Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 35

[AZlawyer]

Completely agree about these two, especially Steve Kraft, who only seems to be good for keeping a sidebar count these days. He has constantly placed more importance on the *advertiser censored* stuff and has constantly misunderstood it. So Willmott dredged up *advertiser censored* for the millionth time. And? It was there, Juan acknowledges it. So it's not like Willmott had any bombshells in bringing it up and Juan doesn't really seem too concerned about it anymore. So Lonnie confirmed there was *advertiser censored*. Hey, so did Brown and Smith.

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.

 

[Hatfield]

I would have liked to hear from a linguistic person to see what their opinion would be on the text on who could have written it.

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.

 

[LambChop]

No, Hope.

I'll speculate to some extent, but I don't believe it was exhaustively clear.

Why do you think JM wanted Dworkin to testify that pornographic video clips were playable on TA's computer?

I'm thinking because DT did not make JM aware of it but brought in another expert to testify. Could those videos have been provided by their expert, Smith, when Smith claimed to have made no report?

 

[My-Future-Ex-Husband]

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.

It's a shame Juan didn't ask Dworkin when IEF came out. In 2009, when it did, it was open source freeware so this would be why it wasn't used. In 2011, it seems it was available for sale and yet Dworkin didn't use it for his testimony. A review of version 6 came out in April 2013.

He's acting like a fancy pants now but the truth is even once the defence started asking about *advertiser censored* he didn't use this program.

AND......there was no child *advertiser censored* which is what they were trying to prove.

The review of IEF is on forensiccontrol.com if anyone is interested.

 

[Hatfield]

Yeah...that doesn't really seem like a huge deal to me. It's not like Juan hid it. It was there. There was a minor inconsistency on whether it was playable or not. Again, at this point the jury probably doesn't even care.

I hope your right Meebee. I really do.

One thing for sure, most of us dont care about it because we know what the DT and JA have been trying to do. I think the jury may be catching on by now. Its just hard to tell with trial by tweet only.

 

[Shadowboy]

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.

BBM. AZL can explain better than I (nope, not a lawyer), but a lawyer can't stop in the middle of questioning and provide a summation. And JM couldn't ask LD to answer questions beyond the scope of LD's knowledge. In other words, JM couldn't turn to LD and ask, "Was this text written by JA?" LD wouldn't know. It's quite likely the PT doesn't know for sure, so why ask it? Cast doubt and move on.

Likewise, JM couldn't stop and say, "Since the origin of this text is in question, it is the State's contention JA wrote it. That brings into question the origin of other electronic communications allegedly sent by TA." That kind of statement belongs in JM's closing. If he tried to slip this in, the judge and the DT would slap him silly.

Anyway, AZL can correct me if I'm wrong. My knowledge of court room procedure is limited.

 

[MeeBee]

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.

I think Juan probably felt pretty good about letting in and leaving it in the air because the jury has seen enough of Jodi's writings to draw their own conclusions. Travis did not have a very sophisticated writing style whereas Jodi did...

So he moved from point A and worked from there.

 

[wendiesan]

This jury doesn't know all the background like we and the other jury did. They know very little, actually. Again, this computer *advertiser censored* question should have never been allowed.

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.

 

[Myvice]

It will be interesting when the defense brings back Geff and Fon how they will try to reinvigorate their campaign of the T-Dog. They just don't have anything to suggest it. Period. Even the messages that were heated were all after JA had moved and a month before she hacked him weren't they?

 

[AZlawyer]

BBM. AZL can explain better than I (nope, not a lawyer), but a lawyer can't stop in the middle of questioning and provide a summation. And JM couldn't ask LD to answer questions beyond the scope of LD's knowledge. In other words, JM couldn't turn to LD and ask, "Was this text written by JA?" LD wouldn't know. It's quite likely the PT doesn't know for sure, so why ask it? Cast doubt and move on.

Likewise, JM couldn't stop and say, "Since the origin of this text is in question, it is the State's contention JA wrote it. That brings into question the origin of other electronic communications allegedly sent by TA." That kind of statement belongs in JM's closing. If he tried to slip this in, the judge and the DT would slap him silly.

Anyway, AZL can correct me if I'm wrong. My knowledge of court room procedure is limited.

You are exactly right.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Curious, she misquoted the Ten Commandments in her interrogation.

It's a fact.

She mimics and employs the language of King James as she believes it's a way to manipulate Mormons and perhaps others.

King James may be associated with an English translation of the Bible, but the language itself and the King's English apply to more than Holy Writ.

The killer even made a show of walking around reading the Bible "inappropriately" or "at inappropriate times" according to Sky Hughes, IIRC.

Just because a hypocrite confesses to know the commandments (and she didn't know them after all, if you remember) and she misquoted them because she never knew them...
And just because a wanna be walks around holding a Bible pretending to be someone she is not....
and just because she uses religion of any kind to manipulate others....
Does not mean she knows one thing about which she speaks.
She is a phoney and anyone who believes she is anything more than a murderer with a cold blooded, cruel heart is foolish.

Give her credit for one thing though. She knows *advertiser censored* and she knows how to be vulgar.

 

[krkrjx]

I think Juan probably felt pretty good about letting in and leaving it in the air because the jury has seen enough of Jodi's writings to draw their own conclusions. Travis did not have a very sophisticated writing style whereas Jodi did...

So he moved from point A and worked from there.

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.

 

[Amster]

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

 

[Love Never Fails]

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.

And it was awesome!! Thanks AZ.

 

[LAcres]

Funny, how during downtimes on this trial, people turn onto each other and their opinions. I have seen this over and over again. Human nature, a difficult thing to understand. What I am personally seeing and have seen throughout this trial, when we feel like Juan is hanging us, not embellishing or clarifying more, its simply because the man is so smart, knows what is going on and knows more than any of us or the jurers do, and that when he makes a statement or does what he does, he cannot help but believe that the ones that count get it. He is bound by the law. Maybe they do, and maybe they do not. This is a complex trial, with JA being what she is, with the defense dragging things out to the Netherlands, etc. When Juan comes on, its like instant. He is believable, simply because he doesn’t go off into the weeds for days. But I think he sometimes forgets that the jury, or us, do not know all that he does. And that is hard to convey, being bound by the rules of the law. I am sure he will bring it home.!

 

[Kamille]

I'm old enough to remember the dawn of email, and the introduction of PC's into the workplace. I'm too old and disinterested to keep up with the expanding parallel universe of social media.

So, with the Helio and such, I listen for a common sense bottom line. That I can grasp. What registered for me was Dworkin saying the text looked odd. That it looked like it could have been generated by a computer. Enough said.

It was on her phone, and supposedly sent by Travis. If its odd, she's the source. It doesn't take much connecting of dots to go from there to the what and why of it.

Exactly. And I have to assume it was NOT on his phone? All the other texts were found on his phone were they not? Since hers was missing? It took the prosecution years to get them didn't it? There was a motion about it. KN said they weren't turned over when they were extracted.

Now I also understand that there are two Helio phones but also a third phone that she had before the Helio. Where is that? Why is only the Helio she had at the time she was arrested, which she'd only had for a short time, not being discussed? Which phone had the "penis" pics sent to it that she supposedly emailed to herself and were found in her computer? Where are the texts that go with that? If they are in TA's phone, where's the accompanying pictures?

So much does not add up because she had so much time to destroy and manipulate evidence.

MOO

 

[Love Never Fails]

Funny, how during downtimes on this trial, people turn onto each other and their opinions. I have seen this over and over again. Human nature, a difficult thing to understand. What I am personally seeing and have seen throughout this trial, when we feel like Juan is hanging us, not embellishing or clarifying more, its simply because the man is so smart, knows what is going on and knows more than any of us or the jurers do, and that when he makes a statement or does what he does, he cannot help but believe that the ones that count get it. He is bound by the law. Maybe they do, and maybe they do not. This is a complex trial, with JA being what she is, with the defense dragging things out to the Netherlands, etc. When Juan comes on, its like instant. He is believable, simply because he doesn’t go off into the weeds for days. But I think he sometimes forgets that the jury, or us, do not know all that he does. And that is hard to convey, being bound by the rules of the law. I am sure he will bring it home.!

LAcres, thanks just isn't enough. Good post. We aren't really turning on each other. We are all just very opinionated. Not always a good thing. Sorry.

 

[GigiG]

Completely agree about these two, especially Steve Kraft, who only seems to be good for keeping a sidebar count these days. He has constantly placed more importance on the *advertiser censored* stuff and has constantly misunderstood it. So Willmott dredged up *advertiser censored* for the millionth time. And? It was there, Juan acknowledges it. So it's not like Willmott had any bombshells in bringing it up and Juan doesn't really seem too concerned about it anymore. So Lonnie confirmed there was *advertiser censored*. Hey, so did Brown and Smith.

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.

 

[Myvice]

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".

 

[deedee21]

Jodi is fighting for life. Lets face it, she doesnt want death or life. The reality hammer is going to come down on her on the bus trip to Perryville. Adios Jodi.