Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 36

[mydirtysecret]

 

[5bigfish5]

I don't believe they do know...but in reality, the defense hasn't actually presented borderline themselves at all. Only DeMarte has introduced borderline - which the defense seemed to lap up but then also sought to discredit her. I think it renders borderline a moot point.

IIRC, the closest Geffner came was mentioning other people thought Jodi was bipolar. They seem to be resting all their hopes on PTSD, abuse, pedophilia, *advertiser censored*, *advertiser censored*, and imaginary *advertiser censored* and throwing borderline in as an afterthought for a mitigator without presenting any evidence of their own to support it.

JMO

AND THAT, is all Jodi.

Wouldn't be the first time she kicked a gift horse in the mouth.

 

[MissHaley]

Why is this abhorrent disrespectful behavior allowed only in this courtroom and in this case? Has anyone else ever seen it continue throughout a case and nothing is ever done about it by the presiding Judge?

Any other Judge would rebuke the witness right in front of the jury and tell him/her to stop with the snide comments and just answer the questions asked.

Another excellent post!!! I have never, ever seen this behavior in court. I've watched a lot of trials, death penalty ones, I've heard judges admonish the attorneys and witnesses over things far less than what's going on here. They're far from professional & proven not trust worthy. I've never heard a defense witness say things to a prosecutor as ALV, Geff, forsuka, the comp techs, etc. have in the first place! But, in JSS court they can not only say it but get away with it !!!!

 

[ShadyLady]

I don't believe they do know...but in reality, the defense hasn't actually presented borderline themselves at all. Only DeMarte has introduced borderline - which the defense seemed to lap up but then also sought to discredit her. I think it renders borderline a moot point.

IIRC, the closest Geffner came was mentioning other people thought Jodi was bipolar. They seem to be resting all their hopes on PTSD, abuse, pedophilia, *advertiser censored*, *advertiser censored*, and imaginary *advertiser censored* and throwing borderline in as an afterthought for a mitigator without presenting any evidence of their own to support it.

JMO

And as for her "sexual issues", just wait till she gets to Perryville if she gets life. Plenty of gang members waiting for her goddess *advertiser censored**, she will be paying mightily for protection. I can only imagine who is waiting to claim her.

 

[ICit]

From Jen:
Jen's Trial Diaries ‏@TrialDiariesJ · 4m4 minutes ago  Phoenix, AZ

Jodi is leaning over looking at jurors.....

we are at recess until 1:25pm MST #jodiarias #3tvarias


RBBM: So creepy that JA is really "stalking" the jurors

Jodi on break =. :spinner:

 

[DebinGA]

Nurmi in his opening said JA was "diagnosed with BPD and PTSD", so they really, really want the "diagnosed" with a "mental illness" part of BPD. What they don't want is for jurors to make the logical leap that JA's malignant BPD makes her too dangerous to live in the general population at Perryville.

 

[krkrjx]

Was Geffner allowed to stay in the courtroom while state witnesses testified? Or did no one inform him not to follow the trial in any way, not even by tweet? He seems to be able to elaborate in his answers as if he knows specifically what the DT hopes to refute before actually asking him to refute it. What's up with that?

 

[LambChop]

The rule is NO NAME CALLING, ever. Also you all need to keep on topic. This is the retrial court session thread. The rules are not as relaxed as they are in other threads. Keep on topic.

Thanks, Lambchop

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Jen's Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ · 27s 27 seconds ago
Willmott is going over test security on all the tests that were given #jodiarias #3tvarias

zZzZzZZZzZzz

How can this be considered new to be used in the DT rebuttal?

All of this has been said a gazillion times by the same people.

Rinse........repeat.

 

[ICit]

AND THAT, is all Jodi.

Wouldn't be the first time she kicked a gift horse in the mouth.

Nay, nor the first time she beat a dead horse! :deadhorse:

 

[rose222]

Yes, my response was meant to be specifically about psych/MH experts. Psychology by its very nature (especially before the recent advances of Neurological research as it pertains to human behavior/mental health disorders) has a built-in and inherently "slippery slope", if you will. So, I, as a professional in the field, believe there is a need to address issues related to "expert" testimony, opinions, test reliability and the uses thereof in the CJ system, as well as witness credibility and standards of practice as an "expert".

As a side note: Psychology as a field was literally in its infancy in the 70's--and for what it is worth the theories and tenets of DV at that time, while well intentioned, were nonetheless very narrow and largely anecdotal, gender specific, politically charged and influenced by the Women's Liberation Movement, and sociological in nature. And those who where educated/licensed at that time and specialized in DV were (and to a large degree still are) Sociology majors (and trust me when I tell you that a person who Majors in Psychology--far more empirical and systematic--receives a very, very different education than one that majors in Sociology), and it has been my experience that many of these "old guard" DV specialists, such as ALV, Fonseco, and to some degree Geffner, are very resistant to change and view things from a very narrow perspective that is outdated and inherently riddled with gender bias.

I have a Bachelors and Masters in Sociology. My best friend majored in Psychology. I agree with you completely.

 

[samspace070]

:seeya:

:loveyou: Thank You for the ^^^ ! You have followed many trials and your opinion is well respected !

I watched a lot of the DeVault trial from YouTube videos this weekend and JUDGE STEINLE got after the witnesses, in front of the jurors, and told them to just answer the question that was asked and not add to it. He did this with Defense witnesses and Prosecution witnesses. He had control of his courtroom and he would have really let Dr Geff and Dr. F have it with their unprofessional comments. Why JSS doesn't just shows me she is incompentent. DeVault was a DP case too. But he didn't let the DT run amuck and go over the same testimony over and over again. He even interruped the Pros objection to tell the DT "asked and answered, move on counselor. He also admonished the DT and the Pros that the jurors were getting tired of hearing the same thing over and over again. That trial was nothing like this trial. He would have slammed Nurmi and Wilnot and put them in jail for malpractice demanding to approach every other question. Seriously. He told both counselor teams HE WASN"T PLAYING GAMES.:maddening:

 

[DebinGA]

JM has 300+ trial "wins". He knows how to read a jury, and may see the DT's shenanigans aren't being well-received, i.e. he's not inclined to save the DT from themselves.

 

[Paintr]

Slightly off topic

I have been reading about several trials/news stories lately. So many murdered people/dead bodies found in bathrooms. If I ever go to check up on someone and can't find them, I am NOT going to check the bathroom. :scared:

 

[ShadyLady]

Yes, my response was meant to be specifically about psych/MH experts. Psychology by its very nature (especially before the recent advances of Neurological research as it pertains to human behavior/mental health disorders) has a built-in and inherently "slippery slope", if you will. So, I, as a professional in the field, believe there is a need to address issues related to "expert" testimony, "expert" opinions, test reliability and the uses thereof in the CJ system, as well as witness credibility and standards of practice as an "expert".

As a side note: Psychology as a field was literally in its infancy in the 70's--and for what it is worth the theories and tenets of DV at that time, while well intentioned, were nonetheless very narrow, largely anecdotal, gender specific, politically charged and influenced by the Women's Liberation Movement, and sociological in nature. And those who where educated/licensed at that time and specialized in DV were (and to a large degree still are) Sociology majors (and trust me when I tell you that a person who Majors in Psychology--far more empirical and systematic--receives a very, very different education than one that majors in Sociology), and it has been my experience that many of these "old guard" DV specialists, such as ALV, MFons, and to some degree Geffner, are very resistant to change and view things from a very narrow perspective that is outdated and inherently riddled with gender bias.

You give them more credit than I do, they know what they do. I was going through a very bad divorce several years after Lenore Walker's book came out, I went to counseling for DV and read her book, and at that time I never even heard of PTSD. So this trial hits a little close to home for me. I find the "unusual persons" the defense has dug out indefensible. It's all about the money for them. And some kind of deep manhate for ALV. As for Bob, well the name I have for him will stay in my head.

All jmo.

 

[memoriesbymichelle]

I watched a lot of the DeVault trial from YouTube videos this weekend and JUDGE STEINLE got after the witnesses, in front of the jurors, and told them to just answer the question that was asked and not add to it. He did this with Defense witnesses and Prosecution witnesses. He had control of his courtroom and he would have really let Dr Geff and Dr. F have it with their unprofessional comments. Why JSS doesn't just shows me she is incompentent. DeVault was a DP case too. But he didn't let the DT run amuck and go over the same testimony over and over again. He even interruped the Pros objection to tell the DT "asked and answered, move on counselor. He also admonished the DT and the Pros that the jurors were getting tired of hearing the same thing over and over again. That trial was nothing like this trial. He would have slammed Nurmi and Wilnot and put them in jail for malpractice demanding to approach every other question. Seriously. He told both counselor teams HE WASN"T PLAYING GAMES.:maddening:

If only we could have had him. It's not right to let witnesses make snide remarks especially when THEY are supposed to be the professionals.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

From N20C:

Tammy Rose ‏@News20Chopper · 1m1 minute ago

Dr. Robert Geffner, Nurmi, Willmott & mitigation specialist walk out of court during lunch break. #JodiArias

 

[ShadyLady]

Jodi on break =. :spinner:

OMG.....LOLOLOLOL.....:laughing::laughing::laughing::yourock:

 

[dog.gone.cute]

From TT:

Tom Tingle ‏@TomTingle2 · 10m10 minutes ago

Prosecutor #JuanMartinez makes his way from bench conf in #JodiArias sent retrial Wed in Phx. Psychologist on stand

 

[Mindmatters]

Do we really know that ALV was not charged with perjury at that time? Perhaps they seal it and do not tell until the trial is over because that would be too prejudicial against their lying murderess?

ICit, I hope truly hope they did--it would restore some of my faith that accountability still exists.