Thank you for the clarification; it is all clear now and I'm sooo glad I don't need to be pissy about it anymore.
Oh, go for it...feel free to be as pissy as you want.
Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #5
- Thread starter KateB
- Start date
New Posts
-
-
NE NE - Tyler Goodrich, 35, left his house to go on a run, Lincoln, 3 Nov 2023
- Latest: Unalienable Rights
- Status
Oh, go for it...feel free to be as pissy as you want.
Then I would argue (without knowing more) that the dude in your teens was likely addicted to the sex too. lol Not uncommon for a guy, I don't think.
Not sure how to tackle the sex on June 4th issue. All we have is are the pics and the timestamps, and without evidence to support the time being inaccurate, we're forced to assume they had sex. Or at the very least, got naked and took pics.
Kate
I would agree with that, except that the words came from the victim himself, which is extremely significant. Who would know better how he was feeling than himself? He said (several times) that he was addicted, and there's nothing to suggest he was misdiagnosing his own feelings.
Kate
La Louve
For Whitney and Teghan
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2012
- Messages
- 2,566
- Reaction score
- 4,924
Have you ever checked out the thread here on TA's texts and journals? If you have you know how long I've been focused on May 26, and how many times I've answered that question. With different opinions, which have changed multiple times, depending on what evidence was available.
The alpha and the omega reply: before texts and journals I believed he felt guilty about blowing up on her May 26, and she exploited that guilt. After everything that can be known for now I believe he felt relief, not guilt, that he didn't know she was coming, wasn't awake when she snuck in, and that if they had sex that day it was because he didn't understand he was in mortal danger, and did whatever he felt he had to do to appease her enough to have her get the frick out of his house. I firmly believe he was scared of her that day.
FinallyRegistered
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2014
- Messages
- 1,980
- Reaction score
- 17
We sleuth. We know how to use our resources. Jodi was, too; she was a known hacker. She also knew cameras. She had a plan for weeks and a serious mission. She went there with a stolen gun, two of her own cameras, and her laptop (which she destroyed). I put nothing past her.
That's the quick, quick overview and I hope that didn't come off as curt or rude, but my Ambien just kicked in and I have to force myself off of here.
fftobed:So your feeling is that he was NOT addicted? He was just using that word for effect...or?
Apologies if you have gone into your thoughts about this elsewhere. I've skimmed the text and journals thread, but I have not read it in detail as it is a gazillion pages long. lol
Kate
I see. I'm just trying to understand what facts we have to support this theory. Are they in the text/journal thread? Maybe I should hunt for the answer there.
Kate
We sleuth. We know how to use our resources. Jodi was, too; she was a known hacker. She also knew cameras. She had a plan for weeks and a serious mission. She went there with a stolen gun, two of her own cameras, and her laptop (which she destroyed). I put nothing past her.
That's the quick, quick overview and I hope that didn't come off as curt or rude, but my Ambien just kicked in and I have to force myself off of here.
And yet...she left the memory card in the camera for the police to find. Erk.
No, not rude at all. I think we all know (hopefully) that any rebuttals/arguments/differing opinions are stated with respect for the other party. No worries. :c)
Kate
LOL! They are bad for me...in the quantities that I prefer them. Thank you for the welcome!
Kate
TexMex
Punishment is justice for the unjust.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2004
- Messages
- 7,615
- Reaction score
- 56
Clergy deal with congregants struggling with premarital sex, extramarital affairs and offer advice and counseling. Sexual addiction is not a new invention.
I sort of imagine half a Mormon bishops counseling schedule deals with folks confessing grinding, oral sex or worse to them. Premarital sex is discouraged in most religions, including mine, but it's a huge issue with Mormons (even if Jodi didn't read that pamphlet).
He absolutely did talk to the bishop in January. Since it was a repeat offense he also had to go before a disciplinary council soon after his talk with the bishop . Mimi's father was on that council. Travis confessed his repeated sex with Jodi. He was given advice and had to check in with the bishop during the period of repentance. Travis told the Hughes after the things he'd disclosed he feared Mimi's dad would not let her date him. At the same time however, unrelated to the council, Mimi had decided there was no spark with Travis booted him into the Friend Zone.
My guess is he did disclose at least some further sexual slip ups for his Temple Recommend to still be suspended in June. Maybe he confessed the May 10 call to the bishop?
Which theory? That he didn't expect her? That he wasn't awake and watching videos as she claimed? That he didn't feel guilty and in fact had next to zero contact with her after May 26?
Yikes. I hate to be the one to tell you, but each of those things was discussed here in the general thread, each for days, as recently as within the past 2-3 months, but no further back than Nov 2015 when the texts first began being published, iirc. Have you ever used the search? Faster than going through the many hundreds of pages.
Which theory? That he didn't expect her? That he wasn't awake and watching videos as she claimed? That he didn't feel guilty and in fact had next to zero contact with her after May 26?
Yikes. I hate to be the one to tell you, but each of those things was discussed here in the general thread, each for days, as recently as within the past 2-3 months, but no further back than Nov 2015 when the texts first began being published, iirc. Have you ever used the search? Faster than going through the many hundreds of pages.
Yes, to all of the above.
I...have not. lol I'm almost afraid to--the thread is so thick! I only have my own knowledge of the case to go by, and I don't recall ANY definitive evidence to suggest a) she wasn't expected, b) that he wasn't up watching videos when she arrived (in fact, during the trial there was evidence to the contrary), or that he had next to no contact with her after May 26. Though I do know their contact was becoming less frequent.
The guilt I can see, actually. I recall reading their texts, and noticing that as being a part of their toxic cycle--the anger, and then apologies/sex talk afterward. But, again, without access to the texts, I can't confirm that. :c/
Kate
I'm aware of all that. What is unknowable is what TA told his bishop in January or in February or in March or in April or in May. About JA or about other GF's, and what the consequences were or would have been had he partially versus fully confessed everything, all at once, versus every time he went in.
Deanna's TR was revoked for a whole year for chastity violations with a man she had loved deeply for years, and after remaining chaste with him for years in a serious relationship. Not gonna speculate on what she confessed to, but somehow I'm sure her bishop could understand it better and forgive it more readily than a tied to a tree rape fantasy.
I really don't think TA told his bishop about the sex tape (if he knew about it for sure). I wish I could believe Travis did tell all, all along. One of the most painful thoughts I've ever had about all this was imagining TA's agony having to choose to lie by omission to his bishop, which would have been soul-destroying for him, IMO, or confessing all and risking even excommunication at some point.
ETA. Just as an aside. JA knew squat about Mormonism. TA was well loved and respected in his Mormon community. It's possible that she misunderstood or overestimated what would in fact happen if she went to her bishop, and that TA didn't fear the blackmail as much as she assumed or hoped he would.
Even if he didn't fear the consequences (theoretically), his response to her claiming greater spirituality while pulling out the Tootsie rolls would have been enough to push him over the edge at that point. IMO.
TexMex
Punishment is justice for the unjust.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2004
- Messages
- 7,615
- Reaction score
- 56
I think some of us, while respecting your work on this, take issue that you are the only one who understands the CONTEXT and none of our thinking bears consideration. We have read the texts, journals, chats and books. We also listened to that repulsive sex tape more times than is healthy and watched and rewatched the testimony of the trial, the closing arguments the penalty phase and the penalty retrial
It's not reasonable IMO to say Travis was "done" with Jodi, scared of her (he told Taylor on May 26 she was "harmless") and that we should disregard him plainly saying he was "addicted" to her many times then dismiss the fact that- lo and behold she's in his bed after she shows up full of apologies, bearing CDs of their trip, a check for the car payment and a jug of KY.
No matter what order the chat is read...backwards, forwards, in Spanish or Russian, with or without time stamps, in a box or with a fox...the fact is however she got into his house, he let her remain, took pictures of her on his bed and then tragically fell for her final manipulation of a Calvin Kleinesque photo shoot in the shower. So whatever the May 26 fight was about was a moot point on June 4. He either forgave her again for whatever the issue on May 26 was or fell for whatever manipulation tactic she dreamed up to pacify him.
TexMex
Punishment is justice for the unjust.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2004
- Messages
- 7,615
- Reaction score
- 56
I should have said confessed to phone sex...not sex tape! I don't think he knew he was recorded or
Yeah. I don't think he would care if she told her bishop that she had sinned. He likely thought it would be good for her. He told his That's between her and her church. His confession was for his clearing his conscience.
TexMex
Punishment is justice for the unjust.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2004
- Messages
- 7,615
- Reaction score
- 56
He had less contact but IIRC on May 30 he tried to call her but she was at work. She texts back: just saw I missed your call. I'm at work. call me/you tonight?
They also text about pictures and random stuff...about 16-18 times after May 26. They very well could have spoken on the phone several times a day or none at all
Then
June 2nd
several calls between Arias and Alexander in the early morning hours:
Arias called Alexander four times between 1 a.m. and 3 a.m.
These calls were all very short, the longest 17 seconds.
Alexander called Arias twice during the 3 a.m. hour:
The first call was just under 18 minutes, the second about 41 minutes.
Arias called Travis at 4:03 a.m. The call lasted 2 minutes, 48 seconds.
At 5:39 a.m. Arias bought $15 worth of gas outside of Yreka
By 8:04 she's renting the car in Redding
June 3
Monterey
Breakfast with Darryl
Then at WAMU depositing money at 10:15am
Arias called Alexander twice:
A 17-second call at 12:57 p.m.
A 2 minute 50 second call at 1:51pm
Pasadena, California
At 8:16 p.m., Arias calls Alexander. The call lasted 2 minutes, 9 seconds.
At 8:31 p.m., Arias goes to a CVS pharmacy.
At 8:34 p.m., Arias calls Alexander again and the call lasts 49 seconds
Between 8:42 and 8:46 p.m., Arias makes gas purchases at Arco.
She's gassed up and on her way to Mesa with a knife and a gun
This isn't good medicine for insomnia, but WTH...
Mister, I've said repeatedly- and meant it- that I very rarely assume or think I have anything right about anything. I've changed my opinion so many times about most everything being discussed that I'm pretty sure I've held every opinion there is to have at one time or another.
Especially given that, I'm not sure why or how you conclude that I don't think anyone else's opinions count or that I think I'm the only one who sees things in context. Just isn't so.
Actually, as I also keep saying... the only reason I ever take the time to do the work to bring docs over here--like all the texts- is because I'm extremely interested in hearing other opinions BASED ON THE DOCS. The context is in the docs. It's not in my head.
The docs provide dots that can be connected to produce multiple narratives. For example, one of your dots right now is Taylor saying TA said she was harmless. The companion dot you seem to exclude from your narrative is that Travis told Regan something altogether different. He also told the Hyatts something altogether different. For me, all the dots need to be accounted for.
Another example. You keep referring to the one hour conversation they had on June 2 as evidence of TA's willingness to be in touch with her, and seem to think that the grand total of 20 words texted between May 26 and June 4th means the same thing. And that May 26 meant little to nothing because of those 20 words and timestamped photos on June 4, and forget altogether that he had actually broken off contact with her earlier, on May 22.
What happened all the way through May matters, IMO, because my dotted line begins there and goes forward, not backwards from the starting point of timestamped photos of sex on June 4.
I really do wonder if and how any opinions would change if the genders of victim and killer were reversed. If Travis had been a woman being stalked by a man would peeps talk about her allowing her killer in or to remain because she was sexually addicted? Or would the first assumption be that she did what she had to do to stay alive, but failed?
- Status