Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 35

[Kamille]

Stealing his ring...

And his knife and gun

 

[T-4-2]

 

[MeeBee]

<Mike Watkiss has more credibility to me than Steve Krafft, who remains adamant that it was foolish for the state to re-try the penalty phase. He has consistently stated that there's NO WAY that JA will get the DP.

Very true about Steve Krafft.

 

[Kamille]

I'm open to hearing opinions that Dworkin was a bad idea for JM overall. You're right, Twitter conveys not so very much.

The two tweeters you cite, though, IMO are in the pack of least informed and sloppiest of those covering the trial. I don't give their take much weight.

On the other hand, I've never seen JM blunder on trial strategy and I don't believe he did so today. My guesses about his thinking could well be entirely wrong, but I don't believe he erred in calling Dworkin. To the contrary.

Nope. And JM needed to solidify his testimony to prove that there was nothing being "hidden" in the original trial for any future appellate questions. Now the fact that no one asked him to run another check on the hard drive the day before his testimony with newer and better equipment and report those findings directly to the DT, giving them a chance to bring it out on cross just shows he's a little slimy himself.

No big deal though. The phone testimony was worth it to me. And the additional deleted *advertiser censored* still means nothing from a communal computer.

MOO

 

[My-Future-Ex-Husband]

Answering My-Future-Ex-Husband from yesterday:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-of-Jodi-Arias-Day-34&p=11484163#post11484163

Smart Pen example:

http://store.livescribe.com/smartpe...edition.html?gclid=COL8jMen3cMCFQqFaQodjqIAQQ


In JSKS' courtroom the user would need to exercise caution not to activate its audio recording feature in violation of her super-secret anti-audio/video recording order.

Thank you, Truth.

We all want one now, lol.

 

[Kamille]

This is JMO and please no stones anyone, as I love Juan and I know he is trying his best, but today is a good example of where I think he gets caught up in the details without helping us understand what we just heard.

We have enough people who were present in the trial to also say this. The courtroom tweeters were present and Ziggy even was hoping it was clearer to the jurors.

Juan knows his stuff and he digs into the details to prove things, but the 1 thing I have constantly wished he would do better is hammer home in simple lamens terms what the main points were. I feel he sometimes leaves me (and the jury) left to figure out what we just heard.

At the end of all the good points, he somehow needs to summarize for us in simple terms what we just heard, instead of assuming we all caught it.

As further proof that he lacks in this area, we have had people here say constantly....."just wait till Juan bring up so + so" OR "just wait till Juan gets to his closing".

Im sorry, but NO, the jury cannot wait. It has to be done while the witnesses are testifying. It needs to be a simpler summary for us.
Especially on days like today when the subject matter is very complex.

With that said, Im glad he is the prosecuter to fight the DT on this case. Another prosecuter may have not been able to do as good as he is doing. I just hope the jury is getting it.

Not an easy task when the DT is objecting and calling sidebars every time you open your mouth and the judge is sustaining those objections on the innuendo that you are trying to relay.

MOO

 

[ILikeToBendPages]

I think JM knows all there is know about JA and her dirty tricks, and waaaay more than we do. Her Helio text lie is part of a larger pattern of intercepts and redirects that JM has known about before the guilt phase even got underway.

The difference now is how much more is being allowed in. Must in one way be an embarrassment of riches for JM. So much to choose from to use against her. He's an incredibly effective editor of evidence, and has narrowed down to just handfuls of pieces; all incredibly damning and revealing.

And you have the t shirt and booty call shorts she took a photo of after she murdered Travis. The slave shirt she said Travis made for her to wear. She told the last jury that she wanted a souvenir. After the fact things don't carry much weight in real world.

noun
1.
a usually small and relatively inexpensive article given, kept, or purchased as a reminder of a place visited, an occasion, etc.; memento.
2.
a memory.

 

[Val1]

Also, I think these jurors (or at least some of them) have a great eye for detail. I base that on many of the juror questions. With an eye for detail, an in-depth explanation of each and every point is not necessary. Hopefully the jury "gets it" by now. That is if they didn't already have a grasp weeks ago.

BBM - Hopefully not to the extend that they expect all the t's to be crossed and i's dotted, like some of us(okay I), would like.:innocent:

ie. proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not involve proof to an absolute certainty, it is not proof beyond any doubt, neither is it an imaginary or frivolous doubt

 

[Truth Detector]

The defense, todays witness, testified in the trial didn't he? Testified that he found no *advertiser censored*? Just like the states witness?

Yes, he did.

 

[RickshawFan]

Yeah, but what other reason would Juan have for bringing up this text in particular (that many of us have always thought was suspicious anyway) and then making the suggestions he did and then suggesting Jodi changed the sent from name at the top?

That was clearly what he was getting at.

I wish we could get the forensic linguist (James Fitzgerald) to evaluate these text messages and maybe some others, too. He was the guy who analyzed that 18-page letter from JA to the Alexanders. He'd probably know in a flash which items among the voluminous emails/texts were forged by Jodi. See:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EyycBXwMzM

 

[JSR]

Right or look how quickly someone found similar texts that we know JA composed and she used similar terms.

Why couldnt Juan bring in some of those to show the Jury JA used similar terms in another text we know she did compose.

Something simple like that would have gone a long ways to helping prove she wrote that.

He probably couldn't get it in with this witness but he might with the DT's psych "experts". Depends on what they testify to in this next round.

 

[My-Future-Ex-Husband]

Juan has probably had his suspicions all along but is less limited here to present evidence and suggest things.

What other reason would he have to bring it up and then say Jodi could have changed the name at the top? Anything else doesn't make sense.

I've mentioned this text over at the sidebar and don't know how to c&p on my phone.

Back in those days FB had a cellphone icon in the Facebook message box down on the bottom right and you could send a message direct to someone's phone.

CMJA had Travis' Facebook password.

Just checked with my daughter and she said it just said it was a message from me (not FB like with the app nowadays) and looked like a text message. We didn't have smartphones back then.

 

[bettybaby00]

One of the elements that the DT may use for appeal is the claim that JM mislead the original trial jury when he said there was no *advertiser censored* on the computer. It seems that the DT is following up in great detail on the *advertiser censored* for at least two reasons.

1. They are using the "big lie" to make this jury believe that Travis Alexander was a pervert who was into child *advertiser censored*, and female *advertiser censored*, and just any kind of *advertiser censored* really in a "He Had It Coming" defence. It's a lie, but by repeating it hundreds of times you may get one jury member to believe it's possible and hang the jury. JM is countering that by demonstrating to the jury that the DT is lying, and, by doing so, IMO, he is clearing Travis's good name.

(IIRC, an upthread post stated that LKN had insinuated that the the first witness's 9 year old daughter might taken pictures of herself when she was partially undressed, and then sent them to Travis, and then that Travis might have deleted them. Such a statement or "question" was just another way of slamming Travis, but it also insulted the first witness. It implied that the man was a neglectful father who wasn't paying attention to his daughter's activities, and that his daughter was promiscuous. So, IMO, if LKN's statement was posted correctly, and the first witness was built like a biker, LKN better hire that new PI to take on an extra shift as bodyguard. Not too many men would take kindly to such public insults. It anyone keeping track of how many people have been slandered by the DT over the course of these trials now? Although, I think this must be a new low. Attacking a little nine year old girl is disgusting!)

2. Since the DT is claiming prosecutorial misconduct, they need to lay a foundation showing that JM lied to the jury about *advertiser censored* being on the computer--that there was *advertiser censored* on the computer and that JM knew it. If they can convince a higher court that JM was a liar, that court could declare a mistrial, overturn the guilty verdict, and AZ would get to pay for this all over again.

JM, therefore, is, I think, countering that by showing that out of over 2,000 images on the what is now known to be Deanna's computer, four thumbnail images containing nudity of which IIRC only one met the standard of being called *advertiser censored* in a court of law. So, JM seems to have dealt well with that issue. As well, there was no child *advertiser censored* found, therefore, the lie about Travis masturbating to a picture of a little boy is proven to be false and the fairy tale the DT spun about Travis being a pedophile was shattered. Therefore, Jodi had nothing to be shocked about, there was nothing to make her "snap".

JMO, but, if the DT is repeating lies, JM should be allowed to repeat the truth.

ETA I just found it. My mistake. bsk in #164 was speculating about what LKN might say to the dad. So, I was wrong to rant away as I did. Although, bsk's supposition sounds so much like what LKN has said, I wouldn't have been surprised.
Sorry mods et al.

Great "summation"!

I'd like to add one thing at the end. Not only was Travis NOT a pedaphile, but her whole "I caught him in the act of viewing/master$$$ to chorn, and b/c I knew his secret, he began physically abusing me." And the sad thing was all of these lies were the basis of all the testimony by the DTs expert witnesses.

 

[Hope4More]

My depos were done early today.

IMO Juan doesn't care in the slightest about the *advertiser censored* nonsense any more, as long as it is not child *advertiser censored* and as long as he is not being accused of hiding it or deleting it or putting it on there lol. He may even prefer to have a little bit of adult hetero *advertiser censored* (4 pics, a few video snippets, 45 minutes one day on YouPorn) just to decimate the pedo lie. And what kind of victim will be more "real" to the jury: a 30-year-old virgin saint or a 30-year-old sometimes horny single guy who struggles with complying with the doctrines of his religion?

Who CARES if Brown found no *advertiser censored* videos and Lonnie D found a few when he used a different forensic tool? What is the POINT of it? IMO Juan was perfectly happy to have that come out in exchange for planting the seed of potential JA fabrication of emails from "Travis." It's like letting sacrificing a pawn in chess to win the game.

I'm feeling very edified to read my guess at his strategy matches yours.

 

[MeeBee]

I've mentioned this text over at the sidebar and don't know how to c&p on my phone.

Back in those days FB had a cellphone icon in the Facebook message box down on the bottom right and you could send a message direct to someone's phone.

CMJA had Travis' Facebook password.

Just checked with my daughter and she said it just said it was a message from me (not FB like with the app nowadays) and looked like a text message. We didn't have smartphones back then.

I remember that feature.

 

[RickshawFan]

Today, JM made sure that nothing JA says in allocution can be credible: it might look at first blush as though it is, but take nothing for granted, jury.

 

[Ranchgirl]

Ok! Deep breath! JM and Det F won! JA will pay for murdering Travis. AZ lawyer has explained to us many times that JA will spend the rest of her life in prison. Second victory for JM and DF..Travis is a normal guy! Shock! Likes women, sex and a little *advertiser censored*! I never thought she would get DP so I am very pleased that TA's reputation is restored.

 

[Hope4More]

Hasn't JM asked a couple of the DT witnesses if they were hired to vilify the victim? I think the jury will "get it".

I'm guessing that being forced to witness the DT humiliating an elderly Mormon bishop made a big impression on the jury too. As did the fact it looked like the bishop felt the need to bring along an attorney to protect himself from being splattered by the DT's slime machine.

 

[wenwe4]

I'm guessing that being forced to witness the DT humiliating an elderly Mormon bishop made a big impression on the jury too. As did the fact it looked like the bishop felt the need to bring along an attorney to protect himself from being splattered by the DT's slime machine.

The Attorney was appointed to represent the LDS church should the Bishop be required to testify on behalf of the church. The Bishop was asked questions about the church (ie: laws of chastity) but most of the questions were related to how his home computer was set up and who lived at his home at what time etc. I do agree with you that it was really slimy of the DT to ask the questions they did but that's how they have played this whole "slime-agation" trial from the very beginning. (IMO)

 

[Dr. Know?]

I bet the jurors are "busting a gut" to talk to each other. Sometimes events in a trial leave me a watcher here wondering. Sometimes it hits me before the punchline and other times thinking a while helps. When it hits you, you might talk about it or post, these poor people must be exhausted.