Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #6

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow.......

Also, I think there's a way to reconcile what I was saying about her hanging out in April 2008 in Travis' neighborhood without actually leaving, reconcile all of that with what you are saying. I'm suggesting that she was actually acting out bits of her fantasies and gathering information in the process about what might work and what might not. She was probably dreaming up possibilities and checking out whether they'd work for a loooong time. I believe what I'm describing is a more active plan-making than you're thinking. Your vision seems to be "she had been fantasizing for 9 months or so and was creating ever more fantasies." My version is "she was fantasizing and doing little experiments and itty bitty trials to see what might work and what would definitely not and early April worked out to be a great opportunity to test the possibilities, even if she appeared to be miserable." Anyway, that would be my idea of reconciling your speculations with mine.

Wowee for you input. Thanks.


Relevant reminders that I remembered every once in awhile this past too-long while, but not often enough:

--The 's father being interviewed by Flores, saying that she frequently enough would call her mother and be happy and in a good mood, then shortly afterwards would call again, crying and utterly despondent, or angry about nothing discernable. (Translated: it's impossible to connect the dots about her state of mind or emotions at any given time, or over time).

--The fact she lied to everyone, constantly, including to herself, even when writing to herself in her own journals, and the fact she doctored correspondence with Travis (impossible to know what's true or a lie, even when reading original case documents).

--JM challenging AV on the stand... so you think it's possible to understand what Travis or the felt or thought....about anything, just by reading texts between the two?

--DeMarte testifying...it's typical BPD to transition, often, suddenly, and without any external reason, between elevating then devaluing their target. (Translation, IMO, she could have thought fleetingly about killing him, even, but the next day have gone back to her plans to snare him in marriage).

There's just no way of really knowing, IMO, certainly not before mid-May, at the earliest.

But...I've certainly enjoyed the long journey of trying to figure it all out anyway, and have especially appreciated the fine company here doing likewise. :)
 
Excerpts from another JM interview……


http://thoughtcatalog.com/m-j-pack/...-discusses-how-he-put-jodi-arias-behind-bars/


Have you ever had difficulty with a defendant’s memory the way you did in this case?

The defendant was on the witness stand for 18 days. That’s almost unprecedented. (…) In terms of this defendant, she was by far the most sophisticated person to have ever taken the stand for this kind of crime I’ve ever encountered. She never buckled under the questioning, if she had an issue she would regroup — she was quite sophisticated on the witness stand.


Do you believe Alexander knew what was about to happen when the shower photos were taken?

No. I don’t believe he had any inkling that he was about to be stabbed. We have to remember the context of the attack that he had just experienced the most intimate activity between a man and a woman — I think to know she had gun and a knife would be inconceivable to him, as it would be to most of us.


This crime is a particularly violent one, especially considering the size difference between the defendant and the victim. Do you have any other theories on why Arias killed Travis Alexander, or do you think it truly was just because he was taking his friend to Cancun?


His going to Cancun was a part of it, but the bigger reason was he had indicated in no uncertain terms that she was not the person for him. And that’s rejection. So it wasn’t just because he was taking this woman to Cancun, it was his view of their relationship. (…) And what made it graphically different is that she wanted to have him one last time. Because she ended the relationship in the most total way you can. She picked the time, she picked the day, she picked the manner. She ushered him off the mortal coil, as they say. Not my line.
 
JM: "because she ended the relationship in the most total way you can. She picked the time, she picked the day, she picked the manner.

She ushered him off the mortal coil, as they say. Not my line."


Shakespeare's line, from Hamlet, and it is "shuffled off the mortal coil." :D
 
All she had to do was get into his laptop and give herself permission. It's a feature of the operating system, on the Mac at least. You've been able to do this for perhaps 25 years. That was the feature that allowed rudimentary networks to be devised. This feature is used these days by IT departments and prying bosses.

There was no evidence one way or the other that Jodi was doing anything with TA's computer as far as hacking, IIRC. However, we don't have her computer.

I'm not certain what kind of a forensic trail "sharing" would leave. If you sync your iphone with your desktop computer (i.e. do a data transfer) does it leave a trail? If you pick up your incoming mail on another computer when you're on vacation, does it leave a trail? All Jodi had to do was the latter. AFAIK.

As far as the phone, I'm not a big phone user. However, it might have worked for Jodi's purposes to text him frequently (as she did), then get hold of his phone and see what numbers he was dialing/texting when he didn't text her back. He frequently didn't text her back.

You might have been able to access other computers for 25 years, but I would just have to wonder if Jodi knew she could do it, knew how to set up these rudimentary networks, and had the capability and tools to set it up so that Travis nor the authorities would discover any of it. Jodi wasn't an IT person or a boss with the capability to pay someone to set up a spying network. And then I'd have to ask for what reason she needed all this access to his computer when most of the items she'd want are on the web, accessible by knowing his username and passwords for certain sites.

I don't know what forensic trails can be left because I'm not a forensic analyst and I don't use their software. But your computer will surely log that it allowed another computer to access it, and it seems like a basic thing a police forensic department could find in the computer logs or registry. When an IT person logged into my laptop from somewhere else, I had, in fact I still have, an icon on my desktop from the software he asked me to access for him to do it. When it logged itself out on him during a period where he was talking to me on the phone and not moving his computer, I had to give him permission again.

I don't know if all software like that works that way, but whether she gave his computer permission or not, I had already considered when I replied that there would be a forensic trail. I believe there are sync logs when devices sync with each other. How it was in 2007, I don't know. If I had to guess if a computer would log that you accessed your mail on it, I'd say yes. It would have an internet history of what sites were accessed that day. If you do not clear your browsing history, yes, the log will be there with a recording of where the computer went. As a matter of fact, I had a client access her gmail on my laptop, and for months and months, her user name would pop up under mine when google wanted to know which email I wanted to access. I never tried to access hers, but it didn't go away until someone told me I had to manually go in and tell Google to stop displaying her email as an option for me. I'm assuming I couldn't access it if I wanted to because she hadn't saved her password in my browser to my knowledge. If she had, then I would have been able to get into it. I also believe, but I can't corroborate it right now, that your email profile might tell you the last time you logged in--even if not from where, just like other social media tells people the last time someone was in the media. Flores told her they'd be able to know she accessed his email and from where, so apparently authorities have software to figure it out.

If she could get her hands on his phone again after he already caught her texting other women on it, then yeah, she could have accessed it and looked at what he was doing. If he hadn't put a lock on the phone. But my strong belief is just what JM said about her. When she feels wronged or upset, she confronts people right away. That's her history, which it why I'm hard-pressed to believe she sat on the kinds of texts and exchanges Travis was having with other women while he was sleeping with her. It's just very hard to believe.

As for her computer, I can't recall if they had her laptop or what happened to it. But they did have that damaged hard drive. It's where there were some penis pics and pics of her pre surgery breasts were located.
 
And an absolute silence descends for the first time since early fall last year. It's really, really over and done with, isn't it? Wow.
 
A new 47 minute video by roommate Enrique, parked in his car across the street from TA's house, talking about Travis, the layout of TA's house, Mormon wards, what Enrique likes to put in his homemade granola bars.......(ETA-sorry, Salberg, just saw your post).


Didn't know....Enrique did have a car, which she would have seen. He drove his car to catch a bus to work because of the high cost of gas (around $4 a gallon at the time). The bus left at 6:30AM from Superstition Mall, about 8 miles from TA's house (morning traffic?)

"Looking back, Napoleon seemed a little depressed that day, and things were a little messy, like someone started to clean then just stopped."


Bishop Layton went to the scene the night TA was found, along with many others from TA's ward, all standing and watching from the little corner park across the street from TA's house.

He was obviously traumatized by this experience, only spared from actually seeing the blood everywhere and Travis dead in the shower.




[video=youtube;8bFWrEf7mXw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bFWrEf7mXw[/video]




Enrique says in the video he's the one who took this pic of Taylor and Travis with Travis' new Sony camera
May 26, 2008 Published in JVM book


image.jpg
 
And an absolute silence descends for the first time since early fall last year. It's really, really over and done with, isn't it? Wow.

I'm kinda waiting around to see the updated mugshot...:facepalm:
 
The Enrique video brought it all back.. Can you imagine your roommate was murdered where you live? And he alluded to being a suspect along with Zach. I will get those 6 days were surreal to him and everyone who knew Travis. And to know all of Travis' friends suspected the killer from Day 1, and now, all she put them through with her lies and wild stories. I don't know how Nurmi & Wilmott can live with themselves presenting that defense and mudslinging Travis along based on what his killer the liar spewed. I know it was ther job but it was a such a slimy defense. So glad she got convicted.
 
More on the computer stuff and timing of the murder plan ...

Remember when Travis' computer got a virus and Taylor helped him? Wasn't that around the itme that she stole her grandfather's gun? Could it be that she had remote access to Travis' computer up till that point, and Taylor's 'fixes' ended her access? If so, that information black-out could've caused her to (flip out) put plans in action.

If Taylor wiped all her remote access, even if he didn't know he did, forsenics may not have been able to see the traces of the remote access due to reformatting partitions, deleting, defragmenting, etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
140
Guests online
3,648
Total visitors
3,788

Forum statistics

Threads
603,702
Messages
18,161,293
Members
231,833
Latest member
Pbarch
Back
Top