Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #5

[geevee]

Have to hand it to you GV, you see things I would never have noticed. Good eyes

Great big monitor and strong glasses. LOL

 

[pocketaccent]

P.S. Tex, no worries on arguing, I just take it as a healthy debate, my motivation is to get folks to see what I see so you can understand my reasoning of what I think is happening in each pic, and all totally meant respectfully.

Yes, Healthy debate is a good thing!
With people from all walks of life. We have here good people from all over the US, a British, a true Taxan, an Asian (naturalized US citizen), and some Canadians too. What more could you ask for?:rockon:

 

[TrialWatcher]

TexMex:

(...)


"I'm not even sure she hated him. She just didn't want him to be with anyone else. She couldn't turn off her obsessive love for him unless he was gone. It was about her mostly, as always. Her feelings. Her insecurities. Her obsessive thoughts. Her "love". Her future. I do think it hurt her that to him, after a certain point, it was only sex."


She hated him. She hated Travis with a rage and intensity that consumed her. I agree that she couldn't turn off her obsession. She wanted to repay every slight, every perceived hurt, every wound to her heart. She had invested so much in him and lost her future vision. She absolutely didn't want him to be with anyone else but years of faking and passive aggressive retaliation (to Travis' face) built up.

Reading Travis' texts, it was obvious why keeping them out of court, as much as possible, was a good idea. Arias' much more so. If she had a way of reading those (which I suspect she did) they must have hurt. Regardless of whether she deserved Travis' coolness with her in December 2007 (she did, tyre slashing maniac) she was in love with him. His texts revealed exactly what he thought of her by then - not a lot. Millions of people over the world hurt, every day, from a break-up or failed romance. As much as they might feel like a little revenge may bring a measure of relief, most couldn't physically hurt someone they love, let alone slaughter. Arias was more than just crazy in love with Travis. She was crazy.

 

[TexMex]

I see no benefit for Arias to threaten to hurt herself as Travis was well used to her dramas by then. That final sitting pic shows anger, indignation and fear. Something she had done by then was scaring him. His face isn't concerned for her safety. It's terrified for his own.

I'm tempted to believe that the shower photo series was ordered by her, perhaps at gunpoint? The reason is that Travis doesn't look natural in those pics. There are no recovered pics of him goofing between shots. It all looks forced - not like a man showing off his physique - more like turning and moving to order, trying to keep calm. Maybe he was calculating how to rush her during those pics then she forced Travis to the shower floor? What goes against my thought process here is the statement made about the eye reflection pic. If she wasn't holding a knife or gun at that point, it is more likely the scenario you put forward. How much weight can be out in the eye reflection pic settlement in court?

Remember the story about the gun being pulled on her by a ninja? How it didn't go off? Could that be what forced her to move so suddenly to knife mode? Did Arias pull the trigger and it didn't fire? Travis then rushed her, the blur pics occur?I appreciate that she may have coaxed him too. What niggles at me is his half-hearted poses and that final look of fear, trying to decide what to do, perhaps?

I just don't think once he saw a gun he's just going to pose at all. He's rushing her trying to knock the gun out. Less chance of a fatal shot if he's moving. I think the half hearted posing was cause he thought it was a lame idea but considering how she'd done him "favors" earlier in the day he figured he go along.

To me it's too risky to Jodi to not have weapon she planned on killing him with ready that it be a complete surprise. Trying to switch weapons in the chaos of that bathroom could result in Jodi being dead instead of Travis. Once she made her move she had to commit to it 100%

Since the blood evidence showed he had sustained defensive wounds before he got to the sink, my thought is she was taking pics, suddenly pulled out her knife and stabbed him in the chest. He's trying to grab the knife as she keeps striking as he's fighting his way out of the shower. She is fully committed, he's gotta die. No turning back. He's trying to get out of the bedroom. A roommate might come in...he might get down the stairs and outside where a neighbor could see...she can't let that happen.

Sometimes I think she shot him because she was so mad that he didn't die in the shower with his blood running neatly down the drain. Then she'd leave. Now there's no possible way to clean up the scene. Even if she mopped up every drop in the bathroom floor the carpet is beyond cleaning. The walls are bloody, the baseboards. She's also cut and knows some of her blood is there. Maybe she hoped there was so much that hers would go unnoticed?

Ultimately though I think the gunshot was to throw off investigators. Two weapons, two suspects she figured

JMO, though

 

[TexMex]

TexMex:

(...)


"I'm not even sure she hated him. She just didn't want him to be with anyone else. She couldn't turn off her obsessive love for him unless he was gone. It was about her mostly, as always. Her feelings. Her insecurities. Her obsessive thoughts. Her "love". Her future. I do think it hurt her that to him, after a certain point, it was only sex."


She hated him. She hated Travis with a rage and intensity that consumed her. I agree that she couldn't turn off her obsession. She wanted to repay every slight, every perceived hurt, every wound to her heart. She had invested so much in him and lost her future vision. She absolutely didn't want him to be with anyone else but years of faking and passive aggressive retaliation (to Travis' face) built up.

Reading Travis' texts, it was obvious why keeping them out of court, as much as possible, was a good idea. Arias' much more so. If she had a way of reading those (which I suspect she did) they must have hurt. Regardless of whether she deserved Travis' coolness with her in December 2007 (she did, tyre slashing maniac) she was in love with him. His texts revealed exactly what he thought of her by then - not a lot. Millions of people over the world hurt, every day, from a break-up or failed romance. As much as they might feel like a little revenge may bring a measure of relief, most couldn't physically hurt someone they love, let alone slaughter. Arias was more than just crazy in love with Travis. She was crazy.

I guess I'm trying to say she hated what he'd "done" to HER. She had wrapped up a fantasy life, marriage, kids, house, trips. But ultimately Travis let her know the only way he wanted to talk to her or see her was for sex. Some other girl would marry him
But I think if when she showed up on June 4, if Travis had suddenly dropped to one knee, proposed and said he wanted her to be his sexually "blossoming" wife, she would not have killed him. She hated the way things were but still "loved" in her sociopathic way him and the improvement in HER life if they were together.

 

[Caylee Advocate]

Interesting debate going on tonight, so I am just going to sit back and enjoy the :rollercoaster: as I am on the :fence: and probably always will be.

 

[TexMex]

I think she went right there in part because she and Flores had discussed the more than one killer scenario on June 10, in their first phone interview.

IMO she never thought she'd be under real suspicion, so why bother staging the scene -- and just in that one way- to suggest 2 killers?

I think she never intended to shoot him, but did so at the end because he (ugh, can't say it) after she had dragged him into the bathroom, and so she picked the gun up from off the floor where she tossed it and shot him to be sure he was dead.

What she said about gun and knife in the Flores interrogation was for me one of the most evil and sickening moments of those hours.

That if she were to murder him, she thought she'd have to use a gun and keep shooting him until he was dead, that she couldn't imagine using a knife, because that would be too inhumane.

She planted the two intruder seed IIRC in the call. He's sooo strong, works out...had to be more than one person...Knowing she'd stabbed then shot him. Hoped LE would pick up the trail of crumbs.
IMO

 

[Hope4More]

She planted the two intruder seed IIRC in the call. He's sooo strong, works out...had to be more than one person...Knowing she'd stabbed then shot him. Hoped LE would pick up the trail of crumbs.
IMO

The difficulty, always, is looking at things after the fact and inferring what was intended originally. Especially when it comes to the , who piles lies atop lies atop lies without ever feeling the need to be consistent with her lies.

She had a knife and stabbed him. She had a gun and shot him. Facts.

Interpretation (utter speculative possible scenario): she used the gun as a prop, didn't intend to shoot him but did after slitting his throat, and on her jubilant night drive through Arizonian desert thought... gosh, jodi. Shouldn't have shot him.

But....wait! Yah. That'll work in my favor if LE ever talks to me about it. Makes it look like 2 people killed him, hahahaha.

 

[Hope4More]

I guess I'm trying to say she hated what he'd "done" to HER. She had wrapped up a fantasy life, marriage, kids, house, trips. But ultimately Travis let her know the only way he wanted to talk to her or see her was for sex. Some other girl would marry him
But I think if when she showed up on June 4, if Travis had suddenly dropped to one knee, proposed and said he wanted her to be his sexually "blossoming" wife, she would not have killed him. She hated the way things were but still "loved" in her sociopathic way him and the improvement in HER life if they were together.

Ultimately kinda overstates it, IMO. He had to be coerced into ever being "official" for that all of several months relationship and broke up with her, not vice versa. She chased after him and moved to Mesa over his adamant objections. She knew even before she moved to Mesa he was trying to find a marriage partner and that it wasn't her.

By early March he'd told her flat out that she needed to leave Mesa. After June 2007, the anything other than sex stuff was always in her own imagination.

The if he'd dropped to his knee and proposed. So much would have to be different for that to be possible- virtually everything, but everything magically being the same except TA dropping to his knee?

I think she would have killed him anyway. She wanted to be done with him. As she told him on May 26-- there aren't any more positives. He was broke, perhaps on the verge of losing his PPL position, and she couldn't make him heel to her purpose, no matter how much she tried to control him.

Killing him and starting over was just so much easier.

 

[TexMex]

The difficulty, always, is looking at things after the fact and inferring what was intended originally. Especially when it comes to the , who piles lies atop lies atop lies without ever feeling the need to be consistent with her lies.

She had a knife and stabbed him. She had a gun and shot him. Facts.

Interpretation (utter speculative possible scenario): she used the gun as a prop, didn't intend to shoot him but did after slitting his throat, and on her jubilant night drive through Arizonian desert thought... gosh, jodi. Shouldn't have shot him.

But....wait! Yah. That'll work in my favor if LE ever talks to me about it. Makes it look like 2 people killed him, hahahaha.

If you tell the truth, ya ain't gotta remember nothin'
~Juan Martinez

 

[TrialWatcher]

I think that pic is giving a somewhat false picture, if you will. If you look at the pic from the e-book (and you can even see it in the ones from trial but not as well) you can see through the bottom edge of the pant leg (where a leg/ankle would be if it were a stationary foot) to his back, her leg is in motion, moving to our left and upwards (otherwise the pic couldn't have caught the toe blur down below and upward, the upward wouldn't show as it'd have happened before the pic was snapped (foot coming down) toe blur is all over the front of the tile like an overlay because her foot was moving quickly. That fold is her foot/pant leg moving upwards and her foot is bare, what looks like a sock is a towel imo, that she hid one or both weapons in, maybe in his bathroom cabinet as in the book pic you can clearly see the cabinet door is open while the attack is in progress, she didn't open it to get the cup when she was in clean up mode, she was in the cabinet before she attacked him. All jmo but I see the proof in the pics.

Geevee, I've looked at the pic from Juan Martinez' book and there are no 'toes' in the picture. I've looked very closely to ensure I see what you are seeing as I was intrigued by the 'ghostly toe' theory. The pic on the left has no toes. The pic you blew up - on the right has ghostly fingers, not toes. There is a gold ring on one of the fingers. Please could you confirm you see the gold ring?

As I posted before, the image used on the right has picked up fingers from the person sitting in front of the monitor in court. The glare is reflecting the fingers and a trace of those is seen on the pic you posted. They don't look at all like toes. Not only that but if they were, the angle of the 'toes' makes no sense in the context of the photo.

 

[TrialWatcher]

I just don't think once he saw a gun he's just going to pose at all. He's rushing her trying to knock the gun out. Less chance of a fatal shot if he's moving. I think the half hearted posing was cause he thought it was a lame idea but considering how she'd done him "favors" earlier in the day he figured he go along.

To me it's too risky to Jodi to not have weapon she planned on killing him with ready that it be a complete surprise. Trying to switch weapons in the chaos of that bathroom could result in Jodi being dead instead of Travis. Once she made her move she had to commit to it 100%

Since the blood evidence showed he had sustained defensive wounds before he got to the sink, my thought is she was taking pics, suddenly pulled out her knife and stabbed him in the chest. He's trying to grab the knife as she keeps striking as he's fighting his way out of the shower. She is fully committed, he's gotta die. No turning back. He's trying to get out of the bedroom. A roommate might come in...he might get down the stairs and outside where a neighbor could see...she can't let that happen.

Sometimes I think she shot him because she was so mad that he didn't die in the shower with his blood running neatly down the drain. Then she'd leave. Now there's no possible way to clean up the scene. Even if she mopped up every drop in the bathroom floor the carpet is beyond cleaning. The walls are bloody, the baseboards. She's also cut and knows some of her blood is there. Maybe she hoped there was so much that hers would go unnoticed?

Ultimately though I think the gunshot was to throw off investigators. Two weapons, two suspects she figured

JMO, though

Remember the video of Travis telling the story of how he froze in fear when a gun was pointed at him in the past? Arias' had her head on his lap, fake sleeping - when he told that story. Arias also kept emphasising that she had always been told, blah blah blah that if someone pointed a gun at you, you stopped. Given that the gun was old and perhaps not used often, is it possible that it did not work properly? In her ninja tale she weaves in that the gun was pointed at HER head but didn't go off. Did she bring the knife as a backup? Wouldn't it have been far cleaner for her to have shot him in the shower? Even Arias could have worked that one out.

If Travis was forced to a sitting position and the gun jammed, she must have had the knife at the ready. Both weapons had to be on her. Is that when the camera was dropped? The time it would have taken her to switch weapons would have been less than it would have taken for Travis to lunge from a sitting position.

"Sometimes I think she shot him because she was so mad that he didn't die in the shower with his blood running neatly down the drain. Then she'd leave. Now there's no possible way to clean up the scene. Even if she mopped up every drop in the bathroom floor the carpet is beyond cleaning. The walls are bloody, the baseboards. She's also cut and knows some of her blood is there. Maybe she hoped there was so much that hers would go unnoticed?"

Yes. She was furious and panicked that he put up so much resistance. Her rage is reflected in every stab wound. My instinct is that the shower pics were forced at gunpoint. Travis is meek in them to an extent that appears strange for a muscle flexing guy. During that time in the shower she probably got some of her venom out. To not have had a say seems so unlike the psychopath. That last haunting sitting pick - where Travis looks shocked and angry - what was she saying then?

Regarding the two weapons, my feeling is that one was backup. She threw a red herring into the phone call with Detective Flores - to deflect his focus from her. She did this continually. The ninja tale seemed like it was made up later on, after she knew she had to admit being there. She probably thought about it overnight and we could see her stitching it together before our very eyes in the interview with EF. We will never know, I guess. If Arias does speak up, who would trust her to tell the truth?

 

[TrialWatcher]

(...)
But I think if when she showed up on June 4, if Travis had suddenly dropped to one knee, proposed and said he wanted her to be his sexually "blossoming" wife, she would not have killed him. She hated the way things were but still "loved" in her sociopathic way him and the improvement in HER life if they were together.

I agree she would have not have killed Travis if he has offered her ultimate goal from the beginning - marriage. She was in love with him, in lust with him. His rejection could not be processed by her to result in any other outcome but death for Travis. Obsession of the scariest kind.

 

[salberg7]

I can't figure out why he sat down in the shower especially with his legs crossed unless she was holding a weapon at him at that point. Or, unless once he saw the weapon he was so surprised he slipped and sat down in that position. I have felt from the get go that she stabbed him shortly after the full face pic, when she used the flash right in his face to startle him. That's an unusual sitting position he was photographed in. His legs were such that he couldn't get anywhere fast in that little space. I am sure he felt quite vulnerable at that point, but why? Unless she did have a gun, she tried to shoot it and it jammed that time (the ninja story)she had the knife at the ready as I think that was her weapon of choice (she used it to slash his tires, she didn't want to make any noise). She delivered the first stab after or during the face pic.
Respectfully I too do not see any toes in the dragging pic. I think the camera could easily have dropped from her right pocket at this point, fallen somewhat behind her to her right and landed upside down to snap the pic. The Camera must have been set in autofocus mode for such a clear shot to be taken (a feature of the Cybershot). The picture IMO shows the killer slightly in motion bending down somewhat perhaps stabbing him due to the crease in the lower pant leg. I do not see any toes there. This was a picture of the murder in action, sadly.
Call it what you may but it's more divine intervention than coincidence that the very object she used the most to define herself (what a wonderful photographer she was) led to her demise.

 

[TexMex]

Geevee, I've looked at the pic from Juan Martinez' book and there are no 'toes' in the picture. I've looked very closely to ensure I see what you are seeing as I was intrigued by the 'ghostly toe' theory. The pic on the left has no toes. The pic you blew up - on the right has ghostly fingers, not toes. There is a gold ring on one of the fingers. Please could you confirm you see the gold ring?

As I posted before, the image used on the right has picked up fingers from the person sitting in front of the monitor in court. The glare is reflecting the fingers and a trace of those is seen on the pic you posted. They don't look at all like toes. Not only that but if they were, the angle of the 'toes' makes no sense in the context of the photo.

Thank you.

 

[TrialWatcher]

I can't figure out why he sat down in the shower especially with his legs crossed unless she was holding a weapon at him at that point. Or, unless once he saw the weapon he was so surprised he slipped and sat down in that position. I have felt from the get go that she stabbed him shortly after the full face pic, when she used the flash right in his face to startle him. That's an unusual sitting position he was photographed in. His legs were such that he couldn't get anywhere fast in that little space. I am sure he felt quite vulnerable at that point, but why? Unless she did have a gun, she tried to shoot it and it jammed that time (the ninja story)she had the knife at the ready as I think that was her weapon of choice (she used it to slash his tires, she didn't want to make any noise). She delivered the first stab after or during the face pic.
Respectfully I too do not see any toes in the dragging pic. I think the camera could easily have dropped from her right pocket at this point, fallen somewhat behind her to her right and landed upside down to snap the pic. The Camera must have been set in autofocus mode for such a clear shot to be taken (a feature of the Cybershot). The picture IMO shows the killer slightly in motion bending down somewhat perhaps stabbing him due to the crease in the lower pant leg. I do not see any toes there. This was a picture of the murder in action, sadly.
Call it what you may but it's more divine intervention than coincidence that the very object she used the most to define herself (what a wonderful photographer she was) led to her demise.

Salberg7, there are no 'toes' in the photo I posted from Juan Martinez' book. The pic GeeVee posts is not from the book but from Detective Flores' monitor in court. I have linked it above. Can you or anyone else see the ghostly image - helpfully highlighted in red by GeeVee (or it may have been another poster)?

I can definitely see a ghostly outline in the extreme left bottom of Detective Flores' monitor in court. Only I see fingers, not toes. There is a gold ring and the shape is of fingers and fingernails, not toes. This is a reflection of fingers onto the monitor. They land on the top of the photo being examined in court. Looking at my own screen, I can see the reflection of my fingers on the monitor, without the glare of court lighting.

"Call it what you may but it's more divine intervention than coincidence that the very object she used the most to define herself (what a wonderful photographer she was) led to her demise". Salberg7

Justice.

 

[TexMex]

I can't figure out why he sat down in the shower especially with his legs crossed unless she was holding a weapon at him at that point. Or, unless once he saw the weapon he was so surprised he slipped and sat down in that position. I have felt from the get go that she stabbed him shortly after the full face pic, when she used the flash right in his face to startle him. That's an unusual sitting position he was photographed in. His legs were such that he couldn't get anywhere fast in that little space. I am sure he felt quite vulnerable at that point, but why? Unless she did have a gun, she tried to shoot it and it jammed that time (the ninja story)she had the knife at the ready as I think that was her weapon of choice (she used it to slash his tires, she didn't want to make any noise). She delivered the first stab after or during the face pic.
Respectfully I too do not see any toes in the dragging pic. I think the camera could easily have dropped from her right pocket at this point, fallen somewhat behind her to her right and landed upside down to snap the pic. The Camera must have.

Maybe it's just me but I've never had a problem that he sat down in the shower. She manipulated him into this "photo shoot". All she did was direct him into a few "poses". I can literally hear her say "ok, we are almost done. The last ones I want to take you need to be seated, the water effect will be different from the others. Just a few...now look at me (takes the face pic)...now look up and close your eyes, think about our sex earlier or think about Napoleon or think about Cancun...whatever. She is getting the knife out and putting camera in her pocket while sweetly "directing" him and she attacks.

 

[geevee]

Geevee, I've looked at the pic from Juan Martinez' book and there are no 'toes' in the picture. I've looked very closely to ensure I see what you are seeing as I was intrigued by the 'ghostly toe' theory. The pic on the left has no toes. The pic you blew up - on the right has ghostly fingers, not toes. There is a gold ring on one of the fingers. Please could you confirm you see the gold ring?

As I posted before, the image used on the right has picked up fingers from the person sitting in front of the monitor in court. The glare is reflecting the fingers and a trace of those is seen on the pic you posted. They don't look at all like toes. Not only that but if they were, the angle of the 'toes' makes no sense in the context of the photo.

The red arrow in the monitor pic is pointing directly to a (toe) nail, if the area next to that (blue arrow) is what you see as a ring, how is the nail right next to it? If what you think is a ring is being pointed to by the green arrow, it would be on the wrong finger, in either case, look at the circled area to the right, the foot blur is also picked up there. I can't do a direct comparison to the book pic because it doesn't include the entire lower section (timestamp and below).



I've never seen a reflection of anything on my monitor when it's turned on, the backlighting doesn't seem to permit it.

 

[LinTX]

The red arrow in the monitor pic is pointing directly to a (toe) nail, if the area next to that (blue arrow) is what you see as a ring, how is the nail right next to it? If what you think is a ring is being pointed to by the green arrow, it would be on the wrong finger, in either case, look at the circled area to the right, the foot blur is also picked up there. I can't do a direct comparison to the book pic because it doesn't include the entire lower section (timestamp and below).

View attachment 90563

I've never seen a reflection of anything on my monitor when it's turned on, the backlighting doesn't seem to permit it.

IMO the one from the book actually shows more of the tile area in front of her foot than the pic from the court monitor. I agree that what you are seeing is a reflection of Flore's hand

 

[TrialWatcher]

The red arrow in the monitor pic is pointing directly to a (toe) nail, if the area next to that (blue arrow) is what you see as a ring, how is the nail right next to it? If what you think is a ring is being pointed to by the green arrow, it would be on the wrong finger, in either case, look at the circled area to the right, the foot blur is also picked up there. I can't do a direct comparison to the book pic because it doesn't include the entire lower section (timestamp and below).

View attachment 90563

I've never seen a reflection of anything on my monitor when it's turned on, the backlighting doesn't seem to permit it.

GeeVee, the quality of the image being used is very poor. Taken from a shot of a monitor offering no valuable comparison to the actual photo shown in Juan's book. We have to work with reproduced copies, of course, for all documents and can't access the actual pics. This make it much harder to accurately view photos. That you managed to highlight it at all has been very helpful to pinpoint it.

I have looked at the above image - as hard to make out as it is - on my macbook pro, my husbands' mac and my iPad. In my sunny study, with no lights on, no light behind me, I get glare on all screens. I can see my fingers and even my face on the monitors. The brightly lit courtroom reflected something from the desk back on to the monitor. To me, it looks like fingers, not toes. I can see what looks like a gold ring in the blur.

Even if - as you suggest - there are toes - the angle is very strange in the context of the entire picture.

I ask you to please answer this: If the toes were displayed on the identical photo in court, why did the prosecution, jury, defense, reporters, photographic experts miss them? In both trials? Why is there no sign of them in the photograph - which is a wider, better quality shot - in Juan's book below?

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=90555&d=1457951352

Thanks.