most do not resort to murder.

Death row has many inmates that are psychopaths or have BPD or another personality disorder of some kind.

I don't think one juror is sitting there looking at JA for months who thinks she is mentally ill. Imo, they know she was very cognizant of everything she did and why she did it.

IMO

 

[bsk]

I wonder how many sidebars today and yesterday have included Juan saying, "Your Honor, they opened the door when they...." I'm going to guess pretty much all of them.

 

[Magdalyn]

Nope, still didn't work for me. Booooo

Have you tried disconnecting from your internet connection, then reconnecting? The no picture thing sometimes happens to me on FB, and the disconnecting and reconnecting sometimes does the trick. HTH! eace:

 

[Wing Ding]

Originally Posted by Channing2101
Why is all the spying and slashed tires stuff allowed in this trial, but it wasn't allowed in the last trial?

Anybody know?

I'm eight pages behind at the moment so I'm sure this question has already been answered, but if not...

I think the tire slashing, ring stealing and light turning on/off by Jodi is all hearsay evidence. Hearsay evidence was not allowed in the first trial, but it apparently is allowed in this re-trial.

edited to add: Oh, and I guess the defense opened some doors for Juan to bring that hearsay evidence in. (thanks everyone for that info)

 

[ohiogirl]

What I want to know is whether all of this alternate evidence was made available to the DT "experts". Because if it was...shame on them. Well shame on them anyway for their skewed version of things but if they had this info? No excuse. And if they didn't? They should be livid with the DT for not providing everything they needed to form an "opinion" and refuse to return for the rebuttal phase unless under subpoena and as a hostile witness.


MOO

That's not how it works. The defense "experts" want to be kept in the dark about anything that would harm their testimony in favor of the defendant. Otherwise, they won't get paid.

 

[Snoopy1]

Thanks - tried that too and no go.

Guess Im just not meant to see em.... lol

Have you tried disconnecting from your internet connection, then reconnecting? The no picture thing sometimes happens to me on FB, and the disconnecting and reconnecting sometimes does the trick. HTH! eace:

 

[Val1]

Apparently the judge told the jury to disregard that speaking objection. Of course, the jury won't disregard it--they'll wonder what the hell he's talking about since they can see perfectly well from the texts that she took it without his permission.

You can bet the DT will try to make it out like it was really for JA after all.... that's why TA said he wasn't angry.:/